Support our Sponsors, they keep FADU free: AG Photographic The Imaging Warehouse Process Supplies RH Designs Second-hand Darkroom Supplies |
> D-23 developer |
*** Click here for the FADU 2015/2014 Yearbooks *** |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
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. |
#2
|
||||
|
||||
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 |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
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. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
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.
__________________
Regards, Svend |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
I suspect ILFORD (Harman) could do with revisiting some of their data sheets and product guides, to check for accurate and rational information.
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Mike |
#8
|
||||
|
||||
If I did use D23, I would use it full strength and replenish it with the DK25R replenishing formula.
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
I could be wrong but once again we may have been talking to ourselves within days of the OP's post
He is not on the list of friends which I think requires 5 posts but I am not sure nor do I know how a member finds out in cases such as this one when the OP who hasn't made it to the friends list, last visited FADU Mike fnd out usre rs |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Terry S |
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 |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Which developer?? | RussKelly | Darkroom | 16 | 3rd August 2014 12:04 PM |
A sometimes Developer? | Sometimes | Darkroom | 14 | 13th December 2010 06:04 PM |
Acutance developer or fine grain developer | mark d | Monochrome Film | 18 | 7th September 2010 08:50 AM |
T Max Developer | Neil Smith | Manufactured brews | 6 | 30th April 2010 09:15 AM |
What Developer do you use | Tony F | Monochrome Film | 37 | 14th March 2010 02:00 PM |