[rollei_list] Re: Plus X -PX 125- and Microdol X
- From: CarlosMFreaza <cmfreaza@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sat, 13 Feb 2010 18:02:12 -0300
Thank you very much for your opinion and interesting info Richard,
I'll see what happens tonight, I'll use the Microdol diluted 1:1.
Carlos
2010/2/13 Richard Knoppow <dickburk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "CarlosMFreaza" <cmfreaza@xxxxxxxxx>
> To: <rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Saturday, February 13, 2010 6:01 AM
> Subject: [rollei_list] Re: Plus X -PX 125- and Microdol X
>
>
> 2010/2/12 Richard Knoppow
>>
>> I've had good results with Perceptol and T-Max. As far as I can tell
>> Perceptol is identical to Microdol-X.
>
> I'll use now the Microdol X and Ilford Pan F 50 Plus film combo for
> the first time and was looking for developing times and users
> opinions. The Ilford Pan F 50 Plus technical sheet suggests identical
> developing times for this film with Perceptol 1:1 and Microdol X 1:1
> at 20ºC, 15' ; developing times have a very slight difference for both
> developers diluted 1:3, 17'and 18' and developing times for other
> Ilford films using these two developers are consistently similar or
> identical according the case, I think these are indications in the
> direction you mentioned above.
> The same technical sheet suggests solution B as the only option to
> develop the Pan F 50 with HC 110 developer, however the developing
> time is short too much: 4'. I had no good experiences using short
> times due to uneven developing; the Rodinal Special developer (nothing
> to do with the true Rodinal) was very active having short times, it
> was good for photojournalism work but it's not so good for others
> works. The page quoted yesterday about the HC 110 suggests:" The
> solution? Try the unofficial dilution H which is half of dilution B,
> and simply develop twice as long as for dilution B", perhaps it works.
>
> Carlos
> ---
> Very fine grain films probably benefit less from fine grain developers
> than others but Pan-F should deliver extremely fine grain where the
> developer is used full strength. Note that the extra-fine-grain property of
> either Perceptol or Microdol-X is there only when the developer is used full
> strength. At 1:3 both grain and film speed are similar to D-76 and there is
> no advantage to the fine grain developers other than that they will give a
> greater acutance effect than D-76.
> Undiluted Microdol-X or Perceptol will cause about a 3/4 stop loss of
> speed which should be compensated for in exposure. For Pan-F a speed setting
> of about EI-25 should be right and yield extremely fine grain negatives with
> good tonal rendition. However, there will be practically no adjacency
> effects so no acutance effect. For the most part acutance effects are
> desired by those using 35mm cameras to partly compensate for mushiness due
> to the lens performance. If you have really good lenses the results will be
> better without the acutance effect, which actually reduces resolution. I
> find that using T-Max 100 with undiluted Perceptol gives me negatives which
> are nearly as fine grain as I got from Technical Pan in Technidol. However
> the speed is about four times greater and the tone rendition is better.
> These negatives have a smoothness of tone rivaling that of larger negatives.
> However, they do show up the faults in my Nikon-F lenses. The pictures are
> sharp but not quite up to Rollei negatives or those from larger format
> cameras.
> Remember than the scale of adjacency effects is fixed so that they make
> more difference for small negatives. For Rollei size they are noticable but
> of less significance than for 35mm. For larger than about 2-1/4 x 2-1/4 they
> are insignificant.
> My recommendation is that Perceptol or Microdol-X be used where
> extra-fine-grain is desired but some other developer be used for general
> purpose development.
> HC-110 and Ilford's equivalent, is convenient because of its ability to
> be diluted to several strengths and very long shelf life, but is not an
> optimum developer for any film. Probably Xtol comes closest to being a
> universal "optimum" developer. Kodak seems to have tamed the problems Xtol
> had and first so I would not hesitate to use it.
>
> --
> Richard Knoppow
> Los Angeles, CA, USA
> dickburk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> ---
> Rollei List
>
> - Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> - Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'subscribe' in the
> subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
>
> - Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'unsubscribe' in the
> subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
>
> - Online, searchable archives are available at
> //www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
>
>
---
Rollei List
- Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'subscribe'
in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
- Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
- Online, searchable archives are available at
//www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
Other related posts:
