PDA

View Full Version : Any Microphen fans here?


Svend
18th January 2017, 06:18 PM
I have recently been given several packs of Microphen and, not wanting to toss it, I am trying to get a handle on how to get the best out of it wrt. film pairing, general use, etc.. I have never used it before, being happy with my standard developers and not really needing the extra speed boost that Microphen is known for.

So my questions are...:
1) Disregarding the speed boost thing, how does it perform as a general-use developer? Say, compared to ID-11, Xtol, etc.? Is it capable of good image quality, in context of a general-use dev? If so, are there any tricks to get the most out of it? (eg. dilution, non-std. agitation).
2) What films does it work best with? Regular grain (FP4, HP5) or tabular (Delta, Tmax)?
3) How would you describe it's overall character? Sp. the usual parameters - sharpness, gradation, shadows/highlights?

There seems to be little comment about its properties out there in the wider web, other than its speed increase. Anchell and Troop don't seem too keen on it; likewise neither was Thornton, if I recall; but neither elaborate more than a brief comment or two. I've looked extensively for some further insight, and although it seems to have its adherents, I haven't found anyone who has really described its character thoroughly. Looking at posted image examples (Flickr, Ipernity, etc.) shows very few images that really shine; most seem rather drab, to be honest, which is a bit discouraging. Surely there must be a film combo and technique that make it sing? I'm curious to experiment a bit with it, and I'd be happy if it gave me as good image quality as, say, ID-11 or Perceptol (my daily drivers). Or should I just hang on to it until I shoot a bunch of film in low light and need the extra speed?

Any insight most welcomed. Thanks in advance!

Best,
Svend

alexmuir
18th January 2017, 11:00 PM
I am by no means an expert on Microphen, but I have used it, most recently last week.
I have used it on a few occasions in the past when uprating HP5 to 1600 or 3200. It worked well for that purpose.
Last week, however, I was developing some Delta 3200 that I was rating at 6400. I also had a roll of HP5 rated at 6400 which I wanted to develop at the same time. Again, the results were good. Having made up a litre, I decided to also use it for a roll of Delta 400 that I was using to test a flash unit. I rated the film at 200, but developed it for the time given for 400. The results were very good. The images had a full range of tones, but also very fine grain, even in quite big enlargements. I'm planning more tests, and will use the Microphen until it's exhausted (10 films).
I don't know exactly what qualities you are looking for, but I would be inclined to give it a try and see how you get on. It comes from a quality manufacturer, and has certainly given me acceptable results. The grain in the Delta 400 negatives was surprisingly fine.
Let us know how you get on with it.
Alex.

Mike O'Pray
19th January 2017, 12:29 AM
I haven't used it but a friend here on FADU by the name of Argentum gave details in a post or series of posts about its speed increasing ability. If I recall he said that of a series of developers he had tried only Microphen gave D3200 its box speed of 3200 which is quite remarkable, given that its true speed is said to be 1000 and Microphen's speed increasing power is said by most to be about half a stop so say 1600.

I think the thread/posts are here on FADU. Have a search. He gave a fairly detailed write-up.

Combined with Alex's findings it sounds to have speed without the golf-ball grain usually associated with speed increasing developers.

Unfortunately Argentum hasn't been on the forum since May last year. I hope nothing has happened to him

Mike

Svend
19th January 2017, 03:54 AM
Thanks guys -- that is helpful. It sounds like it has some good qualities as a general purpose developer for medium speed films, as well as working exceedingly well with high speed film (esp. D3200). I have since looked a bit deeper into this question, and found an Ilford newsletter from many years ago containing an article that Roger Hicks and Frances Shultz wrote about Delta 3200. In it they show example images of this film in Microphen, and they look very fine indeed. Confirms what Alex said about it. Nice!

Some of the best images I've seen with it on photo hosting sites and blogs seem to be with the faster films. HP5, Delta 400 and TMY appear to really have a glow and a smoothness of tone that is very pleasing. This said with the usual caveats in mind, of course - scanned images, digital editing..., but there does seem to be a common trait there.

I recall reading somewhere that it is outstanding with PanF, and that it tames the contrast nicely. I will try to find that article again. Sounds like an interesting combination.

Still, it is surprising how little is written about this developer. There is plenty of ink about Rodinal, D-76, Xtol, the Pyro formulas, etc., but Microphen seems to be somewhat under the radar.

Alex....do let me know how your upcoming films turn out with Microphen. I expect you'll be all done with that before I even mix my first batch -- I still have some ID-11 stock to work through with some TMY before I start experimenting with anything else. Will you be using it for box speed processing of medium speed films? Or push processing and high speed stuff again?

Mike - I did a search on FADU for Microphen but didn't find much in way of descriptions of use, character, etc. Probably me just being impatient and not looking long enough. I will try again.... And yes, I hope Argentum is still here and all is well with him.

Cheers,
Svend

Svend
19th January 2017, 03:37 PM
Alex - another quick question, if you don't mind: Your recent films in Microphen, did you use "by the book" std. times and methods as per Ilford? Or did you modify anything? In other words, what did you do to get the results that you were happy with?

From your note re. use it 'til exhaustion, I'm assuming you used it full strength, undiluted(?).

I am tempted to give it a go with some PanF that I shot this past weekend. Winter scenes, waterfalls, overcast light...could be a very nice combination given its apparent softer contrast.

Thanks,
Svend

Lostlabours
19th January 2017, 05:16 PM
I used Microphen (ID-68) for a while mostly for push processing HP5 (long before Delta film), it's a nice developer but with FP4 and HP5 the grain is crisper and more pronounced but that's the trade off for the increased film speed of about 2/3 of a stop. I always used it replenished but the larger sizes and replenisher were dropped a few years ago, you can make your own from the publish ID-68 and ID-68R formulae.

The reason I stopped using it was the release of XP1 which I found much better for push processing with C41 developer. It's probably better with Delta films than conventional.

Ilford did a lot of work to produce a PQ variant of ID-11/D76, these formulae have been incorrectly claimed to be Microphen, in fact it was a series that became Ilford's commercial large scale D&P fine grain developer "Autophen".

The benefits of Autophen,a PQ version of ID-11. were it's unaffected by the Bromide build up that causes ID-11/D76 to collapse with replenishment, Metol's activity drops with Bromide build up, Phenidone keeps working well to very much higher Bromide levels.

Once Autophen was marketed Ilford looked at exploiting the increased speed properties of a PQ fine grain developer dropping the Sulphite level which helps further, finally releasing Microphen (ID-68).

Ian

Svend
19th January 2017, 05:56 PM
Thanks Ian -- very interesting feedback. It sounds like you used it primarily for its speed gain properties, as seems to be the case with most other users out there. I have come across few who say they use it as a general-purpose developer, based on its image quality merits and irrespective of speed gains.

As a general comment, I am less concerned with fine grain and sharpness, and much more interested in the tones a developer gives. As I shoot mainly medium format and don't enlarge to really big sizes, tonality becomes primary and I can afford to have slightly larger grain and a bit less sharpness for most subjects I shoot (within limits, of course :) ...I do like a clean sharp print, and there are some scenes which demand the utmost sharpness and fine grain). But step back from a print a bit and sharpness and grain become less important, and tonality is then its most important characteristic (other than composition, of course). But I feel I'm preaching to the choir here -- you use Pyrocat a lot, so you certainly know all about tonality and developers. ;)

So I am interested in what Microphen can do and how to get the best out of it. There are some very fine images out there done with it, and those who use it with skill certainly are able to get a unique look to their pictures. If I can extract some tips and hints from anyone here who's used it, that would be brilliant.

Thanks again, and best regards,
Svend

Svend
19th January 2017, 07:36 PM
Calling Peter Elgar! :) Turns out our very own Pentaxpete has some nicely-done photos on Flickr shot with PanF and Microphen. They look excellent -- lovely tones Pete. Nice work! And you used a Rolleiflex with a Planar, which I also use.

So, do tell: how do you get on with Microphen? I see your developing time for 1+3 was a bit shorter (about 20% less) than per Ilford data sheet. Any particular reason for that? Was it just adapted to suit the lighting conditions (bright sun in most shots)? Or is that your std. practice with this film/dev. combo? Any other insight and tips most welcome. Looking forward to hearing from you. :)

Cheers,
Svend

pentaxpete
19th January 2017, 07:53 PM
pentaxpete here ! I got your message about 'Microphen'use.
Well-- I have a 13 litre pack given free years ago in my chemical cupboard but as it is just too much to mix at the moment i 'make my own' from a Formula I was given many years ago by a 'Selo Works' bloke when they closed it down in Brentwood -- but I have been told on THIS site that it is 'Autophen' not 'Microphen'. However, as I use it 1+1 or 1+3 probably cannot see the difference. I have used it with 02/2007 outdated Fuji Acros 100 and find it gives 100 ASA still but Rodinal 1+50 needs to be rated at 80 ASA. I used half a cassette of 1995 dated Kodak Tri-X and processed in the 'Liquid PROMICROL' 1+14 for time stated and got a high Fog Level and HUGE Grain -- so on the next half I used my home-made Microphen 1+1 and got a lower Fog Level and much better grain ! ALL my films are now 'outdated' as all my 'fresh' buys are outdated but 'fridge stored' -- I have found my home-made Microphen increases in activity like ID11 even with a burst of Lighter Fuel in the bottle so I give LESS dev time.
Here is a 'Link' to my 'Home-Made Microphen' photos on Flickr -- Happy Viewing !

https://www.flickr.com/search/?w=25850987@N03&q=Home-Made%20Microphen%20

Svend
20th January 2017, 12:49 AM
Hi Pete -- thanks for jumping in here. This morning I saw your London Bridge pic and a few others from that day of shooting with your Rolleiflex, and was really impressed by the quality of what you got from PanF and Microphen. Those ones in particular really show what this developer can do with the right film and good technique. Given the full sun that day, I'd conclude that dilute Microphen does a good job with PanF's contrast. Nice....

I will try this combo myself soon. I have quite a few rolls of PanF in the freezer and I have been looking for a suitable developer for it, as I understand it is bit finicky wrt. contrast, etc.. So this is quite timely. Presently I have a roll of it in the wash done in Rodinal, and I plan to do a few more the same (trying different agitation routines). So once I get a few of those under my belt, it will be interesting to compare it to what Microphen can do with PanF.

Appreciate your help.

Best,
Svend

Steve Smith
20th January 2017, 08:10 AM
I used to use it a lot (mainly because it's quite cheap!). I'm currently using PMK Pyro which seems to last forever.


Steve.

Lostlabours
20th January 2017, 11:59 AM
Autophen and Ilford's PQ variants of ID-11 (http://www.lostlabours.co.uk/photography/formulae/developers/devPQ-ID11.htm) includes Microphen/ID-68.

Ian

Svend
20th January 2017, 12:52 PM
Thanks Ian. Good info to know. Interesting that ID-68/Microphen has less sulphite than the others. I wonder if that's low enough to mute its solvent action significantly vs. ID-11 at stock concentrations? I seem to recall 100g/L being the threshold -- will check my A&T book.

I'm pretty sure I have all the bulk ingredients to roll my own, so if I like it I can keep making it from scratch, as needed. Just have to figure out how to measure 0.13g :-)

We'll see how I get on with it. Presently experimenting with Rodinal, but side-by-side trials are always insightful -- same camera, same scene, same film....different developers.

Best,
Svend

Lostlabours
20th January 2017, 01:25 PM
Svend, if you look at Agfa's fine grain developer Agfa 44 (Agfa Ansco -GAF - AN17) you'll see a similar level of Sulphite 80g/l and a drop in Metol compared to ID-11/D76. It's the same with Adox Borax MQ, you can find them all here. (http://www.lostlabours.co.uk/photography/formulae/developers/devD76_variants.htm)

I used Adox Borax MQ which is quite similar to Agfa 44for a few years replenished and used to supply it to a couple of commercial photographers, it gives finer grain, better sharpness and tonality, the reduced solvent effect gives better film speed as well.

The optimal level of sulphite is around 75-85g/l. The problem was this was realised after D76 had effectively been made an open source formula used around the world by the motion picture industry and made by almost all manufacturers so it remained the standard MQ Borax developer.

Ian

Svend
20th January 2017, 04:29 PM
Ian - I had no idea you had such a wealth of chemical formulae on your site. Well done! What a great resource. This will be extremely useful, as I do regularly mix my own brews, and even more once I start printing in my new darkroom...I see quite a number of paper developer formulas there. Kudos! We should all be grateful to you for such a resource.

Back to Microphen -- with its lower sulphite I might actually use a powdered developer at stock strength for once. I pretty much always use them one-shot for sharpness, contrast control (if needed) and consistency. But I've always had a hunch there might be something lost when diluting, so it will be interesting to experiment with this. As I noted, some images from this developer seem to have a wonderful glow and smoothness of tone. I'm looking forward to trying it. It really wasn't on my hit list until someone gave me a few cartons of it, but now that I look deeper I like what I see. If I can get a handle on it's unique character (that is, if it indeed has a distinctive and aesthetically interesting one), then it will be yet another tool in the shed to use when I want a particular "look".

Thanks again!
Svend

Lostlabours
20th January 2017, 05:59 PM
These developers work best replenished, once they become ripened/seasoned you get the best from them in terms of finer grain, sharpness, tonality.

This is true for ID-11/D76, Agfa 44, Adox Borax MQ, Xtol, Microphen (ID-68) and Autophen, all of which designed from the outset for replenishment.

Probably the best way to describe this is - as you dilute say ID-11 an use it at 1+1. 1+2 or even 1+3 you get a slight increase in speed and better sharpness but an increase in grain depending on how much the developer and specifically the sulphite is diluted.

When used ID-11 replenished you get the sharpness and tonality you'd expect at 1+2 but the finer grain from using it full strength.

Autophen, Microphen (ID-68), and also Xtol, are better still - more stable when replenished because of Phenidone's tolerance of Bromide build up.

I've hardly put any of my formulae notes etc on my website Svend, I will add a lot more at some point :D.

Ian

Svend
20th January 2017, 06:27 PM
I wasn't aware that these developers when used as replenished had such properties. Gee, I am indeed learning a lot today. :) :cool: Thank you Ian! To be honest, I never really considered replenishers as they haven't been commercially available. Just didn't bother reading up about it as it was not relevant. But now that I am mixing my own brews from scratch this is actually a real option for once. I will most definitely research the particulars of replenishment, how it's done, storage, etc..

In principal, I like the concept. It will save a lot of mixing of powders. One-shot work is fine, but as I usually dilute at 1+1 or 1+2, I do go through a lot of stock (I no longer use 1+3 for image quality reasons). Now that I know the image quality is so good with replenished solutions, I'm sold!

The question is: if I mix up the packaged Microphen that I have on hand, will the ID-68R replenisher (as a homebrew mix) be compatible?

Best,
Svend

Lostlabours
20th January 2017, 07:13 PM
Svend, the huge advantage of replenishment is it's so economic, along with fast and quick to use. If you're an LF user then it doesn't matter whether you process 1 sheet of 5x4 in a litre or 6 (that's what my Jobo 2000 "inversion" tanks need per reel).

I used ID-68 replenisher with Microphen, the only difference between packaged Microphen and ID-68 is Metabisulpite is used at low level in Microphen Part A as a preservative to protect the developing agents.

This is done with some other Ilford (and older Kodak) powder developers. Once mixed in liquid form the Metabisulphite decomposes to Sulphite due to the the alkali - Borax or Carbonate.

Ideally I would use a minimum of 2.5 litres as w my working solution for replenishment. I found that worked well with ID-68/Microphem, ID-ii Adox Borax MQ and more recently Xtol.

I should have a Microphen data sheet from the mid to late 1970's with the replenishment details in an old Kentmere paper box in my darkroom, although you should be able to download via archive.org (The Way Back Machine).

Ian

Svend
20th January 2017, 07:43 PM
Excellent -- good news about using the ID-68 replenisher with Microphen. I'm good to go then. :)

BTW, no need to trouble yourself looking for the old Microphen tech sheet -- I found one in my archive from the early '80s which speaks about replenishment. Very simple to do.

Any particular reason for recommending the 2.5L working sol'n? I really would only use 1L at a time, as that is what my largest Paterson tanks will hold.

Lostlabours
20th January 2017, 08:01 PM
Any particular reason for recommending the 2.5L working sol'n? I really would only use 1L at a time, as that is what my largest Paterson tanks will hold.

Yes it even out variations between films, some use/exhasut developer more than others (due to subject matter, range of densities).

2 litres would be much better than one.

Ian

Svend
20th January 2017, 08:15 PM
Got it! Thanks - makes sense.... a bit of a buffer or elbow room, in other words.

From the Ilford tech doc, it seems the easiest way to use replenisher for small amounts like this is to add it to the empty stock bottle while the soup is in the tank with the film -- adding 9 ml replenisher for every 120 or 135/36 film developed -- then after development is finished, pouring the developer from the tank back into the bottle until full, discarding the (used) surplus from the tank. Nothing to it!

Thanks for all your help Ian. This has been most enlightening and educational. I learned things today I have not seen in any of my books or online. Greatly appreciated!

Kindest regards,
Svend

Keith Tapscott.
22nd January 2017, 09:42 AM
Microphen is a very good and very underrated film developer. It's good to read people taking an interest in trying it.

Svend
23rd January 2017, 02:27 AM
Keith, that's been my impression since undertaking some review of this developer. It doesn't seem to get a lot of attention and buzz. Everyone talks about its speed boost properties, but rarely mention its pictoral qualities. Personally I'm interested in the latter, and the speed boost is just a nice bonus.

Some say it's the powder equivalent of DDX, which certainly has a lot of its own followers, but that may be just heresay. If true, and if equal to DDX, then it should be very good indeed.

If I may ask, what is it that you like about it? Any personal insight or impressions?

Thanks - appreciate any feedback you can add here.

Svend

GoodOldNorm
18th May 2017, 06:21 PM
Got it! Thanks - makes sense.... a bit of a buffer or elbow room, in other words.

From the Ilford tech doc, it seems the easiest way to use replenisher for small amounts like this is to add it to the empty stock bottle while the soup is in the tank with the film -- adding 9 ml replenisher for every 120 or 135/36 film developed -- then after development is finished, pouring the developer from the tank back into the bottle until full, discarding the (used) surplus from the tank. Nothing to it!

Thanks for all your help Ian. This has been most enlightening and educational. I learned things today I have not seen in any of my books or online. Greatly appreciated!

Kindest regards,
Svend Hello Svend. did you experiment with replenishing Microphen, what are your thoughts/findings?

Lostlabours
18th May 2017, 07:22 PM
Norm, replenished Microphen/ID-68 works very well. I used it regularly from about 1970 until Ilford released XP1 mostly for push processing HP5, it wasn't my main developer.

It's not as fine grained as ID-11, but that's more because the grain just appears to be sharper.

I push processed some HP-5 in Pyrocat HD last Autumn and was amazed at the results. I hadn't planned to push process but the light levels were dropping very fast and what should have been 1/100 @ f16 400EI ended up being 1/25 @ f5.5 at between 1600 - 3200 EI. As it was a moving subject I couldn't use a slower speed and f5.5 is the fastest aperture on my 360mm telephoto lens.

Ian

Lostlabours
18th May 2017, 07:27 PM
Should have added that HP5 stains wonderfully in Pyrocat and the more you push the greater the stain to silver ratio which has the effect of masking the grain to some extent.

Ian

Svend
18th May 2017, 08:18 PM
Hello Svend. did you experiment with replenishing Microphen, what are your thoughts/findings?

Hi Norm,
Sorry, no progress there yet, but it's next on my list to try. I've not been shooting much, to be honest (very busy with work and general family craziness), and what little I've been doing has been experimenting with Rodinal with FP4, HP5 and PanF. I am not really that impressed with those results, actually, but am not ready to give up on Rodinal just yet. I have a few more trials to run with stronger dilution and also different films, esp. with TMX and TMY, before I quit it entirely. But that's another topic...

This coming summer I will have Round 2 of the urban Detroit project (a personal project I'm doing with my Father-in-law, who lives in the area), and I anticipate many rolls will be burned through for that one, including some night photography(!). Microphen replenished is my intended developer. Which reminds me, if I'm going to use it for that, I'd better get cracking on some test rolls, Stat! I've been cooped up in the office for weeks now, and need to get out on some long photo hikes in the worst way. What better reason than to test a new developer :D So I may have an answer for you sooner than later.

Cheers,
Svend

PS -- Ian, interesting comment about ID-11 and HP5. I found the grain to be quite prominent, but very sharp, of that film in homebrew D76 at 1+1 (looks fantastic, actually....great tones and very sharp). I assume you're talking about full strength ID-11, however (maybe replenished?) and therefore more solvent action? It will be interesting to compare my past HP5 films with replenished Microphen....now I'm even more curious.

Svend
18th May 2017, 11:15 PM
PS -- Ian, interesting comment about ID-11 and HP5. I found the grain to be quite prominent, but very sharp, of that film in homebrew D76 at 1+1 (looks fantastic, actually....great tones and very sharp). I assume you're talking about full strength ID-11, however (maybe replenished?) and therefore more solvent action? It will be interesting to compare my past HP5 films with replenished Microphen....now I'm even more curious.

I should clarify that statement.... In relation to my usual developer for HP5 and FP4, Perceptol, the grain with D76 at 1+1 was much more noticeable. Not coarse by any means, but it's there. Very sharp grain, as noted. Perceptol, OTOH, leaves a much softer grain with HP5, even at 1+1 dilution. I really like the way HP5 comes out in D76.

GoodOldNorm
19th May 2017, 06:58 AM
Should have added that HP5 stains wonderfully in Pyrocat and the more you push the greater the stain to silver ratio which has the effect of masking the grain to some extent.

Ian Hello Ian,did you increase your development time significantly or did you use a more concentrated developer?

GoodOldNorm
19th May 2017, 07:03 AM
I've been cooped up in the office for weeks now.....

Sven, life's too short, pack your rucksack and get out there :)

Lostlabours
19th May 2017, 07:41 AM
Hello Ian,did you increase your development time significantly or did you use a more concentrated developer?

I just increased the development time to somewhere around 25-30 minutes, I was winging it a bit because the shot was taken at dusk and the light was dropping very fast and there was no time to take a lst meter reading.

With 5x4 and smaller I always use 1+1 to 100 16 mins, however for dish processing 10x8 negatives I use 2+2 to 100 10 mins,


PS -- Ian, interesting comment about ID-11 and HP5. I found the grain to be quite prominent, but very sharp, of that film in homebrew D76 at 1+1 (looks fantastic, actually....great tones and very sharp). I assume you're talking about full strength ID-11, however (maybe replenished?) and therefore more solvent action? It will be interesting to compare my past HP5 films with replenished Microphen....now I'm even more curious.

I always used developers like ID-11, ID-68 (Microphen), Adox Borax MQ and latrer Xtol replenished.

ID-11/D76 will give slightly sharper grain at 1+1 compared to FS, it's slightly finer replenished once seasoned. That's the same with all the developers I just mentioned.

Ian

Svend
19th May 2017, 12:00 PM
I always used developers like ID-11, ID-68 (Microphen), Adox Borax MQ and latrer Xtol replenished.

ID-11/D76 will give slightly sharper grain at 1+1 compared to FS, it's slightly finer replenished once seasoned. That's the same with all the developers I just mentioned.

Ian

Got it -- thanks Ian. Makes sense now.


Sven, life's too short, pack your rucksack and get out there

You got that right, Norm! The weather here is great today so I'm cutting out of the office early, packing my camera backpack and taking my mountain bike to some trails through some old abandoned apple orchards planted by the original settlers in this area. The old trees should be in full bloom now. Quite a sight, mixed in with the forest that has grown up around them over the decades. Wonderful spot.

Cheers,
Svend

GoodOldNorm
11th September 2018, 09:39 AM
Sven did you ever get around to experimenting with Microphen, ID68 etc. The dark dull days of winter are approaching and I would appreciate any information on speed increasing developers.

Rob Archer
11th September 2018, 11:57 AM
I use Microphen a lot. I've just been given three unopened 2.5l packs :) . It works well as a general purpose developer as it controls both grain and contrast nicely. I use it with HP5+ usually. It gives beautiful results diluted 1:1 at IE400 and more-than-acceptable results at 800 (particularly with medium-format negatives). I've also had extremely nice results with FP4+ at 200. I'll scan an post some examples sometime (when/if I can find them!)

Svend
11th September 2018, 01:23 PM
Sven did you ever get around to experimenting with Microphen, ID68 etc. The dark dull days of winter are approaching and I would appreciate any information on speed increasing developers.

Hi Norm,
I have done a limited amount of developing with Microphen. Not enough to really come to any conclusions about it - just three rolls so far. All were done at 1:1 dilution; 2x FP4 and 1x HP5. Results were very nice, esp. with HP5. FP4 looked good in it, but I wasn't wowed; contrast was a bit drab looking...needs more experimenting. Can't say just yet whether I prefer it over my usual developers, Perceptol and ID-11.

What I really want to try is replenished Microphen or ID-68. I just haven't been shooting the volume of films needed to make this feasible (I'm also experimenting with Rodinal combos at present, so that is getting most of my attention). But the replenished Microphen/ID-68 brew seems to be quite special, from what I see and read out there on the web. Images seem to have a glow to them that appears to be unique. I have a larger project coming up this fall, and may give this a go.

I've been meaning to reply to your other thread, so will head over there now and drop a note more pertinent to your original question.

Sorry I couldn't be of more help on Microphen....

Best,
Svend

PS - Rob, thanks for the feedback. Makes me want to try that replenished brew even more now.

Lostlabours
11th September 2018, 02:04 PM
Svend, when developers are used replenished they actually give better results than when fresh (I mean unused).

Microphen is is close to the Ilford Photofinishing developer Autophen so will replenish well and keep going longer than ID-11/D76.

Autophen was a PQ variant of ID-11 and designed for a long life with top up replenishment, although there was also a separate replenisher fror bleed replenishment machines.

ID-11/D76 need bleed replenishment where some stock is discarded and replaced by replenisher it helps keep the bromide from duilding up which inhibits the Metol but it's inefficient. Pheindone can tolerate much highr bromide content so bleed replenishment just adds what was used.

Microphen while similar to Autophen was tweaked to give a greater increase in film speed, mostly by lowering the Sulphite level.

The only differences between ID-68 and Miccrophen are the latter has Metabisulphite as a preservative in Part A to protect the Developing agents before use (during it's shelf life), there's a corresponding slight change in the buffering to compensate, in use they are identical.

Ian

Svend
11th September 2018, 05:17 PM
Ian, thank you. Another very informative reply, as always.

To be honest, I have been holding back on starting a batch of ID-68 as a replenished brew simply because I sometimes go 6 months or more between shooting film (very busy with work and family). My shooting adventures go in fits and spurts. I don't want to go through the trouble just to have the batch go off from sitting idle too long. One-shot dilute developers suit that situation better, for now.

That said, perhaps I should ask: how long does the stock sol'n of ID-68 last? Given the usual full bottles and all that... If, say, longer than 6 or 8 months, then I'd be in good shape.

Cheers,
Svend

Lostlabours
11th September 2018, 06:11 PM
ID-68 should last a good 8 months to a year.

Ian

Svend
11th September 2018, 06:19 PM
ID-68 should last a good 8 months to a year.

Ian

Hey! Good news. No reason not to try this now.

Thanks again Ian.

Best,
Svend

Svend
11th September 2018, 06:29 PM
ID-68 should last a good 8 months to a year.

Ian

....but if used and then replenished, I assume it can go on much longer...correct?

Svend
31st March 2020, 05:01 PM
Waking up my old thread here....

I've finally worked through a rather sizable stash of D76 given to me a few years ago, and also finished some experimenting with Rodinal, and so am happy to be moving on to finally try out Microphen. I've been meaning to do this for years but always put it off for the reasons above.

I've got a couple of packets of it on hand (2.5L and 1L), and would like to try Ian's recommendation of using it replenished. The reason for this is not economy, but rather that Ian had noted it's image quality was better when used this way (seasoned replenished stock vs. one-shot). So regarding replenishment, I have a few questions:

- Can the stock solution be used as a replenisher? In other words, of the 2.5L stock, can I set aside 500ml and use it to replenish the main batch of 2L working solution? Or should I make up a batch of ID-68 replenisher?

- How long will the replenished working stock last? Will it expire within the usual time...say, 8 months to a year or so? Or can it go on longer, assuming regular use and replenishment?

- Can I expect any loss of developer activity over time, if used replenished? I've read that this can be an issue with certain developers when used this way, but would like to know if Microphen behaves this way also, and if so how much do I compensate for this?

Thanks in advance! I'm really looking forward to seeing the results from this. I've always like the tonality that others seem to get from Microphen.

John King
31st March 2020, 06:11 PM
Actually I started using by default. I had ordered 2 x 1 litre packets of ID11 and instead they sent Microphen in error. I had not used it before until then and found it suited my style of photography and had not realised that it was supposed to have a speed increase benefit. I continued to use it with films set at the box speed. I didn't notice any extra increase in negative density but I am certain the grain is less than ID11. I have just finished another 1/2 litre bottle of Microphen which according to the lable on the side it was 1 bottle of 4 made up in August 2018 and has not discoloured one bit and is as good as when it was 1st mixed.

I always use it at the 1-1 dilution so it is quite economical too at less than 1 per film. My last films were Kentmere 100 and enlarged to fit an A 4 sheet of Ilford MG paper the grain is well neigh invisible unless you examine it very closely. To sum up I am sold on it and it is my developer of choice.

Mike O'Pray
31st March 2020, 07:10 PM
Your post is good news for me, John and thanks. I have a packet waiting to be used primarily for D3200 due to its half a stop increase in speed. At the back of my mind was the fear that the increase in speed came with much bigger grain but this would seem not to be the case

Mike

Svend
31st March 2020, 07:48 PM
John - almost two years since mixed is really impressive. Great to hear that it's so long-lasting. From your comments you normally use it 1:1, but have you ever used it replenished? If so, how did it work out for you?

John King
31st March 2020, 08:52 PM
No I have never used it as a stock solution which was replenished. I didn't use that much B&W over the last year or so, it has mainly been colour neg. However with the regular huge increases in price of colour chemicals, I am moving back to B&W more and more.

But talking about replenishment. With colour in a NOVA processor I replenish the developer, stop and bleach-fix at the end of the session. Has anyone ever tried to replenish B&W stop and fixer that way it would ensure it's life was extended almost indefinitely.

Obviously it would have to be cleaned (filtered) out over time but the cleaned chemicals could be used again and again with replenishment. I am just thinking of the build up of silver deposits in the fixer, over time they may be worth recovering.

Svend
31st March 2020, 09:11 PM
Thanks John. I'm hoping Ian G. drops in here to answer my questions about replenishment - he seems to have had a lot of experience doing this with ID-68/Microphen.

In the meantime I am tempted to mix up just the 1L package and try a few rolls of Delta 100, FP4 and PanF just to see how they look when developed at 1+1. As an aside, the 1+1 dilution is pretty much my standard when using Perceptol and ID-11/D-76 -- I always seem to get better results with this ratio than either full-strength (too much solvent action, loss of sharpness), or greater dilutions such as 1+3 (too dilute, developer exhausts giving flat negs).

MikeHeller
1st April 2020, 10:25 AM
No I have never used it as a stock solution which was replenished. I didn't use that much B&W over the last year or so, it has mainly been colour neg. However with the regular huge increases in price of colour chemicals, I am moving back to B&W more and more.

But talking about replenishment. With colour in a NOVA processor I replenish the developer, stop and bleach-fix at the end of the session. Has anyone ever tried to replenish B&W stop and fixer that way it would ensure it's life was extended almost indefinitely.

Obviously it would have to be cleaned (filtered) out over time but the cleaned chemicals could be used again and again with replenishment. I am just thinking of the build up of silver deposits in the fixer, over time they may be worth recovering.


Apologies for going slightly off thread topic but:

I used the stop-bath with indicator in my toaster replenishing as necessary to fill the slot. It seemed to stay yellow for ages although it was quite difficult to see a change in colour in the darkroom and even with a bit removed into a test tube and taken out as the colour seemed to fade rather than go pink. I never tested it with indicator paper so don't know what was going on. I now change it whenever I change the fixer which I judge from the area of prints put through (this is also topped up as necessary).

As for reclaiming silver - I have tried this after liberating a silver electrolysis unit from work. The amount of silver on the plate after several reclamation sessions was negligible and in the end I gave the unit to Ed Buziak that used to produce the magazine 'Darkroom User'.
Mike

GoodOldNorm
1st April 2020, 04:04 PM
If Id68/microphen/DDX are very similar developers would Dave Butchers development times be a good starting point?

http://www.darkroomdave.com/tutorial/process-times-for-ilford-fp4-sfx-and-delta-400/

Svend
1st April 2020, 04:48 PM
If Id68/microphen/DDX are very similar developers would Dave Butchers development times be a good starting point?

http://www.darkroomdave.com/tutorial/process-times-for-ilford-fp4-sfx-and-delta-400/

Norm, are you looking for a starting point to use Microphen and/or ID-68? If so, why not look to Ilford's own data sheet?

https://www.ilfordphoto.com/amfile/file/download/file/1829/product/550/

According to Ian's ID-68 page the times for Microphen and ID-68 are the same:

http://www.lostlabours.co.uk/photography/formulae/developers/devPQ-ID11.htm

Hope this answers your question.

Lostlabours
1st April 2020, 05:20 PM
According to Ian's ID-68 page the times for Microphen and ID-68 are the same:

http://www.lostlabours.co.uk/photography/formulae/developers/devPQ-ID11.htm

Hope this answers your question.

Ilford themselves published that the times for ID-68 were identical to Microphen and that essentially they are identical. In practice there's Sodium Metabisulphite in Microphen Part A but that's compensated for by a slight tweaking of the buffering to maintain the same pH.

Ian