Film developers other than Ilford or Kodak

Film Photography & Darkroom discussion

Moderator: Keith Tapscott.

Jay DeFehr
Posts: 50
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 8:40 pm

F-76

Post by Jay DeFehr »

Lowell was kind enough to send me a sample of F-76, and I'm currently using it as a non-staining control developer in testing some staining developers. F-76 is a very good developer, and as a liquid concentrate, very convenient to use one-shot. Given the choice between D-76, and F-76, I'd choose F-76, but I'd hardly call it the best developer I've ever used. F-76 tests out almost identically to TmaxRS, which is also a very good developer, and which I also prefer to D-76, more for reasons of convenience than for any differences in results. D-76, TmaxRS, and F-76 are all excellent, all-purpose developers, and one could easily add to that very short list, Xtol, Microphen, HC-110, DDX, Perceptol, and the list goes on. My favorite developer is 510-Pyro, but I wouldn't call it the best developer I've ever used, because there is no best developer, just the most appropriate for the job at hand, and 510-Pyro is incredibly versatile. GSD-10 is a fascinating developer, and I'm using it quite often with designer grain films. GSD-10 produces a full stop increase in real film speed, even with extreme contraction development, excellent sharpness and gradation, and very fine grain. GSD-10 keeps very well as the concentrate, or as a working solution, and is formulated specifically for reduced agitation techniques, including stand development. The more I use this developer, the more I like it, and it is easily my favorite non-staining developer.

Jay

Keith Tapscott.
Posts: 551
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2006 8:58 am
Location: Plymouth, England.

Re: F-76

Post by Keith Tapscott. »

Jay DeFehr wrote:Lowell was kind enough to send me a sample of F-76, and I'm currently using it as a non-staining control developer in testing some staining developers. F-76 is a very good developer, and as a liquid concentrate, very convenient to use one-shot. Given the choice between D-76, and F-76, I'd choose F-76, but I'd hardly call it the best developer I've ever used. F-76 tests out almost identically to TmaxRS, which is also a very good developer, and which I also prefer to D-76, more for reasons of convenience than for any differences in results. D-76, TmaxRS, and F-76 are all excellent, all-purpose developers, and one could easily add to that very short list, Xtol, Microphen, HC-110, DDX, Perceptol, and the list goes on. My favorite developer is 510-Pyro, but I wouldn't call it the best developer I've ever used, because there is no best developer, just the most appropriate for the job at hand, and 510-Pyro is incredibly versatile. GSD-10 is a fascinating developer, and I'm using it quite often with designer grain films. GSD-10 produces a full stop increase in real film speed, even with extreme contraction development, excellent sharpness and gradation, and very fine grain. GSD-10 keeps very well as the concentrate, or as a working solution, and is formulated specifically for reduced agitation techniques, including stand development. The more I use this developer, the more I like it, and it is easily my favorite non-staining developer.

Jay
I think Jay has summed it up nicely here, there are such a wide range of excellent B&W film developers to choose from, so no wonder there is so much confusion over which one to choose for those who are just starting out processing their own films.
T-MaxRS can be used with 135, 120/220 and sheet films unlike T-Max developer which is for film-rolls only. I`m sure F-76+ is a fine product too.
I beleive it is a matter of choosing a film and developer combination that suits the individuals personal preference for his/her style of photography that matters more than which actual film and developer is the best which is something that we could argue over for what would seem to be for ever and a day.
GSD-10 sounds an interesting developer. Who makes this product? 8)

Ornello
Posts: 882
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:49 am

Post by Ornello »

Keith Tapscott. wrote:
Ornello wrote:
Lowell Huff wrote:As the manufacturer of CLAYTON F 76 plus Film Developer, I would challange anyone to tell me that they don't think that it is the "BEST" film developer they have ever used! If you want samples to test and prove me wrong, contact me : askus@claytonchem.com 800 231-8872x 104
Oh, please stop it. You insult us all.
You could always take up Lowell`s challenge and try a sample, at least until the Paterson developers that you like make a return.
Lowell is certainly is prepared to market the company products, unlike some of the others out there. :wink:
It may not be an FX-39 beater, but surely worth a try and what is there to lose?
There is no such thing as a 'best' developer, and cannot be in principle. Developer composition can be modified over a wide range to provide various properties in a different balance. More speed/more grain, less grain/less speed, more sharpness/poorer tonality, etc. Paterson, Kodak, Ilford, and others make several developers, each with a different balance of properties.

Keith Tapscott.
Posts: 551
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2006 8:58 am
Location: Plymouth, England.

Post by Keith Tapscott. »

[/quote]There is no such thing as a 'best' developer, and cannot be in principle. Developer composition can be modified over a wide range to provide various properties in a different balance. More speed/more grain, less grain/less speed, more sharpness/poorer tonality, etc. Paterson, Kodak, Ilford, and others make several developers, each with a different balance of properties.[/quote]

This is exactly my point, different developers exploit a particular desired characteristic of what the photographer wants most, eg. enhanced sharpness usually means more enhanced grain, finer grain is usually at the expense of emulsion speed yield.
Of the `maximum definition` developers, it was interesting to note that Geoffrey Crawley clasified along with FX-39, also Kodak T-Max and Technidol developers in the same category. (A.P.) dated as week ending 9th December 2006, pages 37-39.

Jay DeFehr
Posts: 50
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 8:40 pm

GSD-10

Post by Jay DeFehr »

GSD-10 sounds an interesting developer. Who makes this product?
You can make it, if you like, or I can make it for you.

Jay

Keith Tapscott.
Posts: 551
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2006 8:58 am
Location: Plymouth, England.

Re: GSD-10

Post by Keith Tapscott. »

Jay DeFehr wrote:
GSD-10 sounds an interesting developer. Who makes this product?
You can make it, if you like, or I can make it for you.

Jay
Out of curiosity, what is the formula? Do you have start point times for Kodak and Ilford films?
Perhaps Jon would be interested in adding it to the technical section of the site.
cheers. :?:

Jay DeFehr
Posts: 50
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 8:40 pm

GSD-10

Post by Jay DeFehr »

Hi Keith.

I'm sorry it took so long to get back to you. You can find details about GSD-10 here:

http://gsd-10.blogspot.com/

Jay

Keith Tapscott.
Posts: 551
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2006 8:58 am
Location: Plymouth, England.

Re: GSD-10

Post by Keith Tapscott. »

Jay DeFehr wrote:Hi Keith.

I'm sorry it took so long to get back to you. You can find details about GSD-10 here:

http://gsd-10.blogspot.com/

Jay
I have never tried stand development and Glycin is very expensive in the UK, but a formula worth bearing in mind for those who wish to experiment. The FX-2 formula should be suitable for this also. Thanks for sharing Jay.

clayh
Posts: 1
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2007 9:32 am

Post by clayh »

Ran across this reference to "GSD-10", and bells started ringing in the dim recesses of my memory. Then it occurred to me that this formula is essentially the same as Mortensen's Glycin variant outlined on page 278 of his book "Mortensen on the Negative" (Simon and Schuster, 1946)

The only difference is that he uses it at a slightly higher dilution with just a little less carbonate in the formula. He was an advocate of stand development in pursuit of his so-called 7D negative. His formula mixes up directly into a working strength solution as follows:

5/8 oz sodium sulfite
1/8 oz glycin
5/8 oz sodium carbonate
water to make 32 oz.

This gives a working solution ratio (sulfite:glycin:carbonate:water) of 5:1:5:256 versus GSD-10's of 5:1:7.5:100 (assuming the 1:10 dilution of the stock solution).

I have used Mortensen's formula and it is nice soft working formula. Not particularly sharp compared to some other developers, but decent anyway. It struck me that someone that is not particularly careful about work habits like monitoring time and temperature and agitation schedules might find this type of developer extremely useful.

Jay DeFehr
Posts: 50
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 8:40 pm

GSD-10

Post by Jay DeFehr »

Hi Clay.

There were many glycin/soda formulae that differed mainly in the ratio of the constituents and the concentrations of the working solutions. The same is true of the many metol developers, pyro developers, etc., etc. The ratios, proportions and concentrations of developers can have a profound influence on their working characteristics. For instance, the formula for Agfa 8 is:

Sodium Sulfite, desiccated - 12.5 grams/liter

Glycin - 2.0 grams/liter

Potassium Carbonate - 25.0 grams/liter

or a ratio of 6.25:1:12.5:500

This is different than Mortensen's or GSD-10, and I wouldn't expect any of the three developers to produce the same results despite being made up from the same constituent chemicals.

GSD-10 produces negatives of very high acutance, and an increase in real film speed of up to a full stop. While it's true that long development times increase the margin for timing errors proprtionally, GSD-10 is very responsive to changes in temperature and agitation. If you have the chemicals, you might try GSD-10; I think you'll find it a much different developer than Mortensen's.

Jay

Post Reply