darkhorse120
Member
Used this for the first time. Is it supposed to be a s thick as treackle and dark brown? I fear not, but Id like your experiences please...
PRJ
Another Day in Paradise
If you are talking about the stock solution it should be syrupy thick since it is basically just TEA with some chemicals in it.
The brown though is a problem. Tan/green would be ok, but brown isn't a good sign. I've never mixed Pyro 510 since I avoid formulas from the source, ahem, but I have had issues in the past mixing developers in TEA. The problem I have had is the developer oxidizes overnight. Personally I won't ever mix anything in TEA. Propylene Glycol is a better solution to long term storage, but it wouldn't work in place of TEA for your formula. I've been using PG for years with Pyrocat.
If you are hell bent on using Pyrogallol in a developer, just mix up PMK which is most likely the best formula with the best track record that uses Pyrogallol. Or better yet, just buy it premixed from the Formulary and save yourself some grief.
Just my 2¢
The brown though is a problem. Tan/green would be ok, but brown isn't a good sign. I've never mixed Pyro 510 since I avoid formulas from the source, ahem, but I have had issues in the past mixing developers in TEA. The problem I have had is the developer oxidizes overnight. Personally I won't ever mix anything in TEA. Propylene Glycol is a better solution to long term storage, but it wouldn't work in place of TEA for your formula. I've been using PG for years with Pyrocat.
If you are hell bent on using Pyrogallol in a developer, just mix up PMK which is most likely the best formula with the best track record that uses Pyrogallol. Or better yet, just buy it premixed from the Formulary and save yourself some grief.
Just my 2¢
john_s
Well-known
I have had no problems mixing PMK in water and Pyrocat variants in water and in propylene glycol, but I didn't have much luck with Pyro-510. It was brown but hard to describe how "dark." I would say "fairly dark." However, the proof of it is in how it works. I found that it gave very low film speed, much lower than any other developer I have mixed or used. The formula is very elegant in design, which appealed to me, but I chucked it out.
Monday317
Member
Freakscene
Obscure member
510 pyro produces very poor toe speed with associated loss of shadow contrast. There are lots of photos on the web that people direct me to whenever I raise problems with one developer or another, but everything I have seen developed in 510 pyro displays this problem clearly.
If you want a pyrogallol based developer, Moersch Pyro 48 https://www.moersch-photochemie.de/content/shop/negativ/172 is extraordinary, and PMK is an established standard. Pyrocatechol developers are excellent too and any of the variants with ascorbate have improved speed.
Also, mixed 510 pyro is thick and a dark colour is standard for that mixture. When I trialled it I ended up working with it by measuring mass rather than volume. If the weather is cold it solidifies.
Marty
Monday317
Member
Marty, I have noticed this as well. I think the stuff is OK, but needs an extra stop of exposure, or pre-flashing the film to get that shadow detail.
Frankly I’m no fan of staining developers. The stain does fade over time, depending on conditions and thus alters the negative as envisioned. For me, Metol developers render tones the best and Defer’s Masters Metol has worked well for me. I’m also fiddling with Morris Germain’s Fine Grain formula from the Photographer’s Formulary “Harvey’s Defender 777” kit (how do they get away with that??) for grins. No real result to report; my scanner gave up the ghost.
Anyway, thank you for the information and Happy New Year!
Trask
Established
Yes, 510 Pyro is thick and takes some practice to pour out the right amount. Or maybe pour a little too much, so you can then adjust the water amount upward, use what you need and toss the rest. The 510 Pyro I bought from Bostick and Sullivan in December 2019 was not dark brown; I prefer to buy it pre-made than to mess with heating TEA. Note that B&S sells the “updated” formula version that uses 0.375 gr of phenidone, based on Jay DeFehr’s own decision to increase up from the original 0.25 gram.
If you like 510 Pyro but don’t like the stain, Jay has published guidance that you can “de-stain” 510 Pyro by In a 2010 post, Jay says “To unstain 510 Pyro, dilute with a sodium sulfite solution instead of plain water. A 2% solution (20g/liter) of sulfite will unstain your 510 Pyro and retain most of the sharpness you’re used to seeing, while a 10% solution (100g/liter) is enough to produce the solvent effect of a fine grain developer. A drop or two of 1% benzotriazole in a liter of working solution will clear some of the fog without significantly affecting contrast or film speed.” I admit that it’s not quite clear to me whether or not Jay is suggesting using both the sodium sulfite AND the benzotriazole, or that the benzotriazole option is a separate means to somewhat reduce the fog (stain?) to a lesser degree than using the sodium sulfite. I have use the sodium sulfite option to unstain 510, and it works very well.
Freakscene, thanks for the tip about the Moersch pyro 48!
If you like 510 Pyro but don’t like the stain, Jay has published guidance that you can “de-stain” 510 Pyro by In a 2010 post, Jay says “To unstain 510 Pyro, dilute with a sodium sulfite solution instead of plain water. A 2% solution (20g/liter) of sulfite will unstain your 510 Pyro and retain most of the sharpness you’re used to seeing, while a 10% solution (100g/liter) is enough to produce the solvent effect of a fine grain developer. A drop or two of 1% benzotriazole in a liter of working solution will clear some of the fog without significantly affecting contrast or film speed.” I admit that it’s not quite clear to me whether or not Jay is suggesting using both the sodium sulfite AND the benzotriazole, or that the benzotriazole option is a separate means to somewhat reduce the fog (stain?) to a lesser degree than using the sodium sulfite. I have use the sodium sulfite option to unstain 510, and it works very well.
Freakscene, thanks for the tip about the Moersch pyro 48!
Monday317
Member
Thanks, Trask. Actually, beyond everything else, Germain’s is making good looking negatives and I got a strong recommendation from a friend this evening to consider F76+ or FA-1027. Who knows?
Freakscene
Obscure member
I found more than one stop was needed and in soft light shooting 100 speed films at EI25 or lower still provided poor shadow contrast.
I like staining developers but find them a hassle. I have some up to 25 years old and haven’t noticed any substantial change, but I also cannot get a single printing paper I could get then, even if the names are the same they have changed.
You can get good results with any film developer combination that produces a normal curve, and if you scan, you don’t even need that. This is why good labs usually standardise on one developer.
Any protection on the Harvey’s name expired long ago, but none of them include the Paraphenylene Diamine (base) used in the original 777 as far as I know. There are no magic developers.
Anyway, thank you for the information and Happy New Year!
You’re welcome, HNY.
I am not sure how synergistic phenidone and pyrogallol are at TEA pH, so increasing the phenidone concentration might not make that much difference.
Unstaining a negative developed using a staining developer sounds like accepting all the hassle for no benefit, and you could save money and hassle by using hydroquinone and sulfite. You can make a staining developer using hydroquinone if you leave the sulfite out and watch the pH.
You’re welcome. I have no interest in his business, and don’t know him, but Wolfgang Moersch knows his chemistry and produces really good stuff. The pyro 48 is very good and in particular is very stable.
It is easy to get carried away, and tinkering is fun, but really you can do anything with a standard developer. There is too much mythologising about chemistry.
Marty
Monday317
Member
You couldn’t be righter. My preferred approach these day is One Camera, One Lens, One Film (if possible, or at least one brand), One Developer, One Paper; and so on.
Now a painter couldn’t do that, though I am acquainted with a girl who only uses black, white, red, blue, and yellow for her work and gets great results. That said, for a monochrome photographer, understanding your tools intimately reduces GAS and gear obsession in favor of perfecting the craft. Gone is my 35mm & German folder; the RB67 stays. Trying to stick with Acros and Tri-X only and fix on a single developer that works for moi.