Tech Pan devotees - development (again)

I've been using rodinal (near-standing development) - a more stable

formula for development, with the exception of streaking. Lately

I've been exploring the characteristics of Tech Pan with Technidol and

Docufine.

 

As a film, I'm finding it very tempermental - the development time for

Technidol way too short to control the contrast, and the changes to

temperature and development times (+/- 2-4C or +/-30secs) are either

too subtle or too crude.

 

Exposing Tech Pan at 25ISO without a yellow filter, and developing

7.5 mins with the standard vertical agitation cycle 2s/30s is a very

short development time for me (against a baseline time with Rodinal).

Everything else remaining constant, 1 vial of Technidol in 600ml

ends up blowing the highlights in some images on one roll, and

underexposing another roll, with blocked up shadow detail, despite

both rolls exposed in similar f16 conditions. I'm starting to think it

requires more fine-tuning for metering and exposure than using

slide-film at ISO 25.

 

I've not had much help from Kodak's datasheets (which amusingly

encourages 'experimenting' for a development time. Has anyone has

succeeded in finding a baseline development time for predictable

development in lower dilutions? I'm looking at a 1.5 - 2x dilution

e.g. 1 vial in 900ml H20 or 1200ml, maybe even reducing the

temperature by 1-2C. I suppose I'm looking for less contrasty

results, without pulling the film beyond ISO 25.

 

On the other hand, Docufine LC, 5.5min 20C yields flat (recommended

gamma 0.45 from 5min) negatives with an even shorter development time

- almost the opposite extreme of rodinal.

 

 

Thoughts or recommendations greatly appreciated.

I've had good results from my (admittedly limited) experience with the Techpan-Technidol combination. The tank I use for 35mm takes 290mls, and 237mls was insufficient quantity, so I ended up using 2 vials of Technidol in a larger (500mls) tank. An important aspect to avoiding streaking is to quickly drop the reel into the tank (in the dark, obviously) rather than pouring the developer in through the top. I've found that rating the film at ISO25 and using the strange 'cocktail-shaker' method of developing yields good results. The film is developed for 9mins at 22 degrees Celcius with agitation for 2 seconds at 28 second intervals.<div></div>

I used to shoot alot of TP and really love the stuff. You are right about Kodak...

they tend to sit on the fence about alot of stuff. Being that TP is a very high

contrast film, for pictorial results your going to want a very low contrast or

compensating developer. With the powder version of Technidol gone, I have

tried several other soups. POTA for one if the lighting is very contrasty works

wonders. Divided D76 is short of amazing also with a speed of 100! Using

Technidol with a pull of a good 20% also is nice but I never liked having to

mix up seperate batches all the time.

Try Photo Formulary's TD3 liquid developer. It is a staining developer that subdues the highlights. It is quite reliable and consistent, though probably fairly toxic.

Although I've had good results with Technidol, following the instructions to the letter, I restricted my use of that combination to VERY flat lighting. For more normal contrast lighting I much prefer TD-3. Consistently excellent results in a wide range of light. If you like Tech Pan, you should give it a try.<div></div>

I guess I got the answer I was dreading (here's another developer to try.....if

Photo Formulary TD3 is even available in England). David and Jay - those are

very fine examples with Technidol. Thank you for taking the effort to show. It

may a monitor issue if the black zones do hold watertight in the lady's pullover,

whilst the highlights on the faces threaten to burst on both images.

 

Again thanks for the pulling suggestion - I'll try 20%; previously I've been too

cautious in pulling Tech Pan. If that doesn't work, I'm going to trial a cocktail of

Technodinal and stir without shaking like a cocktail.

I've used PyroCat-HD with good results. Rated at asa 75.

Hi, I obtained good results with TP-120 in Tetenal Neofin-Doku, 5 min. development time and 3-sec. agitation... good luck

Check out the recommendations on Ed Buffaloe's www.unblinkingeye.com site.

Here's a low contrast developer you can probably get in England, though you may have to experiment a bit due to different brands and compositions.

 

Caffenol LC is made with two teaspoons (about 10 cc volume) of Folger's Coffee Crystals and the same volume of Arm and Hammer Washing Soda in eight ounces of water (mix the soda first, until the solution is completely clear, then add the coffee and stir until it loses the milky appearance). I've used it with good results on microfilm emulsions (which are similar to Tech Pan) at 25 to 30 minutes at 70 F; it stains lightly and doesn't require obtaining any exotic chemicals. Any instant coffee can be used, but the amount might need to be adjusted (different instant coffees are made with different combinations of beans and different methods of getting from beans to instant powder). Washing soda is a laundry version of sodium carbonate (decahydrate, anhydrous -- arguments, but no one seems certain; it probably isn't sold with the Arm & Hammer brand in England, but it most likely is sold, at least for the blue-haired old lady crowd who still use a wringer machine), and I've experimented with increasing the amount by 50%, which increases activity and shortens developing time by about 25% or a little more.

 

Use a water stop; acid stops and carbonate alkali can cause pinholes in your emulsion. I've used Ilford Rapid Fixer and it doesn't seem to remove the stain (though I haven't tried it with other brands of fixer as a comparison).

I've standardized on Tech Pan being shot at EI 10, and developed with Xtol diluted 1 + 5 using distilled water. Developing temperature is 24C (20C takes far longer than I have patience for). Developing time is 12 1/2 minutes, agitating 10 seconds / 60 seconds. You may wish to try these conditions as a starting point for your own experiments.<p>One final caveat: it is easy to have insufficient developer when diluting Xtol this much. I use a tank that is large enough for two reels of film, but only place one reel of film in it along with an empty reel to serve as a spacer. This ensures that I have enough developer present to complete development.

In AG (vol 32) Michael Maunder thinks that POTA produces too low contrast. He therefore created Celer-Stellar. As an alternative he also recommends using C-41 developer at full strength, 10 min @ 20 C. Stop, fix, wash and dry.

POTA, Tetenal and the caffenol coffee beans in the kitchen sink sound great. After much bewilderment about the options, I suppose the most consistent developer for my tastes would be caffenol coffee beans, since I vary my morning coffee-brew much less than all the other experimental developer options given here.

 

I'm grateful for those suggestions which I've made a note of. Any times and temperature cycles for the above recommendations would also be appreciated.

 

Regarding the unblinking;eye web recommendation - I stared hard for 20 minutes and couldn't find any relevant data to this thread (even if anyone else finds it off the hoof).