PMK vs. WD2D+

[jpa66]

I'd really like to try one of these developers, but have only used one staining developer before ( Finol ). I was wondering if anyone has any experience with either of them, as I'm trying to decide which one I'd like to experiment with.

What are the things you like about them? How's the ease of use? - things like that.

Any input is welcomed.

Jan

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

I like PMK, which I've been using for a while. It works well on Tri-X, HP-5, Foma 100, and Efke 100. I have't tried any other films with it yet.

Tri-X

Tri-X

Tri-X

Efke 100

Foma 100

HP-5

These were all shot on 35mm film.

The developer is a pain to use, it oxidizes fast after mixing and needs to be used immediately, it is very toxic, and requires more frequent agitation than other developers. For best stain, an alkaline fix is needed. i use Photographers Formulary TF-4, which Freestyle, B&H, and Photographers Formulary all sell.

It is worth the bother though, the tonality is great, unlike any other developer. The Efke film gave the most unique results, very deep looking photographs compared to modern films. I've used the film in D-76 and Rodinal with great results, but PMK is the best developer for it. D-76 an Rodinal for Tri-X give different results than PMK, but all are very good.

 

[Tom A]

I have used PMK - though some years ago. I agree with the fact that it is a pain to use - but image quality is very good.
A couple of years ago I switched to Pyrocat HD for any "pyro" related. I find it quite astonishing in both sharpness and "depth". Easier to deal with than PMK too. Not as distinct stain as PMK - which makes it easier to scan.
Check on Flickr for Pyrocat HD shots. Amazing quality!

 

[Freakscene]

it is very toxic

Pyrogallol is no more toxic than the hydroquinone in D76. Be careful and follow appropriate safety considerations with all developers that contain phenol developing compounds.

I think the pyrocat developers are the best staining developers to work with when transitioning from non-staining to staining developers. You get the advantages but with slower oxidation of the developer, less non-specific staining with most films and better retention of shadow speed.

I'll find some scans to post this weekend.

In terms of PMK vs W2D2, the biggest practical considerations are that W2D2 produces larger grain and the stain is much more yellow than when using PMK. The yellow stain makes it harder to use multigrade paper and decreases highlight separation in wet prints. Not exactly what you need. It tends to work well in large format where you can keep developing to a quite thick negative, by which time the highlight separation has been achieved.

Marty

 

[jpa66]

I like PMK, which I've been using for a while. It works well on Tri-X, HP-5, Foma 100, and Efke 100. I have't tried any other films with it yet.

The developer is a pain to use, it oxidizes fast after mixing and needs to be used immediately, it is very toxic, and requires more frequent agitation than other developers. For best stain, an alkaline fix is needed. i use Photographers Formulary TF-4, which Freestyle, B&H, and Photographers Formulary all sell.

It is worth the bother though, the tonality is great, unlike any other developer. The Efke film gave the most unique results, very deep looking photographs compared to modern films. I've used the film in D-76 and Rodinal with great results, but PMK is the best developer for it. D-76 an Rodinal for Tri-X give different results than PMK, but all are very good.

It sounds similar in use to Finol, then. It also oxidizes quickly, needs very frequent agitation and requires an alkaline fix.

I really like the tonality of the Efke print in particular. Efke 50 is one of the films I want to develop in a staining developer. I usually use Rodinal ( and like it ) but want something different.

 

[jpa66]

I have used PMK - though some years ago. I agree with the fact that it is a pain to use - but image quality is very good.
A couple of years ago I switched to Pyrocat HD for any "pyro" related. I find it quite astonishing in both sharpness and "depth". Easier to deal with than PMK too. Not as distinct stain as PMK - which makes it easier to scan.
Check on Flickr for Pyrocat HD shots. Amazing quality!

I was have been intrigued by the shots I've seen developed by Pyrocat HD for some time. I did just look at some Pyro HD images on flckr, and I agree that it can produce amazing images - lots of good stuff there!

Pyrogallol is no more toxic than the hydroquinone in D76. Be careful and follow appropriate safety considerations with all developers that contain phenol developing compounds.

I think the pyrocat developers are the best staining developers to work with when transitioning from non-staining to staining developers. You get the advantages but with slower oxidation of the developer, less non-specific staining with most films and better retention of shadow speed.

I'll find some scans to post this weekend.

In terms of PMK vs W2D2, the biggest practical considerations are that W2D2 produces larger grain and the stain is much more yellow than when using PMK. The yellow stain makes it harder to use multigrade paper and decreases highlight separation in wet prints. Not exactly what you need. It tends to work well in large format where you can keep developing to a quite thick negative, by which time the highlight separation has been achieved.

Marty

Yeah - I'm not interested in a very pronounced stain, as I will be wet printing. Pyrocat sounds like it could be a good choice. What's the biggest differences between the two developers? Any film speed loss utilizing either of them?

I'll be interested to see those scans.

Jan

 

[Dan]

I'm not interested in a very pronounced stain, as I will be wet printing.

Actually, for wet printing, you DO want more stain.

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

PMK loses a little speed with the films I used it for. Tri-X and HP-5 both clock in at EI-200, and I shot the Efke 100 at 50.

 

[Tom A]

I have not found a signifiant speed loss with Pyrocat HD - but I tend to shoot TriX/Arista at around 320 iso. Efke 50 did show a small speed loss - I rated it at 32 instead and it worked well. Acros/+X seemed to hover around 80 iso rather than 100 - but a lot of time I was shooting it at Sunny F16 so that introduced some variables.
If you mix Pyrocat HD - only mix up enough for 4-5 weeks supply. It "dies" rather conclusively after that!
We are getting better weather and I have 400 ft of EK 5231 (+X) to load in Nikon cassettes and might mix up another batch of Pyrocat HD. It does work very well with this film - nice "silvery" tones - good shadow detail and nice deep blacks. It is my preferred film for things like vintage cars etc. Next week is the "All British Car Meet" here in town - 500+ Morgans. Jags. etc scattered on the grass of the Van Dusen park.
Great photo-op of owners using a toothbrush to clean wire-wheels etc.

 

[robklurfield]

500 Morgans? Very cool. (Well, I realize there will more Jags and other stuff, but still...). Hope you get to see a lot of three wheelers, Tom.

So, is the consensus that Pyrocat HD would be the easiest one to try first for someone who hasn't used a staining developing before? Safety precautions? Gloves and a paper mask? Or more than that?

 

[Tom A]

There are usually about 100 Morgans, including 3 wheelers and the rest is anything British, lots of Jags, Austins, AC, Jowett etc.
The Pyrocat is fairly easy to mix - but use a mask for the initial A bath. The Pyrocatchol is toxic - but I usually mix it outside and once it is in suspension it is safe.
Check on Google as to volumes and times for various films. Good information there.
One version I have tried is a semi stand development. First minute continious agitation, then stand for 5 minutes, two flips and taps, stand for another 5 minutes, two more flips and taps and a third flip/tap at 16 minutes. With Neopan 400/Trix 18-19 minutes seemed to give the best result.

 

[Nokton48]

I like PMK+. It's my favorite developer. The "plus" is a toothpick-size shot of Amidol. That adds 1/3-1/2 stop extra film speed.

 

[jpa66]

I like PMK+. It's my favorite developer. The "plus" is a toothpick-size shot of Amidol. That adds 1/3-1/2 stop extra film speed.

So, what constitutes a "toothpick-size shot" and what does the Amidol do to the film ( aside from increasing the speed )?

 

[Nokton48]

If you look in the Gordon Hutchings book, he refers to "Pyro+". I follow his instructions, and use a flat toothpick, as a sort of a "scoop". The exact amount of Amidol is not really all that critical, it can be measured by eye. Then you can eyeball the results and adjust, if you want to. You add and mix the pinch of Amidol right before you soup the film. It does increase the film speed 1/3-1/2 stop which is a "plus". That is what it does to the film, and the tiny extra shot of film speed is worth the trouble for me. Plus, I already have the Amidol around, so why not use it? It dosen't take much.

Thirty years ago I used WD2D, there was on old article on it in Peterson's Photographic. PMK is a more modern formulation, and I believe it's more stable than the WD2D. It's also mentioned in Hutching's book. Every Pyro Nut should have a copy of "The Art of Pyro" by Gordon Hutchings.

 

[jpa66]

OK, I'm going to go with Pyrocat HD to start with, as it seems to be the easiest to work with. I'm going to get it in liquid form from The Formulary for now.

My question is: Is there any real difference in the stuff that has glycol versus the stuff that doesn't have it? The website says that the glycol is added to stabilize the formula and add longevity to it. I was just wondering if there are any real-world differences in use.

Thanks again, gentlemen.

Jan

 

[Freakscene]

My question is: Is there any real difference in the stuff that has glycol versus the stuff that doesn't have it? The website says that the glycol is added to stabilize the formula and add longevity to it. I was just wondering if there are any real-world differences in use.

Mixed in water pyrocat HD stock lasts about 6 months. In glycol, it effectively lasts forever. I have a batch of pyrocat MC mixed when the formula was first published on APuG (I'd been using something similar for a while, but liked the use of TEA to convert the metol to the base form) and it's still good, maybe 6 or 7 years later.

Marty

 

[Chris101]

Actually, for wet printing, you DO want more stain.

Why is that? Especially considering that many people use variable contrast paper.

 

[Freakscene]

Why is that? Especially considering that many people use variable contrast paper.

What you want is more differential stain (where stain addition is proportional to silver density), but less overall stain. The more differential stain you have, the better you manage (given adequate stain colour contrast compatibility) the issues of VC paper having very broadly manipulable contrast in the midtones and shadows, but less controllable highlight contrast. This allows better close-value separation and retains highlight values while increasing contrast in the inherently lower contrast (this is a result of how our visual system processes scenes vs how silver reacts across a spectrum of exposure) shadow areas.

At least in theory.

One thing that additional proportional stain definitely does do and can easily be demonstrated is making negs suitable for printing on moderate contrast silver paper and inherently very low contrast contact processes like platinum and palladium. This is because non-silver contact processes require UV exposure and the stain is much more differentially UV dense than it is to visible light. So in effect you have a neg with a normal range of tones for silver prints, but "looks" much more contrasty to UV-sensitive materials.

Tri-X, Pyrocat-MC.

Marty