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
  #1  
Old 23rd April 2016, 02:32 AM
Svend Svend is offline
Friend
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 1,193
Default Perceptol minimum stock sol'n for one-shot dilutions

I have heard that for developers like ID11, D-76 and Microphen, when used diluted for one-shot batches, that there should be at least 100ml of stock in the working solution to avoid having all the developer used up before completion. However, for Perceptol I was recently told that this amount should be a minimum of 250ml stock. Is this correct? It seems then, that 1+3 dilutions are not possible in multi-roll tanks with all reels full. Or even a single roll in a small tank. I use Patterson tanks which need 300ml and 500ml working sol'n per 135 and 120 roll, respectively. If you do the math you’ll see what I mean.

Before I heard this, I kind of suspected something was amiss, as in looking through my old negs of FP4 (my standard film years ago) I noticed that almost all the films developed in Perceptol at 1+3 were very flat and lacking contrast. Drab and lifeless. Others developed in D-76 or ID-11 at the same dilution, or even Perceptol at 1+1, are all fine -- full range of tones, lots of snap. (As an aside, some of the best results, tonality wise, were from D76/ID11 at 1+1).

So, can anyone here verify this about using diluted Perceptol? Doing my own initial runs (hardly extensive or authoritative) appear to bear this out -- I have used Perceptol recently with Delta 100 and FP4 at 1+2 and 1+3, having 250ml stock per roll in the tanks. The results have been excellent, and dramatically different from my old negs. These old films using 1+3 Perceptol would have had only 75ml stock in them for each 135 roll, which now seem to have been considerably under-charged.

Perusing the Ilford literature shows no mention of minimum stock volumes in dilute one-shot batches to achieve full development.

As I like the tonality of dilute Perceptol for certain films and scenes (high contrast, full sun, winter, etc.) and the sharpness it can produce, I would like to keep using it and get the most out of it. If anyone here has any experience or knowledge of this question, I would welcome the insight.

Thanks in advance, and regards.
Svend
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 23rd April 2016, 11:06 AM
paulc paulc is offline
Friend
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Nestled in the foothills of Norfolk.
Posts: 931
Default

Perceptol has a capacity of four films per litre - So yes, you do need 250ml per film. This caught me out too when I mixed a batch prior to developing a stack of 5x4 sheets.

ID11/D76 and Microphen have a higher capacity of ten films per litre, so you can get away with smaller quantities of developer.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 23rd April 2016, 11:48 AM
Svend Svend is offline
Friend
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 1,193
Default

Thanks Paul. What you say makes sense. I too read the reference in the Perceptol doc about 4 film capacity, but it seemed to refer only when used as stock, undiluted. It wasn't apparent that it also means using 250ml stock in diluted solutions. If so, it would be nice if Ilford could elaborate this in their literature.

Cheers,
Svend
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 23rd April 2016, 07:36 PM
Mike O'Pray Mike O'Pray is offline
Friend
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Daventry, Northants
Posts: 8,969
Default

If I have understood this correctly then a 135 film in Perceptol at 1+3 needs 250ml of stock so you need a 1 litre tank for a 135 film! Can this be right?

I have used Perceptol at 1+3 in the past in a 250ml Jobo tank and simply divided 250ml by 4 to determine the stock amount.

It has been some time since I used Perceptol and when I used it at 1+3 I probably had no film to compare it to at stock solution but I cannot recall the negs looking particularly flat and the prints seemed OK

I'd be inclined to contact Ilford about this. It does seem strange that it makes no mention of a minimum stock of 250ml

If a 1L packet of Perceptol only does 4 films it really starts to get expensive to get fine grain

Mike
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 23rd April 2016, 10:00 PM
Svend Svend is offline
Friend
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 1,193
Default

Mike - yes, it does get expensive, esp. as Perceptol costs 50% more than ID11 in my area.

As a quick comparison I checked the Kodak tech sheet for Microdol X which is said to be very similar in composition. The recommendation is a minimum volume of 473ml working sol'n at 1+3 per 135/36 roll, which works out to 118ml stock per roll. OTOH, capacity per litre is the same as Perceptol - 4 rolls/L.

I think you're right, a message to Ilford would clear up this confusion.

As for my old films, it is likely that they had only 75ml stock per roll, as I was using 300ml working sol'n per 135 roll in my Paterson tanks. Hence the flat contrast, as that doesn't meet even the ID11/D76 min. volume. Lesson learned. But it sure would be helpful if Ilford would add a statement about this in their tech pubs. A single short sentence would do it.

I'll post back here if I hear back from Ilford on this.

Cheers,
Svend
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 24th April 2016, 10:10 AM
Alan Clark Alan Clark is offline
Friend
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: North Yorkshire
Posts: 1,426
Default

I recently contacted the Ilford technical department about a film developing issue, and got a very helpful response from them. Hopefully, you will get the same.

Svend, did you try printing the negatives developed in 75mls of Perceptol and 225 mls of water? The reason I ask is that I have often used this amount myself, with FP4 and HP5, and found the results very easy to print, on the whole. In my experience negatives that look flat and uninteresting, drab and lifeless, as you described them, are the ones that give the best results. And negatives with lots of snap, as you describe them, are the ones that can cause trouble. I think it was John Blakemore who said that the drama should be in your prints, not your negatives.

Going back a few years, it was the late Barry Thornton who promoted the use of Perceptol at a dilution of 1:3 He was a bit of a technical chap, yet never mentioned the need for a minimum of 250 mls of stock. I would be surprised if this turned out to be the case.

Good luck in your search

Alan
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 24th April 2016, 11:49 AM
Svend Svend is offline
Friend
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 1,193
Default

Alan, I will check to see if I've ever printed one of those negs. If not, I can do a quick scan of a couple and see what comes out the other end. Good suggestion. Perhaps I'm making a fuss about nothing.

But still, an inquiry to Ilford would be helpful to satisfy my curiousity and clear this up, as using 250ml stock per film would be impractical to say the least. This info came to me second-hand, so it is easy in those circumstances to misunderstand the question or omit a detail or two in transmission. No fault of either party, this stuff just happens, and all mean well by it.

Still, something seems a bit off-base here. I have read Thornton and, as you say, he doesn't mention it, but certainly would have if it were relevant. The Microdol tech doc adds further support that my numbers may be off.

I will get back here with Ilford's response.

Best,
Svend
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 26th April 2016, 11:06 AM
Svend Svend is offline
Friend
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 1,193
Default

No word back yet from Ilford, but I read Anchell & Troop's Film Developing Cookbook last night. They are emphatic that every 135-36 or 120 roll film needs a minimum of 250ml stock, no matter what the dilution or processing method and no matter the developer (within reason - see below). They cite D76 in their example, but are clear that this should apply to all developers. The basis behind this is that the 250ml/roll amount is needed to develop the film "to its fullest potential" (their words), and to ensure consistency and quality.

So, this rule would apply not only to Perceptol as I originally thought, but also to D76/ID-11 and Xtol. They seem to state exceptions for Rodinal, HC110 and the like, needing high dilution ratios, but their wording isn't very clear on those.

Further, as Mike points out, this is rather impractical if one is standardized on 1+3 dilutions and only has a small tank. Or even a large tank and want to develop multiple rolls. This means I could only develop a single roll in my 1 litre Paterson tanks.

Needless to say, this was an interesting find. Given their reputation and depth of knowledge, I'm inclined to follow their advice. Still, I look forward to hearing from Ilford on this.

Best,
Svend
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 26th April 2016, 12:07 PM
Paulographic Paulographic is offline
Friend
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Mid Pennines
Posts: 835
Default

I've been using D76/ID11 @ 1:1, and occasional 1:3 since 1974 and never had any problems with negs "lacking" anything even in small stainless steel 250ml single 135 tanks.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 26th April 2016, 12:08 PM
alexmuir alexmuir is online now
Friend
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Glasgow, Scotland.
Posts: 2,668
Default

I read that advice some time ago and have followed it ever since. With 35mm films I try to use 500ml, rather than 300ml in the Paterson tanks. I have rarely had a film that looked under developed. The theory seems to be that more developer yields better, more consistent results.
Alex
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
Contact printing 5x4: the bare minimum DaveP Monochrome printing techniques 16 2nd November 2013 04:41 PM
Developing time and Dilutions Robpunk Photography in general 28 10th October 2013 08:44 AM
Contact printing - minimum requirements? TonyMiller Cameras - Large Format 9 20th March 2012 07:11 PM
Silverprint Minimum No More! Martin Reed New products and offers 11 1st February 2011 03:40 PM
Non-Standard Dilutions. Keith Tapscott. Monochrome Film 12 27th January 2010 04:12 PM


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:41 PM.


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