larrydressler Posted March 17, 2006 Share Posted March 17, 2006 I recently got a cachet AB 55 Dev kit. I have not mixed it up yet but was wondering if anyone here has ever used it. I shoot 35mm 120/220 mostly Plus-x Forma and Foma 100.on occasion Tri-x. Anyone use this Dev before and did you like the results. Any information would be accepted. Larry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edward_vargas1 Posted March 17, 2006 Share Posted March 17, 2006 I have used Cachet AB55 off and on over the years to process 120/220 and not 35mm. It does well as a compensating developer. I would increase exposure between 1/3 to 1 pending your use of a diffusion enlarger or just use the film's ISO for a condenser enlarger. I have not push process any film because I use other developers for this. I find the grain fine, handles high contrast areas well and excellent for Ilford Pan F+ - in some ways it gives creamy results for skin tones like Agfa Rodinal with Agfa films. One of the best features is to process different films together between 68-85 degrees. Follow the instructions to the letter. Use distilled water, no pre-wet and keep A and B far away from one another to avoid pouring the wrong solution in first and no rinse between A and B. I am not sure of the tank size you use for processing but if you use one liter tanks or smaller then I would recommend making the stock solution of two liters of A and B and one liter of Rep B instead of the the working solution of a gallon - working solution is good for a month or if you process a lot of film. If not try this method which I use. I store my stock solution (all my developers) in amber glass bottles which will last for 8 months - a test I did; but I keep my stock for six months. There are a couple of ways for storing stock solution. 1). You can have two one liter amber bottles each for A and B, and one liter for Rep B. 2). Or 4 500ml bottles for each A and B, and 4 250ml bottles for the Rep B. I use method two which works well because all I need to do is add 500ml of distilled water for a working solution of A and B, and 250ml for the Rep B. I hope I didn't get you confused with my method of storing of chemistry. Have any question just email me. Good luck with the AB55. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
larrydressler Posted March 18, 2006 Author Share Posted March 18, 2006 Edward Thanks I printed it out and will read it real slow a few times. I was not going to mix it up until my gallon of d-76 was gone. I always like to try something differant so this is differant. it is almost like the old Panthermic 777 in the instructions. Larry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jtdnyc Posted March 19, 2006 Share Posted March 19, 2006 Larry, I used AB-55 about ten years ago to develop 35mm film and was pleased with the results. Prints from AB-55 negatives had full tonality everywhere without any dodging or burning. They reminded me of prints I've seen from the 30s and 40s. I used AB-55 in a Jobo processor, which I have since been informed is not ideal, as the constant agitation supposedly defeats the purpose, to some extent, of 2-bath development. I have also read that 2-bath development works better with older films than with modern films, as modern may be too thin to absorb the requisite amount of Part A. Despite these theories, I obtained very pleasing results on TMX with my Jobo. Go figure. Recently, I bought an AB-55 kit which I haven't had a chance to use yet. This time, I plan to use traditional films and manual agitation. Who knows, maybe the results will be even better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
larrydressler Posted March 19, 2006 Author Share Posted March 19, 2006 Jonathan Thanks I am using old style film. and Also I was told about the 2 bath not working well with newer films but I love the look of TMY in Diafine so another "Go Figure" I love the Arista.edu and Ultra films. also I have a few rolls of APX I have been itching to try. my 35mm is a mix but my 120 is almost 100% B&W. I also find that the 2 bath makes for a negative that is so easy to scan I am wondering why I still have an enlarger. Larry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jtdnyc Posted March 20, 2006 Share Posted March 20, 2006 <I also find that the 2 bath makes for a negative that is so easy to scan I am wondering why I still have an enlarger.> Larry, look at it the other way: AB-55 gives you a negative that is so easy to print optically, why bother with a scanner? (Just teasing. I use both processes.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now