[pure-silver] Re: Film In Dektol
- From: Tim Daneliuk <tundra@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: pure-silver@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 21:07:55 -0600
Richard Knoppow wrote:
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tim Daneliuk" <tundra@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: <pure-silver@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Wednesday, November 11, 2009 4:24 PM
> Subject: [pure-silver] Film In Dektol
>
>
>> Last week I needed to do a quick test on a bulk film loader I've owned
>> for years but never used before (I almost never shoot 35mm). I loaded
>> a 10 exposure cartridge of Ultra 400 (which I'd also never used) and
>> exposed it at ASA 200. However, I didn't much feel like doing my normal
>> film development since my sink was full of trays for print processing at
>> the time. So ... I decided that, for my purposes, I could just develop
>> it in Dektol. I dug around and found a suggestion of 90 seconds @ 68F
>> so that's what I did.
>>
>> I just finished making a print from this and I'm really surprised.
>> I figured that the Dektol would be overkill, really grainy, and generally
>> just wrong for the film. I was, um ... wrong. The print looks *really*
>> good - at least technically - it was just a test shot of no particular
>> artistic merit. The grain is very restrained and the acuity - at least
>> at 8x10 - is more than adequate. With *very* careful exposure and
>> processing, I've gotted usable 11x14s from 35mm, but this makes me want
>> to experiment more to see what I might be able to get out of Dektol.
>>
>> So, what say ye? Have any of you gotten good film results with Dektol?
>> Am I just getting better-than-expected results because Ultrafine 400 is
>> some magic emulsion heretofore unknown to me?
>> --
>
> Many years ago, when newspapers still used large format film it was
> common to develop film in print developer. This was usually Kodak D-72,
> about the same as Dektol. The reason was simply that one didn't need two
> set ups for film and prints. The film used was nearly always
> orthochromatic so the common red safelights worked for it as well as
> paper. Kodak used to give developing recommendations for D-72 for press
> films. The main problem with it is that its so active that the
> developing times tend to be very short. It should be used in trays with
> constant agitation to avoid uneven development. Actually, the short
> development time was an advantage in press work.
> Dektol is probably not the ideal film developer but its no grainier
> than Rodinal, maybe less.
> c.1943 development recommendations for press films were:
> Dilute 1:1, with no agitation develop about five minutes. With agitation
> for about four minutes. For less contrast dilute 1:2.
> There are charts showing development time vs: gamma and temperature
> for several films of the time. The gammas are generally much higher than
> would be used now, i.e., greater than 1 where modern negatives are
> usually developed to gammas of around 0.6 to 0.8. Development times are
> around 90 seconds to three minutes. Keep in mind that many older films
> required substantially longer development times than modern films.
>
I wonder if the shorter dev times contribute to less visible grain.
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk tundra@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
PGP Key: http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/
=============================================================================================================
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.
Other related posts:
