Development by inspection using non-staining developer

Discussion in 'Large Format' started by jeff_rivera|5, Aug 22, 2003.

  1. I've decided to go this route, DBI. I'd like to use chemistry that
    is readily avaliable locally, ie commercial developer. So what's
    been your experience using D-76/HC-110/Rodinal/? for DBI? I realize
    I'll have to keep the green light off for the first 2/3 to 3/4 of
    the expected development time. Any thoughts?

    I'm going to try this no matter what. If the results stink, then I
    guess PyrocatHD will be next to try. However I REALLY would like to
    make it work with commercial developer.

    thanks, as always.

    ps I'm just waiting on the damn bellows!!!!!!!!! Hopefully, next
  2. I don't know of anything magic about staining developers for development by inspection, use any developer you like. When you develop by inspection you actually don't have time to literally inspect the entire image. Instead, you judge the degree of development by looking at the highlights. It actually might be a little easier to evaluate the highlights with a non-staining developer but in any event it shouldn't be more difficult. I think it's important to have a green light fixture that can be operated with a foot switch. It's hard to evaluate the negative if you have to hold it with only one hand and try to operate the light switch with the other. Good luck, I tried it briefly but concluded that I didn't process enough 8x10 negatives in the course of a week or month to gain the necessary practice and experience.
  3. There is, or was, a chemical known as "desensitizer". You add it to your developer to make DBI feasible. Kodak discontinued their product about 20 years ago. I've never tried it, but as I understand it, staining/hardening pyro developers don't require desensitizing because the of tanning effect of those developers. So it might be useful with "ordinary" developers.
  4. I have had nice results with DBI using HC110, Divided D23 and a little
    Divided D76 and D76. Definitely worth mastering (which isn't hard). There is a
    good article on Ed Buffalo's site:
  5. Scott, that's what I wanted to hear. HC-110 is so readily avaliable and cheap!

    "Oh where oh where did my big bellows go, oh where oh where can he be?" Sigh!
  6. As mentioned earlier, tannign developers such as pyro and catechol are an advantage in DBI because they desensitize the emulsion. Desensitizers are still available - the most common ones are the pinakryptol dyes, which should be available from the formulary or artcraft. They do tend to be expensive though, which makes tanning developers attractive. See under "Writings" for chapter and verse on DBI. In my experience, DBI sort of works even with regular developers, especially after you have developed some facility with it. Cheers, DJ
  7. Hi,
    I regularly use X-Tol developer with FP4+ while dveloping by inspection. I have never fogged any film even with the green safelight on for an extended period of time. I guess the speed of the film is slow enough that I don't get any fogging.I don't see the need for any desensitizing agent. Based on my experience I don't see any problem with developing film by DBI using commercial developers. I also use HP5+ from time to time and have not had any problem with that either although I am a little more careful about leaving the light on.
  8. Same here. I use DBI with Plus-X and HP5+ in D-76 1:1 and have never had difficulty with fogging. I don't even turn the light on however (for normal development) for 9 minutes with Plus-X and 11 minutes with HP5+.

Share This Page