Pyrocat HD - Need Help for First Time User

[david_weiss2]

<p>I used this for Delta 100 the other day and the negatives came out too thin to print on a clip test. I had forgotten that I used it once last summer - could it have given up the ghost already? I thought about this,but when I mixed A and B, the solution turned a nice dark greenish blue so I thought it was okay.</p>

<p>So last night I mixed some from scratch using Sandy King's published formula (the phenidone, bisulfite varient). Went to mix up the B batch and found no potassium carbonate. So read on the web that sodium carbonate could be used, but with 100g in 500 grams of water instead (apparently okayed by Sandy). It also said that one should use the equivalent amount - I know this term has chemistry implications, but in this sense, does it just mean to use the same volume as you would have used with the potassium carbonate?</p>

<p>Lastly, I tried the semi-stand method as suggested by Michael Emanuel (2:2:500, agitate first 30, 2 inversions every 10 minutes for 45 minutes). Anyone try this successfully?</p>

<p>Anyone know if Sandy King still is around? I did not find a post more recent than a few years old from him on this website.</p>

<p>I am using a small tank for 35 mm film.</p>

<p>I am going to test in myself later today but thought I might get some advice first.</p>

<p>Thanks in advance for any suggestions/comments.</p>

<p>Dave</p>

<p> </p>

[ann_clancy6]

<p>yes sandy king is around. try apug. org</p>

[jay_de_fehr]

<p>David,</p>

<p>Sodium carbonate is less soluble than potassium carbonate, so if you make stock solution, you'll only be able to dissolve about 20g of sodium carbonate to make 100ml of solution, instead of 75g of potassium carbonate. A little math shows 1ml of 20% sodium carbonate solution contains .2g of carbonate, whereas 1ml of 75% potassium carbonate contains .75g of carbonate. Multiply the 20% sodium carbonate X 3.75 to make the equivalent of the 75% potassium carbonate. Example: to make 500ml of a 1:1:100 dilution of pyrocat HD, you multiply all of those numbers X5, or <strong>5</strong>ml A + <strong>5</strong>ml B, added to 3/4 the total volume of solution, or 375 ml of water, then top up to <strong>500</strong>ml for your working developer solution. To substitute a 20% sodium carbonate solution requires an extra mathematical step. For the same 1:1:100 dilution you must first multiply the B sloution X 3.75, so your dilution becomes 1:3.75:100 multiplied x 5 for 500ml of working developer, or <strong>5</strong>ml A + <strong>18.75</strong>ml B, added to 375ml of water, then topped up to <strong>500</strong>ml. Personally, I would just use 20ml of B solution to make it a little less complicated. Actually, that's not true; what I would do would be to add 5ml of <a href="http://pyrostains.blogspot.com/">510-Pyro </a>concentrate to 500ml of water and stir. If you like the idea of a two-part catechol developer, and are willing to compound your own, you might like <a href="http://hypercatacutancedeveloper.blogspot.com/">Hypercat</a>. Hypercat is devilishly simple:</p>

<h2>Hypercat Formula</h2>

 

<ul>

<li>Stock Solution A </li>

<li>ascorbic acid 1g </li>

<li>catechol 10g </li>

<li>propylene glycol 100ml </li>

</ul>

 

<ul>

<li>Stock Solution B </li>

<li>distilled water 750 ml </li>

<li>sodium carbonate 200g </li>

<li>distilled water to 1 liter </li>

</ul>

<p>Hypercat is not comparable to Pyrocat HD, which is a general-purpose, superadditive developer, more like PMK Pyro. Hypercat is a single agent acutance developer, not suited to rotary processing, and works best with standard agitation regimens. The stock solutions will last a very long time (years, at least) on the shelf, so I don't mind keeping some around for those times I want the sharpest possible negatives, which is not that often. I'm the first to admit I'm something of a developer enthusiast, to put it mildly, and I spent a lot of time and energy learning about them, tinkering with them, testing them, and so on. In the end, I've settled on just three developers that form my personal holy trinity of film development: 510-Pyro for almost everything, <a href="http://gsd-10.blogspot.com/">GSD-10 </a>for stand development/maximum compensation, and Hypercat for maximum acutance. Some might argue that's two more developers than necessary, and there's some wisdom there, but each of these developers merits their place on my darkroom shelf, and since they last so long, very little is wasted.<br>

Good luck with your Pyrocat HD, and I hope I haven't confused you with all the math.</p>

 

[david_weiss2]

<p>Jay,</p>

<p>We are kindred spirits in terms of being developer enthusiasts - although I am just starting down the path where you seem to have been on it for a longer period of time. I get such a kick testing different developers and seeing the great differences - it has just re-energized my b&w work. I do not see tiring of it for some time to come. I just want to add at least one staining developer to my options for when maximum acutance is desired.</p>

<p>Anyhow, I ordered some propylene glycol yesterday and was going to make some Pyrocat MC, but might just go the Hypercat route. It might be interesting to see the differences. Could you give me any mixing tips (can I assume that you heat the propylene glycol, add the catechol and then the ascorbic acid?). </p>

<p>And no, the math makes perfect sense. Basically, a 1:4:100 ratio of A to B to water. I notice that you imply that it is not a ratio for the water, but a "to make" instead.</p>

<p>And to Ann, yes indeed, Sandy is all over Apug along with some other great folks. Thanks for reminded me of that site.</p>

<p>Dave</p>

 

[jay_de_fehr]

<p>Hi Dave,</p>

<p>Yes, there's some controversy over the 1:1:100 v 1+1+100 notation, but the former makes more sense to me, as it ends up with 100 total parts instead of 102 parts, and it makes the math easier. Here's the mixing instructions for Hypercat:</p>

 

<a name="722862572465655661"></a>

<h3 ><a href="http://hypercatacutancedeveloper.blogspot.com/2006/12/hypercat-mixing-instructions.html">Hypercat mixing instructions</a></h3>

To make up Hypercat, you'll need: a pyrex mixing container, a hot plate, lab burner, or dedicated microwave, and lab safety gear including dust mask or respirator, lab glasses, and gloves, and the constituent chemicals. Work in a well ventilated area. <br /><br /><b>Stock Solution A</b><br /><br />Add 3/4 the total volume of propylene glycol to the Pyrex mixing container at room temp. Add dry chemicals, and stir into a slurry. Top up to final volume with propylene glycol. Heat with stirring until all of the chemicals have completely dissolved (about 150F). Allow to cool before transferring to permanent storage container.The color of the concentrate should be a light, peachy-amber. Your concentrated stock solution <b>A</b> is now ready to use.<br /><br /><b>Stock Solution B</b><br /><br />Add 750ml of distilled water to the mixing container. Slowly, with stirring, add 200g of sodium carbonate. Stir until completely dissolved. Top up to 1 liter with distilled water. Your concentrated stock solution <b>B</b> is now ready to use.

All the above is pasted from my <a href="http://hypercatacutancedeveloper.blogspot.com/">blog</a>. I specified sodium carbonate as the alkali mostly for convenience, since I can buy it in the form of pH Plus from Walmart. You could substitute potassium carbonate, TSP, or sodium/potassium hydroxide if you prefer. TSP is a little more basic than the carbonates, but not as basic as the hydroxides. A 10% solution of sodium hydroxide works very well, but doesn't keep as well as the carbonates; convenience again.

The original Hypercat formula was meant to be a kind of catechol version of 510-Pyro, which eventually began to seem redundant to me, so I reformulated it as a stripped-down acutance developer. I probably should have given it a new name, but since I kind of scrapped the original Hypercat.......Incidentally, Pyrocat MC/glycol which uses metol instead of phenidone, is quite similar to the original Hypercat, and the only member of the ever-swelling Pyrocat family worth making up, in my opinion.

Good luck, and I'd love to see some of your results when you have some.

 

[david_weiss2]

<p>I guess not many people are using Pyrocat HD - I thought I would get a few answers to those questions! </p>

<p>Anyhow, my homebrew version did nicely. Seems the Delta 100 in this brew with semi-stand is about an EI of 100 for me. Maybe a bit of blocking in the highlights. I did get nice detail in the shadows at this EI, and some nice midtones. I do not notice much if any staining, although grain seems uniform - it is nice enough, but nothing special so far. Of course, I have not tried it at a shorter time with standard concentrations (since I tried semi-stand first), so maybe that would help. I actually like Rodinal semi-stand 1:100 better for this film so far (also EI of 100 or so). </p>

<p>I do believe traditional films stain better - is that correct? I am going to try some HP5 plus tomorrow - anyone try this combination before?</p>

<p>I noticed that with the Formulary version, it turned a deep blue green in the container before I dumped it into the tank, and this one maybe a slight change - a litle gray maybe. Very different. </p>

<p>I did use the sodium carbonate in the B solution - seems to work okay when used at the greater quantity. </p>

<p>Well, I will keep trying - going to shoot some bridges next which will be more interesting to post.</p>

[rothelle]

<p>Hey Jay, It's been about two years from the last time I talked to you. I had some 510 pyro from 2007 sitting around and I wanted to see what will it do in 1:500 with some HP5+ and this was no test film. I must say it's still good. Wow. I have a 1/2 of bottle as I been using more of PMK because it's just much easier to mix and toss. But 510 is my #1 out of all pyros. Oh yea Im using it in a sidekick film processor at 75 degrees too.</p><div></div>

[jay_de_fehr]

<p>Very nice work, Rothelle! It's always good to hear from you and to see your work. I would love to see you post some of your work at my <a href="http://pyrostains.blogspot.com/">510-Pyro blog</a>, and share some of your development details. Your work and methods are much different than most users, and others might benefit from your experience.<br>

David,<br>

Delta 100 is an excellent choice for developer evaluation, producing box speed in standard developers and dilutions, like D-76 1:1, with standard agitation regimens. In my testing of Pyrocat HD I didn't see much evidence of a compensating effect as measured by increased film speed when used with semi-stand development; 1/3 stop +/-. Or, put another way, you can expect to lose about 1/3 stop of film speed when you use continuous agitation. I find the difference in film speed produced by continuous agitation compared to stand development to be a reliable measure of compensating effects.<br>

To thoroughly evaluate a developer requires a commitment and persistence few possess, so I try to be very selective of the developers I choose to evaluate. The only reason I evaluated Pyrocat HD was because it was virtually the only catechol-based developer used by contemporary photographers with anything like regularity. As a formula, I find it to be inelegant, at best.<br>

That traditional films stain better than designer-grain films is a myth, and obviously visible stain is likely a sign of general stain, which acts like fog and is to be avoided, or overdevelopment in which the middle and lower values are heavily stained, or both. An optimally developed stained negative will look thin, with no obvious stain, unless compared visually with an unstained negative, and wet negatives show less stain than dry ones do.<br>

Congratulations on your success, and enjoy!</p>

[the world in black white]

<p>David: If you haven't tried Jay's 510-Pyro you might be doing yourself an injustice. Since I discovered it about three years ago I haven't used anything else. Also, the shelf life is amazing! Thanks again, Jay!</p>

[jay_de_fehr]

<p>Hi Donald,</p>

<p>It's good to hear from you! How have you been? I've been around the world a few times since we last corresponded. So, you've been using 510-Pyro for three years, and not a single image or post at the <a href="http://pyrostains.blogspot.com/">510-Pyro blog</a>? I'm sure your experience would do others some good, and the blog could use some fresh images. I hope all is well, and thank you for the compliment.</p>

[david_weiss2]

<p>Donald,</p>

<p>I am going to try as many of these as I can - I would need to purchase the triethanolamine first,but have the other ingredients. The ascorbic acid - will vitamin C tablets do? Thanks for the heads-up (I am very susceptible to suggestions right now).</p>

<p>I wish there was some central repository for all of the formulas, how to mix, maybe some starting times and dilutions? And I mean all of them - trying to pick through threads on APUG is a nightmare. Maybe there is a site that I do not know of.</p>

<p>The Anchell books that I have from the library (Darkroom Cookbook 2nd edition and the Film Developing Cookbook) do not seem to have a lot of these staining devleopers. Not that they aren't darn good - I want to also try FX2 sometime in the next few months.</p>

<p>I suppose there just isn't enough demand out there - not enough folks mix their own. </p>

<p>Jay - btw, great pictures on your 510 site, especially the horse and the Belle - she seems to be glowing! These pictures originally got me interested in staining developers. What is the difference in a negative developed in 510 Pyro verses Hypercat?</p>

<p>Dave</p>

<p> </p>

[jay_de_fehr]

<p>Hi Dave,<br>

Thank you for your compliments. The horse photo is by Frederic Harster, a Dutch photographer. I encourage all 510-Pyro user (there aren't many of us!) to post their images and experiences for the benefit of everyone who uses, or is considering using this developers.<br />I recommend using ascorbic acid in powder form. I use the NOW brand from vitamin/supplement shops.Capsules have binders etc., that might not dissolve completely. The best source I know for TEA is <a href="http://www.chemistrystore.com/cart.cgi?group=49941">thechemistrystore.com</a>.<br>

The difference between a negative developed in 510-Pyro compared to one developed in Hypercat is essentially one of acutance, but that is an oversimplification. 510-Pyro is a kind of all-purpose, fool-proof, do-everything developer, which might suggest that it does nothing specific very well, but that's not the case. Instead, it seems to do everything from rapid development in rotary processors, to semi-stand development of document films, and everything in between very well, which still amazes me. The only reason I use Hypercat instead of 510-Pyro is if I want exhaggerated acutance. Frankly, I find two-part developers a pain in the ass, exceded only by three-part developers, like ABC pyro, which is responsible for the bulk of the pyro legend. Aside from intellectual curiosity, it takes a pretty extreme circumstance to pry me away from 510-Pyro.<br>

Two-part developers are sometimes credited as being more "flexible" than single-solution developers by their proponents, but I consider that a distinction without a difference. From a formulator/tester's perspective, two-part, or divided developers are a nightmare of complexity. Most users don't vary the ratio of A:B across dilutions, if they vary their dilutions at all, so whatever potential benefit that might exist in the three-way circle of A:B:dilution is mostly theoretical, and more likely to lead to errors than improvements over the standard ratio/dilution. All things considered, a two-part developer is demanding of its user, and should reward him with something unavailable from other, easier to use developers.<br>

In the case of Hypercat, the rewards come in the form of special effects: compensating effects, adjacency effects, and extremely high acutance resulting from surface development, emulsion tanning, and staining. I wanted Hypercat to be as close as I could make it to an ideal acutance developer. Ideally, a developer would consist of a reducing agent in a solvent; just add film and let it go! Unfortunately, I don't know of a reducing agent that works effectively without help, but every chemical added to the formula after the reducing agent demands a compromise. To keep development times shorter than hours, an accelerator is added to raise the pH of the developer, and a small amount of preservative is added to stave off oxidation during development and then some more to secure a practical shelf life. While the accelerator keeps development times conveniently short, too much encourages the development of unexposed silver halide, or fog, and while the preservative provides for a practical shelf life, too much can create a solvent effect, which impacts sharpness.The fog produced by the accelerator can be controlled by the addition of a restrainer, but too much restrainer slows development and reduces emulsion speed. The compromises each constituent chemical represents can be moderated, but not eliminated. Hypercat "cheats" by eliminating as many ingredients as possible, and by using unconventional substitutes. Catechol turns out to be a good candidate for a super-simple developer, and doesn't need much help. It does require a fairly high pH, but it doesn't produce much fog, so a restrainer isn't needed when used with carbonate alkali, and by using glycol as the solvent for the A solution, and since it is a one-shot developer, it only needs enough preservative to preserve it during development. A very small amount of ascorbic acid performs double duty as a preservative, and a moderator of general stain, and it dissolves readily in glycol. So that's it! Catechol, ascorbic acid, and carbonate.<br>

The resulting Hypercat is a lean, mean, acutance machine. It's list of attributes reads like an acutance freak's wishlist:<br>

Single reducing agent/no regeneration of developer during development/ Designed for use in dilute solution- for maximum compensation, adjacency effects.<br>

Surface development- for reduced halation, reduced graininess<br>

emulsion tanning- reduced migration of developer in the emulsion for increased acutance<br>

image staining- composite silver/stain image for reduced density and graininess, improved sharpness<br>

But, to get all these benefits requires commitment to the testing required of an undocumented, two-part, staining developer. I only know one photographer other than myself who has invested much time in learning Hypercat, and he did some very impressive work, I believe with Delta 100.Most of my own testing has been done with Pan F+, Acros, TMX, TMY/TMY-2, and a few document films. I'm curious to know how it would handle a film like TX, or TXP. <br>

Good luck with your testing, and keep us posted.</p>

[the world in black white]

<p>Hi, Jay! I was glad to see your post. Have been wondering what had become of you. I haven't posted anything to your blog because it seemed to be dormant/dead. <br>

My images have been largely added to this photo.net site: http://www.photo.net/photodb/member-photos?user_id=688548&include=all&unlimit=1 Probably 80% - 90% of the images were developed in 510-Pyro. Also, they are predominately on Delta 100 film.<br>

Best wishes to you!</p>

[david_weiss2]

<p>Donald,</p>

<p>Could you divulge the dilutions/times/EI you used for the Delta 100? Your pictures are very nice! There are so many nice ones, I do not know where to start (okay, the street lamps for some reason stands out to me, and the textured wood with the side lighting, and the old style camper... so many nice ones!). If I could get results like this, I would be very happy.<br>

Dave</p>

[the world in black white]

<p>David: Full box speed of EI 100 is retained. Dilution is 1:100 (really economical). Processing time is 7 - 8 minutes @ 70F degrees with rotary processing. <br>

Good luck, and thanks for the kind words!</p>

[jay_de_fehr]

<p>Donald,<br>

WOW! Really beautiful work. Do you offer prints for sale? I'd love to have one...okay, several. Do you develop your IR film in 510-Pyro? Good information on developing IR film is hard to come by. I don't shoot much IR, but I've developed a few rolls for friends, in both 510-Pyro and in Hypercat. Even though I'm used to the fine grain 510-Pyro produces, I was still surprised by the Hypercat with the IR film- beautifully smooth and regular grain, just perceptible in 8x10 prints from 645 negs.<br>

How can I persuade you to post some of your images at the blog? Your work perfectly illustrates the potential of 510-Pyro in the hands of a master. The little house in the fog slays me- just oozes atmosphere. I can only imagine what the print looks like. I'm sure you could produce the same excellent results with any developer, but your work shows what's possible with 510-Pyro. I hope posting at the blog a few of your images with as much developing details about them as you'd like, might encourage others to do the same, and breathe some life into it. Think it over.<br>

Thanks for the link to your work, and for your good wishes. I'd enjoy meeting you in person one day, over coffee and a stack of your prints. Be well.</p>

[chromatik]

<p>I don't think 1:2:100 versus 1+2+100 matters much in the real world. When I want to mix up a batch of PMK Pyro for a single roll of 120, it comes out to 6.5 ml + 13 ml + 650ml in my single tank. I think temperature compensation, agitation, the original exposure's "accuracy," time devloped, time pouring in and out, and perhaps other factors, trump a 1 or 2 percent volume discrepancy in the soup solution.</p>