Film and Darkroom User

Film and Darkroom User (http://www.film-and-darkroom-user.org.uk/forum/index.php)
-   Chemical formulae (http://www.film-and-darkroom-user.org.uk/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=41)
-   -   D-23 developer (http://www.film-and-darkroom-user.org.uk/forum/showthread.php?t=13676)

yaacovk 2nd March 2021 08:36 AM

D-23 developer
 
Hi.
please your advices.
why not using D-23 over D-76?
it's more cheap and easy to make and the results i'v saw was wonderfull...

ragards.

Yaacov.

Rob Archer 2nd March 2021 10:34 AM

I've used it in the past. Some say it's one of film photography's best-kept secrets! It does, indeed, give excellent results. It's also cheap and easy to make and keeps well. I found it gives better highlight definition than D76/ID11. The big downside was that you generally have to give a film at least a full stop more exposure than box speed. I usually rate HP5+ at 200 anyway so that's not a problem for me but it may be for some. The only reason I stopped using it was that I was given several unopened 5 litre packs of ID11 and 2.5l packs of Perceptol. When I've used these up I may well go back to D23.

It's also the first bath in some 2-bath developers such as Stoeckler's which works really well for high-contrast slow films like PanF+.

http://www.film-and-darkroom-user.or...ight=Stoeckler

yaacovk 2nd March 2021 11:20 AM

Thank you Rob.
Yes, i asume that you know.
the two bath D-23 call DD-23 (Divided D-23) and it can give a solution for the full stop exposure.

Yaacov.

Svend 3rd March 2021 12:33 PM

I have never used D23, but quite a few here use Perceptol regularly, including me. It is basically D23 with the addition of salt, so metol-only, no hydroquinone. It's a wonderful developer, and if my results with it are any indication of what D23 can do, then I would wholeheartedly recommend it to you. Compared to D76, Perceptol has: finer grain; better highlight control; softer contrast; smoother gradation. It's my preferred developer for HP5, TriX, and PanF, at least for nature and landscape scenes.

OTOH, as Rob says, you lose a stop of speed, but that's OK with me. And it gives less punchy contrast, so for some scenes it may not suit the desired "look" -- e.g. for urban scenes I prefer D76 because I want some sharper more visible grain and I like the gutsy negs it gives.

Let us know if you try it and how it worked out.

FYI -- there's a recipe here somewhere for homebrew Perceptol if you want to try it. Just as easy as D23 to mix up.

Mike O'Pray 7th December 2021 02:41 PM

There seems to be a range of opinions on whether D23 can deliver full box speed with say ISO 400 films and it isn't clear to me if dilution helps although if it behaves likes Perceptol then it would seem that based on Ilford speeds it almost makes 400 for HP5+ and D400 at 1+3 and does make 400 in TMax but TMax may be slightly faster than either of Ilford's 400 speed films

What appears somewhat incongruous to a layman like me is that despite the above, llford does give times for D3200 at 3200 at stock so presumably Ilford regards Perceptol as capable of good results at 3200?

What I would have expected, based on the logic of its inability to make 400 is that if we assume D3200 to be a real ISO of say 1000 then development at 800 or at a stretch 1000 might be the best it could achieve

In saying this I appreciate I am using the Perceptol information and not D23 but in terms of speed achievement in terms of development, both developers seem to be lumped together

I had a look at a few pics produced at 400 in D400 using D23 stock by Alex Luyckx and to my eye the shadow detail was very good but the pics appear to have been taken in overcast conditions where open shadows tend to be the norm

For what it is worth the MDC chart show more times at 400 for D23 than it does for Perceptol and John Finch in his Pictorial Planet video makes no mention of the need to sacrifice speed that I can recall

So I am unsure what conclusions to draw but my instinct is that,based on the range of info I have found D23 will be certainly be capable of full box speed for those films below 400 and may well be capable of getting as close to full box speed for 400 films as makes no real difference

The one thing that still leaves me puzzled based on Perceptol and D3200 is how close do both Perceptol and D23 really come to producing good negs at much above EI 1000 despite Ilford's stated times for Perceptol for EI's 1600 let alone EI 3200

Mike

Tom Kershaw 7th December 2021 04:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike O'Pray (Post 142600)
The one thing that still leaves me puzzled based on Perceptol and D3200 is how close do both Perceptol and D23 really come to producing good negs at much above EI 1000 despite Ilford's stated times for Perceptol for EI's 1600 let alone EI 3200

Mike

I suspect ILFORD (Harman) could do with revisiting some of their data sheets and product guides, to check for accurate and rational information.

Mike O'Pray 7th December 2021 07:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tom Kershaw (Post 142602)
I suspect ILFORD (Harman) could do with revisiting some of their data sheets and product guides, to check for accurate and rational information.

I agree, Tom. I have a funny feeling I may have brought this up at the 2 Ilford tours I attended in 2006 and 2008 but if I got an answer that covers my point on Perceptol not being quite good for box speed with genuine 400 film but good enough for say 1000 film at 3200 I cannot recall what it was.:)

Mike


All times are GMT. The time now is 05:38 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.