Is there much advantage using PMK with 35mm film?

The photographers who praise PMK appear to be large or medium format photographers. Is there anyone with experience using PMK with 35mm film who finds it useful, and with which films?

This topic has been covered, although any new responses would be

welcome.

 

<p>

 

http://greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=0035TT

It's been over a year since any worthwhile findings have been

presented. Lots of promises, no followups.

The thread Don referenced was started by me last May. Since that

time I haven't found anything new from reading on the net. However,

my darkroom area is finally functioning and I will be develping my

first rolls of HP5 within the week. I'm getting back into this stuff

after 20 years. I've dedided to try two and only two developers. ID-

11 and PMK. I will be ordering the PMK with Hutchings book this

week. I won't make any bold promises, but I will let you know what I

think when I finally get to compare. Should be interesting.

 

<p>

 

John

It would not suprise me to find no one that aggrees with me but I

like PMK with T-Max 100 in 35mm and T-Max 400 in 120. I used PMK

exclusively for two years in 35mm, 120 and 4x5. At the end of that

time I found that the advantages in the sheet film were on a par with

its disadvantages and have gone back to using conventional developers

for the most part, still using PMK occassionally. Where I found a big

advantage with PMK is in roll film. It is very easy to see the

difference even under a grain focuser, greatly improved sharpness and

in printing it has a more pleasing pallete of grays. It is the only

developer that I use with roll film (except maybe for copy

negatives). My only word of caution would be to not underexpose.

Underexposure with this developer tends to leave really blank shadow

areas. Have fun.

I love Tri-X in 35mm format in PMK. I blow up to 11x14 with very

little visible grain. The shadows are just perfect and the

highlights are even better.

 

<p>

 

Once you've tried PMK you'll never go back....

Its sharp with 35mm HP5+. The grain seems to be very small (however I

can still see it on an 8x10 condenser enlarged print but my nose has

to be right beside it). Gradation is excellent on Agfa Multicontrast

Classic glossy. You have to be careful not to underexpose it because

it can get grainy very fast. However it can handle overexposure VERY

WELL. It can also handle high contrast situation quite well. People

seem to have the best luck with FP4+ and HP5+ and that why I've

choosen to use these films.

Well I certainly like it with Delta 100 and 400 films in 35mm, which I

rate at 64 and 250, respectively. Very little grain and very good

highlight detail, while the slower film speed rating sees to it that

there's detail in the shadows. I'm going to try it with some sheet

Delta films in the near future, which should be a lot of fun.

I contributed to the earlier thread, but will follow up with what I've

learned since.

 

<p>

 

1. I believe Anchell/Troop's prediction in the Film Developing

Cookbook that a pyro afterbath would be unneccesary if the film were

fixed in an alkaline fixer is true. Going straight from TF-4 to the

wash seems to work fine at my house.

 

<p>

 

2. Hutchings' suggestion to mix the developer an hour or so before

using to increase stain seems to be helpful. I also find that as my

developer gets older, its staining power seems to increase. I'm

thinking of buying another kit and aging the "A" solution as he

suggests.

 

<p>

 

3. I also find Hutchings' recommendation to use PMK double-strength

to increase film speed works well, especially with P3200, where it

also helps staining. I have a high school basketball season's worth

of negatives to bear this out.

 

<p>

 

4. This one doesn't make sense to me, but I do find 35mm FP4+ harder

to stain than its 120 version. Has anyone else had this problem? It

does seem to work okay using the steps outlined in #2.

 

<p>

 

5. Unlike most findings, I find my tap water seems to work better

with PMK than distilled. I do live in a small town with an excellent

water system, which may account for this.

 

<p>

 

6. I've been using PMK for about a year now, and the better I get to

know it, the more I like it. As a previous poster mentioned, it does

very well with HP5+ AND FP4+.

Brian, have you tried the pinch of amidol (.1 gram per litre, I

believe) to increase the EI? I would think this would be more cost

effective than doubling the strength. However, I don't know what it

looks like either way. I was thinking of ordering some amidol along

with my first kit of PMK just 'cuz I really want 400 out of my HP5+.

 

<p>

 

Just wondering.

 

<p>

 

John

Sorry, John, I haven't. I like to try things by the book at first and

then gradually work in other procedures as needed. While I've been

downrating FP4+ to between 80 and 100, depending on content, I haven't

felt the need so far with HP5+. I've just been letting the camera DX

400 without any problems, for whatever that's worth.

I have always read the questions regarding pyro and PMK as well as

responses that vary from fanatical to damning with amusement. I will

try to give some of my experience that may be helpful to anyone who

has toyed with pyro or are thinking about it. I think I am actually a

fanatic but instead of telling everyone how magical it is I will try

to give some practical advice. Due to a personality flaw I hava a

problem ditching things until I have completely mastered them, I

think many B+W photographers have this tendency.

 

<p>

 

A few years ago I decided I wasn't quite happy with my rodinal APX100

combination because of the inability to reproduce skin tones,

specular catch lights in eye's, and other highlights in portaits with

the seperation and subtle gradation I was after. Don't get me wrong

that combination is good, but I wanted more. I remembered reading in

various places many pyro users raving about the highlight seperation

that they were getting. I decided to see what PMK could do, so I

bought the book, some chemicals, and some HP5, FP4, and Pan F. I

started to play around and did see some of the things that made pyro

different but it was not near as good or easy as most fanatics

declare from my standpoint.

 

<p>

 

No disrespect intended but I think Gordon Hutchings left some

critical details out of his book for People just getting into PMK,

especially with VC paper.

 

<p>

 

When using VC paper:

 

<p>

 

1. Forget everything you have ever learned about when making prints.

This is going to be a new experience that you have to re-learn from a

visual stanpoint.

 

<p>

 

2. Unlike other negatives, highlights change slower that shadows when

you make exposure adjustments. This translates into changing exposure

also changes contrast at the same time. more exposure = more

contrast, less exposure = less contrast. If the highligts look just

about right but the shadows look way way too dark do not reach for a

lower contrast filter, try less exposure first (Sometimes a lot less).

 

<p>

 

3. All of the instant reactions to test prints that you have made

with other negatives over the years are absolutely wrong for pyro

negatives. You will have to readjust your reactions and visual

evaluation over again for pyro on VC paper.

 

<p>

 

4.When learning to readjust your exposure/contrast reactions.

Deliberately make a print that is way too light for a reference. You

will be amazed that the highlights won't look flat white. Then make

it darker until you get good blacks. If you cannot do this without

bringing the highlights down into the upper midtones then increase

the contrast a little bit and try again.

 

<p>

 

5. If you react the way you normally would, you will be way off.

 

<p>

 

Once you get a feel for this the way you did with regular negatives

getting to the right exposure/contrast will be much less tricky and

you will understand how magical pyro/PMK is (Think the best print you

ever made, the one that just glows. Now imagine that any negative at

all can look like that. That is just about what PMK is like once you

readjust your printing habits)

 

<p>

 

I happen to like all of the Ilford films and Verichrome pan processed

around what Gordon Hutchings recommends as N-1. They print great on

G3-G31/2 VC paper and great on my huge stock of Ektalure when

appropriate.

 

<p>

 

email me if you have any specific questions for a one time pyro hater

turned true fanatic over the last 2 years.