What b & w developers to you prefer, and why?

[sunrisecody1]

The title says it. I'm getting ready to get back into developing my own, but I'm curious what developer(s) are best. Back in my old days I used D76 1:1, Xtol, and Microdol X. What do you think the best choices are today?
Thanks guys!

 

[johnf04]

I use Rodinal (the original Agfa developer) mainly because I had problems in the past with developer concentrate failing to work correctly once the bottle was opened. I don't process a lot of films.

 

[Deleted member 65559]

I use Pyrocat HD in glycol for films. Occasionally XTOL for 3200 asa films. I appreciate the highlight separation & the subsequent ease of printing.

Formulary Ansco 130 for prints for the beautiful tonal separation on fiber papers. I always have some LPD (in cans for easy storage on hand for when the 130 runs out before i can get more. Both great developers.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Rodinal, HC-110.
Easy to mix, takes little space, long storage time, lots of info.

 

[jwnash1]

I use Rodinal (the original Agfa developer) mainly because I had problems in the past with developer concentrate failing to work correctly once the bottle was opened. I don't process a lot of films.

. I use R09(Rodinal) for the same reason. Sometimes I do 1:100 stand development with it other times I use 1:25 and timed development depending on the film and my mood. i like the one shot concept because I found myself throwing away a lot of developer that had gotten too old.

 

[davidnewtonguitars]

Pardon, but for what film? That is the more important question!
D76 works well for a lot of films, I daresay it is about as universal a developer as there is, but for a specific film there may be a developer that is much better.

 

[kiemchacsu]

This +++
In my case only hc110. Rodinal is good for low speed film but not my taste for 400 iso film. Hc110 is more versatile i think.

Rodinal, HC-110.
Easy to mix, takes little space, long storage time, lots of info.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Mackinaw]

Mainly Xtol, because it's septic tank friendly (and a full speed developer). Sometimes Rodinal, and D-76, for when I shoot Ferrania P30.

Jim B.

 

[RObert Budding]

XTOL for a bit of extra speed, low toxicity, and very fine grain.

 

[charjohncarter]

Rodinal, HC-110.
Easy to mix, takes little space, long storage time, lots of info.

Along with someone above, Ko.Fe is right.

Over the years I have found at least in my case that matching a film with a developer is not as important as finding your preferred EI , development time and very importantly the best agitation scheme for each film you use.

 

[Jamespics]

Rodinal - for the same reasons as everyone else. DD-X because I think it lifts my shadows a bit. But it is expensive.

 

[Erik van Straten]

Perceptol 1+2 @ 23 degrees C. Finest grain possible AFAIK for 400-2TMY, the only film I use.

Erik.

 

[mcfingon]

Perceptol 1+2 @ 23 degrees C. Finest grain possible AFAIK for 400-2TMY, the only film I use.

Erik.

It would be interesting to compare Xtol (my favourite) and Perceptol on a 400 film Erik. I seldom use 400 but have some Delta 400 in stock, so if I can get some Perceptol I'll try both developers. My reasons for liking Xtol are much the same as above (fine grain, sharpness, speed, eco-friendliness), but I would add two related advantages:
Very high consistency (pH doesn't seem to change over time)
Very good keeping quality of stock solution
John Mc

 

[Roger Hicks]

DDX. Lasts for years and gives an extra 2/3 stop of speed. Like quick'n'easy Microphen. Perceptol is good if you don't mine losing 1/3 to 2/3 stop.

I used to develop HP5 Plus in both, rating it at EI 250 and 500 respectively. The former is close to the ISO in that dev; the latter, about 1/3 stop below ISO. Then I decided it was too much trouble and standardized on DD-X.

Always found Rodinal slow and grainy. Great for LF; OK for MF; totally unsuitable for 35mm.

Cheers,

R.

 

[sepiareverb]

I use DD-X on several films, decanting into glass and topping off with some Bloxygen when I open a new jug or draw from a partial bottle has eliminated the partial bottle shelf life problems I did have with it. All the Ilford films do beautifully in it. I use Rodinal on my slow stuff, Rollei Ortho and RPX25, and on ADOX 100 films, and to push HP5+ to 800 (not supposed to work I know, but testing can turn up some unexpected treasures). Perceptol and D96 for the motion picture films from ORWO and Double-X. I also like the current version of Studionol, RO9 Spezial for HP5+ at 400. It is my standard. And HC-110 is always on hand for sheet film, HP5 or FP4. Again, lots of testing over the years has given me great control over 810 negs with that. I much prefer liquids, but have not found anything in liquid form that can match Perceptol, and am resigned to mixing up D96 as well for the same reason.

 

[Dogman]

Haven't done any film is several years but before I switched to digital, I had over 30 years of film shooting, processing and printing. I mostly used highly diluted developers. Shooting Tri-X, I used Rodinal in sodium sulfite or FG7. I also used Rodinal/sulfite with HP5 and PanF but switched to D76 1:1 when I couldn't get Rodinal locally. All of them gave good results.

 

[Roger Hicks]

All of the above tends to illustrate than anyone else's experience is of very limited use...

Which is logical, as otherwise there wouldn't be as many developers. I used to like D19, which I compounded myself from raw chemicals. I still have the analytical balance and many of the chemicals.

Cheers,

R.

 

[stevierose]

Hi Roger
Sorry for being a bit slow but I didn’t completely follow your post. You develop HP5+ in DDX with an EI of 500? What time/temp do you use? Do you use a similar increase in EI for other Ilford films?
Thanks
Steve Rosenblum

 

[Roger Hicks]

Hi Roger
Sorry for being a bit slow but I didn’t completely follow your post. You develop HP5+ in DDX with an EI of 500? What time/temp do you use? Do you use a similar increase in EI for other Ilford films?
Thanks
Steve Rosenblum

Dear Steve,

7 -1/2 minutes at 24. You might want to vary that by up to +/- 30 seconds.

The time-temperature recommendations on Ilford films are effectively for EIs, not ISO speeds, so the recommended 7 minutes for 400 and 8 minutes for 800 represent a slight pull and a (very) slight push, respectively.

And of course a lot depends on your metering technique/ personal preferences. With an incident light meter I'd drop the EI to 320; with spot metering for the shadows, using a shadow index, 500 is fine.

Yes, similar arguments apply for all Ilford (and indeed other) films in DD-X.

Cheers,

R.

 

[robert blu]

I am not developing much in these days but it seems me I'm the only one using Ilfosol 3 ...
robert
PS: after reading Roger's post I think I'll try DDX