A New Fan of Diafine, Thanks Lex!

Thanks to Lex and his posts on using Tri-x and Diafine, I finally

decided to try it myself. I had started a roll of Tri-x and was

shooting it at 800 in my Olympus XA, so I decided to use this roll for

my first try. Most of the shots were of a construction site and some

indoor friends and family shots. My next roll will be at 1250, which

is were I think Lex likes to shoot. After my first roll I feel

confident that 800 is too slow. :-)<p>Thanks Lex!<p><center>

<img

src="http://home.houston.rr.com/henricus/Photos/Frontend_Loader_26.jpg"><p>

Outside under the shade of a tree with strong side lighting.</center>

Well, I have to give credit where due. I first read about Diafine here on photo.net a few years ago, which prompted me to try it. I've been enthusiastic about it since then.

 

Glad to pass the enthusiasm along to others.

It truely amazes me that Diafine has been around for so long (I used it back in the mid '70's and have enjoyed it ever since) and basically, up until recently it has been such a "quiet" developer. When I started mentioning it, I received emails with some people asking me if I was correct in stating what I stated about Diafine... no I wasn't crazy then and I'm not crazy now! The stuff is and always has been an AMAZING developer with silver based films. Side by side comparisons of the same film developed in say, D76 1:1 or HC110B, when compared to film developed in Diafine and printed to an 11x14, is short of astounding. The acutance is beautifully high yielding very sharp, fine grain (close to the results of Rodinal as far as acutance goes) with gentle tones and subtle gradations that result in an almost glowing print... not to mention the longevitity of the shelf life of Diafine! I love shooting the stuff rating my 4x5 @ 400 (TXP) and printing it on my cold lights (without filtration!)... nothing short of amazing! Henry, welcome to 2 Bath developing!

I also recently have been using Diafine and like the results very much.

After reading Lex's suggestion to try it with Pan-F I've been pleasantly suprised. To me though it seems that Diafine's recommended EI's are a little on the ambitious side and it seems like I get a little better results at a lower EI with some films.

<i>. . .seems that Diafine's recommended EI's are a little on the ambitious side and it seems like I get a little better results at a lower EI with some films."</i>

<p>

Daniel,

<p>I guess it depends on what you are trying to achieve. The beauty of this stuff is that you can experiment. I'm going to try to use iso 1250 and see how that looks. I might even try the Pan F!