[pure-silver] Re: under-developed?
- From: Agnes <frcontrone@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: pure-silver@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2007 10:58:46 -0800 (PST)
It could be the difference with me and how I was taught. The D-76 was taught
to me in a college class. There the only temp control was on the developer
itself. But we also had a development chart for the various temps, and film
types that was a good 20 years out of date. What ever the temp of the water
coming out of the faucet was the stop, which varied widely depending on the
season. The fix kept in 5 gal. containers was changed out maybe once a year.
There were hundreds of rolls developed per week. We just got so we would fix
longer to get rid of the pinkish color to our negs. It was there that I
switched to HC-110 after taking a Bruce Barnbaum workshop. I also got my
development times of digital truth froim that point on. The grain was
significantly smaller, the contrast improved. No more weird things happening
to my negs. I use dilution b unless like you the times get to close to 5
minutes. I like longer development times. I also started bringing my own fix
to the school as well. I doubt the fix was the culprit in why I disliked
D-76. I just was never able to control the contrast the way I wanted to with
it.
Aggie
Janet Cull <jcull@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>I find the way I use it works wonderfully<<<
Aggie, how do you use it? I have a bottle left and would love to hear how you
like yours. Thanks.
On Feb 19, 2007, at 1:40 PM, Agnes wrote:
I used D-76 for years, and was disappointed in it. I switched to HC-110
and love it. I find the way I use it works wonderfully for me, and gets me the
results I couldn't acheive with D-76. I guess as they say, each to their own.
I also like pyro developrs as well.
Aggie
Janet Cull <jcull@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I was in a camera shop and saw a deal on chemicals, hc110 being the
only developer they had. I live an hour from the city and any such
store, so order everything at a distance. I thought it was a
bargain. Turned out not to be, really.
On Feb 19, 2007, at 12:38 PM, Jim Brick wrote:
> Janet,
>
> I'm at a loss to know why you stopped using D-76 and went to
> HC-110. What was the reasoning behind this? D-76 is one of the all
> time best developers available. HC-110 is sort of a generic blah
> developer. There are many many great developers out there, D-76
> being one of them, and in my view, HC-110 is not one of them.
>
> IMHO of course,
>
> Jim
>
>
> At 08:06 AM 2/19/2007 -0500, Janet wrote:
>
>
>> Thank you, Jonathan. I've printed this out to look again more
>> closely. I cut the negatives this morning and they don't look as
>> great as I thought they might last night. My 35mm negs used to look
>> good when I used d76. 120 didn't always and I've fought with that,
>> but this is a new problem. I'm almost out of this hc110. Next time
>> it's back to d76. If they look the same as these I'll really be
>> going after it! Thanks again.
>>
>> Janet
>>
>
> ======================================================================
> =======================================
> To unsubscribe from this list, go to www.freelists.org and logon to
> your account (the same e-mail address and password you set-up when
> you subscribed,) and unsubscribe from there.
>
=============================================================================================================
To unsubscribe from this list, go to www.freelists.org and logon to your
account (the same e-mail address and password you set-up when you subscribed,)
and unsubscribe from there.
- Follow-Ups:
- [pure-silver] Re: under-developed?
- From: Peter De Smidt
- [pure-silver] Re: under-developed?
- From: Richard Knoppow
- References:
- [pure-silver] Re: under-developed?
- From: Janet Cull
Other related posts:
- » [pure-silver] under-developed?
- » [pure-silver] Re: under-developed?
- » [pure-silver] Re: under-developed?
- » [pure-silver] Re: under-developed?
- » [pure-silver] Re: under-developed?
- » [pure-silver] Re: under-developed?
- » [pure-silver] Re: under-developed?
- » [pure-silver] Re: under-developed?
- » [pure-silver] Re: under-developed?
- » [pure-silver] Re: under-developed?
- » [pure-silver] Re: under-developed?
- » [pure-silver] Re: under-developed?
- » [pure-silver] Re: under-developed?
- » [pure-silver] Re: under-developed?
- » [pure-silver] Re: under-developed?
- » [pure-silver] Re: under-developed?
- » [pure-silver] Re: under-developed?
- » [pure-silver] Re: under-developed?
- » [pure-silver] Re: under-developed?
- » [pure-silver] Re: under-developed?
- » [pure-silver] Re: under-developed?
- » [pure-silver] Re: under-developed?
- » [pure-silver] Re: under-developed?
- » [pure-silver] Re: under-developed?
- » [pure-silver] Re: under-developed?
- » [pure-silver] Re: under-developed?
- [pure-silver] Re: under-developed?
- From: Peter De Smidt
- [pure-silver] Re: under-developed?
- From: Richard Knoppow
- [pure-silver] Re: under-developed?
- From: Janet Cull