New UK Store Selling Spur Products

[Phil]

After a very long time testing and blogging about them, FADU friend Brock (Bruce Robbins) has a store up on his excellent site, The Online Darkroom, selling a small, but select, selection of Spur Film and Paper Developers.

http://www.theonlinedarkroom.com/p/b...=0&sort=normal

His prices are very competetive, as are his shipping rates - he's also in the UK.
Bruce is a really nice bloke to deal with, and is as courteous and as prompt in his delivery of things as you could wish for.

[Keith Tapscott.]

The instructions for Spur HRX3 are very confusing. The developer is sold in two separate parts, so shouldn't the instruction say 1 part A + 1 part B + ? parts of water instead of 1+20 etc?

[Brock]

Originally Posted by Keith Tapscott.

The instructions for Spur HRX3 are very confusing. The developer is sold in two separate parts, so shouldn't the instruction say 1 part A + 1 part B + ? parts of water instead of 1+20 etc?

They could be better, Keith, but it's a translation from the original German. I'll re-write everything in due course to make it clearer.

In actual use, the developer is dead easy. You work out the total amount of neat developer needed in exactly the same way you would for any developer, i.e., for 1+20 dilution just divide the total volume of fluid going into your tank by 21. The only additional step that has to be done is to divide that total amount of neat developer by two and use equal amounts of A and B.

For example, you want 500ml of developing solution and the dilution is 1+20. Divide 500ml by 21 and you get 24ml (rounded up from 23.8ml) for the total amount of neat developer required. Split the 24ml into 12 ml of A and 12ml of B. That's all there is to it. Parts A and B are always used in equal amounts.

I've used more Acurol-N because that's the first developer I got from Spur but I'm beginning to catch up with HRX now and I think it's even better. Acurol-N is like a finer grained Rodinal and HRX is a slightly finer grained and slightly sharper D76. Attached is a pic of my latest film, Adox CHS 100 II developed in HRX, against a window. It's lovely stuff. You can read about what a great combination the Adox film and HRX are here: http://www.theonlinedarkroom.com/201...lunan-bay.html

For an independent review, here's what Leica guru, Erwin Puts, had to say about HRX and Acurol-N:
http://www.imx.nl/photo/technique/a-...ur-develo.html

I hope this clarifies things for you but if you have any other questions then please fire away.

Bruce

[Keith Tapscott.]

Thanks Bruce.

[B&W Neil]

Originally Posted by Brock

They could be better, Keith, but it's a translation from the original German. I'll re-write everything in due course to make it clearer.

In actual use, the developer is dead easy. You work out the total amount of neat developer needed in exactly the same way you would for any developer, i.e., for 1+20 dilution just divide the total volume of fluid going into your tank by 21. The only additional step that has to be done is to divide that total amount of neat developer by two and use equal amounts of A and B.

For example, you want 500ml of developing solution and the dilution is 1+20. Divide 500ml by 21 and you get 24ml (rounded up from 23.8ml) for the total amount of neat developer required. Split the 24ml into 12 ml of A and 12ml of B. That's all there is to it. Parts A and B are always used in equal amounts.

I've used more Acurol-N because that's the first developer I got from Spur but I'm beginning to catch up with HRX now and I think it's even better. Acurol-N is like a finer grained Rodinal and HRX is a slightly finer grained and slightly sharper D76. Attached is a pic of my latest film, Adox CHS 100 II developed in HRX, against a window. It's lovely stuff. You can read about what a great combination the Adox film and HRX are here: http://www.theonlinedarkroom.com/201...lunan-bay.html

For an independent review, here's what Leica guru, Erwin Puts, had to say about HRX and Acurol-N:
http://www.imx.nl/photo/technique/a-...ur-develo.html

I hope this clarifies things for you but if you have any other questions then please fire away.

Bruce

Attachment 2121

Bruce,

This is an interesting and informative review but I just wish it was backed up with some print examples.

Neil.

[Brock]

Of course, you're right Neil. It's much better scanning prints than negs for this sort of thing. In my defence, I'm posting anywhere between three and seven times a week and it takes a lot of time - not to mention money that I don't have - to illustrate posts with print scans. But I'll definitely have to make more of an effort to get back into the darkroom.

[Mike O'Pray]

To be frank, in my case Bruce, what would count is evidence that HRX gives me better negs than my current developer which is Xtol.

Xtol's 5L pack results in lower processing cost per film than HRX would seem to, if I have got my maths correct so the negs have to at least match Xtol for purchase to make sense.

Clearly two small bottles make processing easier than making and decanting into wine-bags 5L of Xtol so at that point I might be tempted but I just haven't seen enough evidence of comparisons with other developers yet.

It is a bit chicken and egg, I know, since if no-one starts using the stuff then there is no fount of user experience to draw on.

Usually we can often rely on that vast market called the U.S. for extensive user experience but there would seem to be so few users of Spur products there or here for that matter - yet.

Mike

[Brock]

Hi Mike,

Logically, there is no amount of testing I or anyone else can do that would be able to tell you whether HRX would give you better negs than you're getting from Xtol. Only you can do that. As you know, it depends on your own personal EI, your exposure measurement technique, your processing technique in terms of time and temperature management, the type of weather you normally shoot in and even your equipment.

Once you've accounted for all those variables, you then have personal preference to deal with. Some people want fine grain, some want high acutance and others want soft or hard contrast, etc. I can say that HRX is giving me superb negs with Adox CHS 100 II but that only holds true for me and the way I work. Would it work for you? There's only one way to find out! Personally, I go by my teenage daughter's dictum of YOLO - you only live once.

But if you're getting everything you want in your negs from Xtol, why change? The hardest thing is arriving at the type of neg that makes life easier for you and if you've already cracked that I'd be inclined to stick with it.

[Keith Tapscott.]

The main reason of my interest in the HRX developer, is that if it gives me the quality I am looking for, then I no longer have to mix stock solutions from dry powders.
I have no interests in the Adox films though.

[B&W Neil]

Originally Posted by Brock

Of course, you're right Neil. It's much better scanning prints than negs for this sort of thing. In my defence, I'm posting anywhere between three and seven times a week and it takes a lot of time - not to mention money that I don't have - to illustrate posts with print scans. But I'll definitely have to make more of an effort to get back into the darkroom.

I understand the situation entirely, Bruce, you certainly can't be everywhere at once and you are doing a great job on your website as it is.

It is just over the years I have tried many new developers, and still do occasionally, and I have found it doesn't matter how good the reviews and technical stats stack up, or how wonderful the negatives look under a good loupe, there is nothing better than seeing a print that has been produced with the developer / film combination under consideration.

Neil.