Support our Sponsors, they keep FADU free:   AG Photographic   The Imaging Warehouse   Process Supplies   RH Designs   Second-hand Darkroom Supplies  

Notices

Go Back   Film and Darkroom User > Monochrome Work > Monochrome Film

  ***   Click here for the FADU 2015/2014 Yearbooks   ***

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #11  
Old 28th September 2020, 03:19 PM
Brock's Avatar
Brock Brock is offline
Friend
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: St Andrews
Posts: 698
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike O'Pray View Post
This may take us off the thread to a certain extent but as Svend has mentioned Microphen, I recall Argentum doing tests with D3200 and he found that only Microphen delivered full box speed. I'd need to search for his thread which was several years ago but I think and it is no stronger than "think" that he also used DDX.

I find that both DDX and Xtol do equally well at 1600 for D3200 but if Microphen genuinely improves on this in terms of speed and has no minuses it is certainly one to consider, George.

NB It comes in 1L powder so its life while in powder form is virtually indefinite and easy to store. Once in liquid stock 1L may be easier to store in small 125/250 ml bottles than the 5L of Xtol to retain maximum life . However even at 1+3 which is not recommended for fast speed films it still works out the most expensive as it is 4L max(at 1+3) whereas DDX is 5L (1L at 1+4 ). So if it does deliver better speed than DDX and you are a user of D3200 it may be worth the extra cost for the likes of D3200 or Tmax 3200

Cost-wise however it does not appear to be meet the definition of both all round developer that is economical

Mike


You can develop up to ten films in a litre of Microphen (with an additional 10% extra dev time per film) which makes it much better value.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
__________________
The Online Darkroom
www.onlinedarkroom.blogspot.com
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 28th September 2020, 04:06 PM
Mike O'Pray Mike O'Pray is offline
Friend
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Daventry, Northants
Posts: 8,962
Default

Thanks Brock I hadn't read further into the instruction sheet and should have. It would look as if that makes a stock solution which is reused only slightly less economical than a 1+3 and dump each time and it gives you whatever benefit comes from using stock solution.

The only downside is the added time which by film 10 is 90%. So towards the end times for the likes of D3200 start to get long but given it's a hobby that hardly a concern

Mike
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 28th September 2020, 04:30 PM
George George is offline
Friend
 
Join Date: Sep 2020
Location: West Sussex
Posts: 8
Default

Thanks all - looks like I've got a few to try. I will perhaps order a few of these suggestions and experiment with them and see what I prefer.

I have always aimed towards a fine grained neg, but now also low contrast, as it seems to suit my printing technique/condenser enlarger. I can very easily get a lot of contrast so that's not an issue which often is for some
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 28th September 2020, 04:39 PM
Svend Svend is offline
Friend
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 1,193
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by George View Post
Thanks all - looks like I've got a few to try. I will perhaps order a few of these suggestions and experiment with them and see what I prefer.

I have always aimed towards a fine grained neg, but now also low contrast, as it seems to suit my printing technique/condenser enlarger. I can very easily get a lot of contrast so that's not an issue which often is for some
George,
If it's fine grain you're after and softer contrast then Microphen might be just the ticket. Others can confirm or refute this, but it's worth checking out. Also, Perceptol would be ideal for this, but there is about 1/3 stop speed loss if used at 1+1 dilution (more if used undiluted), and it's not terribly economical.

Lots to mull over here. Good luck!
__________________
Regards,
Svend
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 28th September 2020, 06:31 PM
Brock's Avatar
Brock Brock is offline
Friend
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: St Andrews
Posts: 698
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike O'Pray View Post
Thanks Brock I hadn't read further into the instruction sheet and should have. It would look as if that makes a stock solution which is reused only slightly less economical than a 1+3 and dump each time and it gives you whatever benefit comes from using stock solution.

The only downside is the added time which by film 10 is 90%. So towards the end times for the likes of D3200 start to get long but given it's a hobby that hardly a concern

Mike


Yes, the +90% is a pain Mike. Some people claim to keep to the original time with no ill effects although I’m not brave enough to try that. I haven’t tried 1+3 either after reading a couple of negative things about it - it’s apparently not so good for a speed boost for a start - but you’ll get 10 35mm films out of it or 8 120 rolls in a Paterson tank. I’m sticking with Microphen mainly because it’s good and makes it possible most of the time to shoot handheld with Delta 400. I’ll do anything to get rid of the tripod.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
__________________
The Online Darkroom
www.onlinedarkroom.blogspot.com
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 28th September 2020, 08:38 PM
Mike O'Pray Mike O'Pray is offline
Friend
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Daventry, Northants
Posts: 8,962
Default

Brock on a practical note which may also help George Have you found a time limit to how long you have to do 10 films i.e. is the small amount of air left each time in the 1L container for the cumulative period of the development times a problem in your experience?

I suppose that if the container is a flexible PET bottle such as a 1L soda water bottle then each time it is poured into the tank you could simply squeeze it to force the remaining liquid back up the neck until you are ready to pour the developer back into the bottle?

Air is usually the biggest enemy but as it is a matter of minutes each time then the squeeze may not be necessary

Thanks

Mike
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 28th September 2020, 10:56 PM
Stocky Stocky is offline
Friend
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 276
Default

In the old days of Agfa, their Rodinal Special (nothing to do with Rodinal, and also called Studional) was a similar developer to DDX and their instructions referred to reusing the working solution but only within a time frame. For longer times between use and reuse there was a percentage increase in time recommended.

Lots of people have reported diluting DDX further than 1+4, some a bit to lengthen dev time and reduce contrast a bit, some to 1+9 for economy. But the OP already reuses the 1+4 working solution, so reusing a more diluted working solution might run into problems of keeping times or efficacy.

Most alternative developers will result in some speed drop which is hard to give up. Microphen is now available only in 1L packs which make it close to the price of DDX anyway. The instructions for diluting it further (1+3) could probably apply to DDX also: my worry would be reuse of the diluted developer after some storage time.

I mix up ID-68 from ingredients and that satisfies my need to use a more economical speed increasing developer but I must admit that the initial setup costs (a 10 year supply of phenidone, kilograms of various other ingredients) make the saving an illusion I suppose. I do use most of the same ingredients for paper developer and there is a saving there.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 29th September 2020, 08:41 AM
Brock's Avatar
Brock Brock is offline
Friend
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: St Andrews
Posts: 698
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike O'Pray View Post
Brock on a practical note which may also help George Have you found a time limit to how long you have to do 10 films i.e. is the small amount of air left each time in the 1L container for the cumulative period of the development times a problem in your experience?

I suppose that if the container is a flexible PET bottle such as a 1L soda water bottle then each time it is poured into the tank you could simply squeeze it to force the remaining liquid back up the neck until you are ready to pour the developer back into the bottle?

Air is usually the biggest enemy but as it is a matter of minutes each time then the squeeze may not be necessary

Thanks

Mike

That’s not been a problem for me, Mike. So far! I always try to use up developer well within its use-by date. To be honest, I usually dump the dev after eight or nine films anyway to be on the safe side. The few occasions where I done the full ten have been fine so I’m probably just being over-cautious.
__________________
The Online Darkroom
www.onlinedarkroom.blogspot.com
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 29th September 2020, 09:10 AM
Brock's Avatar
Brock Brock is offline
Friend
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: St Andrews
Posts: 698
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stocky View Post
Microphen is now available only in 1L packs which make it close to the price of DDX anyway. The instructions for diluting it further (1+3) could probably apply to DDX also: my worry would be reuse of the diluted developer after some storage time.
I just checked on AG Photographic’s site. Reusing the stock Microphen solution to do ten films or using it one-shot at 1+2 (also does ten films) works out at 68p per 35mm film. Using DDX at 1+4 works out at £1.56 per film. Microphen at 1+1 is £1.13 per 35mm film which is still a decent saving over DDX.
__________________
The Online Darkroom
www.onlinedarkroom.blogspot.com
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 29th September 2020, 10:10 PM
Stocky Stocky is offline
Friend
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 276
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brock View Post
I just checked on AG Photographic’s site. Reusing the stock Microphen solution to do ten films or using it one-shot at 1+2 (also does ten films) works out at 68p per 35mm film. Using DDX at 1+4 works out at £1.56 per film. Microphen at 1+1 is £1.13 per 35mm film which is still a decent saving over DDX.
I'm sure that you're correct. I was just going on memory, and prices here at nearly the End of the Earth tend to be even higher. (Only New Zealand is further!)

If using one-shot, DDX can be diluted further than 1+4. It's quite potent stuff.
Reply With Quote
Reply
Support our Sponsors, they keep FADU free:   AG Photographic   The Imaging Warehouse   Process Supplies   RH Designs   Second-hand Darkroom Supplies  

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Anti-newton glass substitute GoodOldNorm Darkroom 6 23rd June 2019 09:10 PM
Grey card substitute GoodOldNorm Photography in general 54 23rd August 2015 06:07 PM
Ilford FB matt Substitute kimberellie Introductions 3 25th October 2010 07:51 PM


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:34 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.