dazedgonebye
Veteran
I don't know, but the Barry's is very easy. You don't mix every time.
I make a 1 liter batch of both developers and use it for 10 or 12 rolls then mix again. The volume of chemical is small as well. I have 3 small plastic bottles containing the chemical powders and a $20 digital scale to make measurements easy.
Morris
-
With Diafine you only need to mix-up once per year.
There's an excellent tutorial HERE. (Be sure to watch both videos.)
bcostin
Well-known
Thanks, that article looks pretty interesting. Like a lot of people, I got started with Diafine. I still use it for almost all of my Tri-X/Arista Premium 400, for when I know I have iffy exposures, and when I have a mixed batch of different films that I want to develop all at once.
The most tedious part of developing for me is standing around and doing regular agitation. That's another reason I like Diafine, with its "agitate when you feel like it" approach. I've started using traditional developers more often now that I've switched to rotary agitation with a Uniroller.
The most tedious part of developing for me is standing around and doing regular agitation. That's another reason I like Diafine, with its "agitate when you feel like it" approach. I've started using traditional developers more often now that I've switched to rotary agitation with a Uniroller.
charjohncarter
Veteran
liquid two bath: almost
liquid two bath: almost
Will, try the one I use. HC-110h subtract 3 minutes from your time, dump, fill with 5.0 cc Borax to 500 ml H2O finish to your normal time. You do have to mix the Borax but I use one shot and it can go down the drain.
liquid two bath: almost
Will, try the one I use. HC-110h subtract 3 minutes from your time, dump, fill with 5.0 cc Borax to 500 ml H2O finish to your normal time. You do have to mix the Borax but I use one shot and it can go down the drain.
W
wlewisiii
Guest
Interesting. What do you feel you gain with this & what film/EI combinations do you use?
Thanks!
William
shadowfox
Darkroom printing lives
Steve, where can I get Barry's developer? do you use the 1-liter mix as use-it-once, or do you re-use it for the 10-12 rolls?
Morris, thanks for the video.
John, I'm also curious as to what is the advantage, do you have any sample photos developed this way?
Morris, thanks for the video.
John, I'm also curious as to what is the advantage, do you have any sample photos developed this way?
sanmich
Veteran
Tri-X + Emofin
It simply works great.
I don't have the experience or skills to really compare to other good options. I simply like the results very much (I disliked the results from Tmax, but that's another story)
A friend of mine which IS very knowledgeable about developement has tested this combo and since then swears by it. good contrast control and fine grain...
It simply works great.
I don't have the experience or skills to really compare to other good options. I simply like the results very much (I disliked the results from Tmax, but that's another story)
A friend of mine which IS very knowledgeable about developement has tested this combo and since then swears by it. good contrast control and fine grain...
dazedgonebye
Veteran
You can get the chemicals to make Barry's at freestylephoto.
You need:
sodium sulfite
metol
sodium metaborate
This is the formula I use.
-------------------
Bath A
80 g sodium sulfite
6.5 g metol
Make up to 1 L with water
Bath B
12 g sodium metaborate (Kodalk)
Make up to 1 L with water
-------------------
I make up a liter and use it for 12 or more rolls. I ditch it about the time that the second bath starts to smell like last week's gym socks. No idea if that is a meaningful test, but it happens sometime after a dozen or so rolls, which is what I've read is about the limit.
Papercut
Well-known
I know that Photographer's Formulary sells two of Thornton's recipes already pre-mixed. Like Steve, I mix his basic formula up myself -- the 3 powders are cheap (photographer's formulary has these too) and simple to mix with an accurate scale. The one-liter solutions last 12-15 rolls; though I might start straining it with coffee filters as suggested, because by the last couple of rolls the particulate "crud" is rather bad.
I certainly don't think two-bath is a perfect method (is there such a thing? I doubt it!), but it works for me for much of my work. If I did wet printing, I might not use it at all because the negatives come out quite flat (low contrast). But my workflow is hybrid (film + scanning negatives + printing digital files), and for this I think the two bath works well: good resolution, high accutance, controlled highlights, and low contrast. Contrast is easily dialed in (or out) in PS with adjustment layers (levels and curves), so a flat negative is just fine by me -- I also tend to like a softer tonal scale than seems currently fashionable (especially in online photo circles). Thornton's two-bath is also not well suited to films that are faster than 400 ISO, or films shot at EI's greater than that. So, when I shoot AP400 at 800, 1200, or 1600, I use something else (HC-110, Xtol, or Rodinal stand development -- currently experimenting to see which look I like best under which conditions).
-- Kevin
I certainly don't think two-bath is a perfect method (is there such a thing? I doubt it!), but it works for me for much of my work. If I did wet printing, I might not use it at all because the negatives come out quite flat (low contrast). But my workflow is hybrid (film + scanning negatives + printing digital files), and for this I think the two bath works well: good resolution, high accutance, controlled highlights, and low contrast. Contrast is easily dialed in (or out) in PS with adjustment layers (levels and curves), so a flat negative is just fine by me -- I also tend to like a softer tonal scale than seems currently fashionable (especially in online photo circles). Thornton's two-bath is also not well suited to films that are faster than 400 ISO, or films shot at EI's greater than that. So, when I shoot AP400 at 800, 1200, or 1600, I use something else (HC-110, Xtol, or Rodinal stand development -- currently experimenting to see which look I like best under which conditions).
-- Kevin
charjohncarter
Veteran
William, I have used TriX at 250 and Tmax100 at 50 using this method. I liked the HC-110h (vs Rodinal) the best. But that is just personal taste.
dazedgonebye
Veteran
I return the developer to the bottle with a filtered funnel. So far, that's been enough to keep things pretty clean.
titrisol
Bottom Feeder
2 bath development is fine, it works for some occasions, the learning curve is quite easy and you can get consistent results
It is not a silver bullet, and like Roger Hicks said it maybe idiot-resistant but idiots are very smart.
Give it a try and see if you like it.
It is not a silver bullet, and like Roger Hicks said it maybe idiot-resistant but idiots are very smart.
Give it a try and see if you like it.
photorat
Registered Abuser
Thanks for all the informative, down-to-Earth replies and useful tips. To summarize, the various split developers are a good option for high contrast situations but only with older style emulsions that are responsive to them (I gather Tri-X or EK 5200 are candidates). And of course, it is not a silver bullet. Idiots are indeed intelligent and resourceful people. They invariably find ways of circumventing even the most idiot-proof system.
Ronald M
Veteran
I used the Leica formula in the 1980s with plus and tri x. Results were nice in controling contrast at the penalty of less separatio in the highlights.
As films changed to thinner emulsions over the years, it became less effective. I increased the concentration of developing agents in bath A and that helped some, but the negs just lost the sparkle completely.
I went to D76 and stayed with it to this day.
The Leica formula was basically D23 for bath A and sodium carbonate for B. I found it in a book by HS Newcomb I purched in 1966.
I did muck around with some of the formulas for two bath in the Darkroom Cookbook. One of the simpler ones listed early with basic ingredients wotked well with Delta 100 original version. We are now on version 2 and have been for 10 years.
D76 and give enough exposure and keep the time short and you will be happy. Except the current version of Delta 400 which works best by far in Xtol or the Expensive liquid put out by Ilford, DD X. D76 used to work fine with original Delta 400, but not worth beans today.
If you have a tough problem, do water bath developing where you swap between developer and water 4 times.
As films changed to thinner emulsions over the years, it became less effective. I increased the concentration of developing agents in bath A and that helped some, but the negs just lost the sparkle completely.
I went to D76 and stayed with it to this day.
The Leica formula was basically D23 for bath A and sodium carbonate for B. I found it in a book by HS Newcomb I purched in 1966.
I did muck around with some of the formulas for two bath in the Darkroom Cookbook. One of the simpler ones listed early with basic ingredients wotked well with Delta 100 original version. We are now on version 2 and have been for 10 years.
D76 and give enough exposure and keep the time short and you will be happy. Except the current version of Delta 400 which works best by far in Xtol or the Expensive liquid put out by Ilford, DD X. D76 used to work fine with original Delta 400, but not worth beans today.
If you have a tough problem, do water bath developing where you swap between developer and water 4 times.
KenR
Well-known
Vestal's Two Bath Formula
Vestal's Two Bath Formula
A full discussion of this topic with the pros and cons of several formulae can be found in Anchel's "The Film Developing Cookbook". I tried Vestal's Two Bath D-76 formula as listed and got nice results with street photo's taken in NYC where the contrast between the shady side of the street and the sunny side seemed to be tamed by this method. Like any other non-commercial formula, it is a bit time consuming to make up, so I have given up on the 2-bath method and have been using semi-stand methods with HC-110 to accomplish the same thing.
Vestal's Two Bath Formula
A full discussion of this topic with the pros and cons of several formulae can be found in Anchel's "The Film Developing Cookbook". I tried Vestal's Two Bath D-76 formula as listed and got nice results with street photo's taken in NYC where the contrast between the shady side of the street and the sunny side seemed to be tamed by this method. Like any other non-commercial formula, it is a bit time consuming to make up, so I have given up on the 2-bath method and have been using semi-stand methods with HC-110 to accomplish the same thing.
Tom A
RFF Sponsor
Td 201 split developer
Td 201 split developer
The small, but dedicated Double X "gang" on Rf is perpetually trying out new and improved ways to soup the stuff.
I did do about 85 rolls in the Td 201 formula (Anchell/Koop "the Film Developing Cookbook" - essential reading for any serious bl.w user).
Most split developers work less well with modern thin emulsion films - but the Td 201 is fine. I tried it with Acros 100/Presto 400/ Tmax and Tmax-2 and of course with the old standby's TriX/XX. I also tried it with Efke 50 and some other slow films.
I make up 2000ml of the A and the B bath - my tanks need 1500 ml for five reels. As you run the film, you loose about 8-10ml/film for each run and after 50 rolls, the A bath is down to about 1500 ml (and starts looking rather "grotty" too). Thats when I dump it and remix. The B bath seems to last a long time, but I usually changed it after 20-25 rolls as it too starts looking bad (and smelling bad). Still cheap though and very consistent.
On Flickr I usually tag films with which developer/time used - so try typing in the tag "Td 201" and see what comes up.
Td 201 split developer
The small, but dedicated Double X "gang" on Rf is perpetually trying out new and improved ways to soup the stuff.
I did do about 85 rolls in the Td 201 formula (Anchell/Koop "the Film Developing Cookbook" - essential reading for any serious bl.w user).
Most split developers work less well with modern thin emulsion films - but the Td 201 is fine. I tried it with Acros 100/Presto 400/ Tmax and Tmax-2 and of course with the old standby's TriX/XX. I also tried it with Efke 50 and some other slow films.
I make up 2000ml of the A and the B bath - my tanks need 1500 ml for five reels. As you run the film, you loose about 8-10ml/film for each run and after 50 rolls, the A bath is down to about 1500 ml (and starts looking rather "grotty" too). Thats when I dump it and remix. The B bath seems to last a long time, but I usually changed it after 20-25 rolls as it too starts looking bad (and smelling bad). Still cheap though and very consistent.
On Flickr I usually tag films with which developer/time used - so try typing in the tag "Td 201" and see what comes up.
charjohncarter
Veteran
Tom A, I looked at you Flickr TD201, I liked them. My aim with Two Bath is to increase shadows. I can never really tell if it happens. Here are a couple from my latest Two Bath, Rodinal 50+1 for 10 minutes, one teaspoon of Borax in 500 ml water for 2 minutes, rating TMY-2 at 250, 30 seconds agitation at first and then 3 inversions per minute. One was in flat light on a foggy morning and the other was in doors:
Last edited:
Tom A
RFF Sponsor
The shots look fine, though a bit "flat" but as you said, so was the light. You could try a higher concentration of Rodinal (1:25) for maybe 6-7 min and the do the Borax thing.
What could be interesting is to do the development for 60-70% of the time in Rodinal and then add something like 30 min. stand development in Borax.
The weather is too crappy here for anything interesting to shoot at the moment (1/60 @f2.8 with Tri X at 400!!!!!), but once it improves I might try something like that.
What could be interesting is to do the development for 60-70% of the time in Rodinal and then add something like 30 min. stand development in Borax.
The weather is too crappy here for anything interesting to shoot at the moment (1/60 @f2.8 with Tri X at 400!!!!!), but once it improves I might try something like that.
charjohncarter
Veteran
Tom A, interesting thoughts, I especially like the Borax standing for 30 minutes. I might try that. I'm not sure that anything happens though with these thin emulsions. Maybe I'm just remembering the good old days better than they really were. Yes, we had real fog yesterday, but sure as I shot that roll in less than 60 minutes, today was full sun no clouds.
Last edited:
dazedgonebye
Veteran
I'm still loving the Barry's formula, but now that I'm going to shoot some large format, I have another problem/question.
With the slow large format lens and my lack of lighting gear, I find my usual FP4 in Barry's to be on the slow side for portraits.
This was f5.6 at 1/30th...pretty much at the limits of what I want to shoot with a fidgety little boy.
So, I don't want to abandon the Barry's. It works too well for me and I love the ease of it.
Any recommendations as to a faster 4x5 film that might work well?
With the slow large format lens and my lack of lighting gear, I find my usual FP4 in Barry's to be on the slow side for portraits.
This was f5.6 at 1/30th...pretty much at the limits of what I want to shoot with a fidgety little boy.
So, I don't want to abandon the Barry's. It works too well for me and I love the ease of it.
Any recommendations as to a faster 4x5 film that might work well?