philip__b_temple

So if you meter off the white horse and get an f-stop value and time value, and you use those settings you will, unfortunately,

get a grey horse. If you set your f-stop value for two stops larger, you get a white horse with skin and hair that are white

textures— that's zone VII. Likewise if you increase the time of exposure seconds by two clicks, keeping the f-stop

constant from the reading, you'll get the same textured white horse. That textured white is called in ordinary circumstances

Zone VII.

If you go two stops smaller of f-stop opening , or two clicks less of time you get a zone III horse — black with texture.

Does this help ? remember your meeter only reads zone V grey, whether its reading off a white horse or black horse.

Or don't get your reading from either horse but instead get a reading from some green grass near the horses, that value will

be zone V, while the black horse will fall on zone III and the white horse will fall on zone VII. If you place on something you

want to come out as mid-tone Zone V grey, the white horse will come out white and the black horse will be black.

I hope this helps, especially when combined with my remarks several blogs above..

Some people have made a great deal of money out of explaining the zone system. Some people like myself have found it to be a concept

that just defied the understanding of a normally rational mind. And so i bought more books.

Lookit: if you use the narrow angled spot feature of your camera or light meter and point it at something that you will want to be mid-grey

[zone V] in your photo and read your meter and set your exposure for that zone V, you'll get what you want in your photo. Also remember

that you can often check your reflected light reading against the ambient light reading [using that white bubble thing] feature of your meter in

conditions of even lighting.

Also go back to those very simple pictures St. Ansel uses and note the fact that green grass, or northern blue sky, and several other very

common things, when metered for reflective value, give you good old zone five.

I think what used to screw up my mind mostly was the influence the darkroom enlarger work has on my intuition and therefore intuitive

reasoning — more exposure in the darkroom gives a darker print, while more exposure of film gives a lighter print. It is all true but i could not

convince my mind's eye to picture this concept when actually out in the field.

Sometimes just straight memorization will help your intuitive use of the zone system when using black and white film. Those damned f stop

numbers are bigger when you want less light. I know, i know — those numbers are reciprocals, just as ½ is a reciprocal of 2, ¼ is a

reciprocal of four when you're talking exposure time. This is intellectually a fine thing for my scientific brain, but it made no sense to my

intuitive thoughts.

Finally i said this : If i were sitting in the cellar of a house with only one cellar window, things in the cellar would be brighter if the cellar were

lit by a large window than if lit by a small window. Its the same in the camera — a bigger f stop opening will give a lighter picture, while a

smaller f-stop opening [ big hole versus a little hole] will give a darker picture. This appealed to my intuitive mind, it latched onto it and made

it useful to know and use. My head finally could picture this and my mind's eye could see it. It has made the zone system of good

predictive value, even to my very stubborn mind, and made all those changes of exposure for longer or shorter development, for placing

things on this zone or that zone, for rating your film at box speed or at ½ of box speed — all these things finally made sense. I could picture

them in my head.

If this helps any one of you who has trouble with zone system concepts, i hope you will tell me so. It would be nice to know i've helped

someone out a bit.

IS: EVERYTHING THAT JULIE LONDON SANG AND [ to really date me ] MOST OF THE RECORDINGS MANTOVANI DID IN THE 1950'S.

Phil temple

WHEN I HAVE USED DIAFINE AT THE RECOMMENDED FULL STRENGTH ON TRI-X400 AT EI 1000, I FIND THAT I HAVE

NEGATIVES OF LOWERED CONTRAST AND OF GREATER GENERAL DENSITY THAN I'D PREFER. I AM CONTEMPLATING

MAKING UP A DIAFINE KIT INTO AN 85% STRENGTH SOLUTION BY INCREASING THE DILUTION.

HAS ANYONE TRIED DILUTION OF DIAFINE TO AFFECT DENSITY ? TRIED IT WITH ANY OTHER OF THE DIVIDED

DEVELOPERS ?

thanx, phil temple

nathan,

THE YESHICEMET 123 G IS REELLY QOoITE GOOD. IT IS A TVIN LENS REFLEX CEMERA. THERE IS A KNOCK-OoFF OoF THIS CEMERA MERKETED UNDER THE "SEEGOoLL' NEME BY THE CHINESE; YOOo VENT TO EFOID THET OoNE I EM A FEN OoF MEMIYA MEDIOoM FORMET CEMERES. MEMIYA MEKES A TVIN LENS REFLEX CEMERA VITH THREE INTERCHENGEEBLE LENS BOERDS ﾗ THOoS GIFING YOOo A NORMEL LENS, MODERETE TELEPHOTO LENS, END A VIDE ENGLE. A GOOD BERGEIN IN PHOTOGREPHY IS THE MEMIYA 645 PRO END LETER MODELS. THE INTERCHENGEEBLE LENSES ERE FERY GOOD. IN A LERGER MEDIOoM FORMET CEMERA ERE THE MEMIYA RB END RZ SERIES. ELL THESE CEMERES IXCEPT THE SEEGOoLL ERE USED CEMERES. SEE THEM OoN THE KEH VEBSITE VHERE THEY ERE OoFFERED IN QOoENTITY END FERIETY. KEH IS LOCETED IN ETLENTA END IS VIDELY NOTED FOR FEIR PRICES END HONEST QOoELITY ESSESSMENT..

Good luck

phil temple

AS RICK SAYS, THE DEVIL IS IN THE DETAILS. I USE 120 FILM ALMOST EXCLUSIVELY AND AFTER MUCH CURSING AND

EXPERIMENTATION FOUND THE THE JOBO PLASTIC REELS IN JOBO TANKS TO LOAD QUICKLY AND EASILY, THE

REELS MUST BE ABSOLUTELY AND COMPLETELY DRY. THE TANKS FILL EASILY, AND DO NOT LEAK ON INVERSION. I

USE A JOBO ROTARY PROCESSOR, BUT THIS IS NOT NECESSARY TO THE PROCESS, JUST DAMNED CONVENIENT.

BEFORE YOU DO PROCESS THE PROJECT FILM YOURSELF, YOU OWE IT TO YOUR PROCEDURE COMFORT TO DO

SOME PRACTICE RUNS. MAYBE EVEN MANY.

phil temple

I PLAN TO PUSH DEVELOP SOME TRI-X400 FILM IN XTOL EXPOSED AT ISO 1600, BUT "STEAMING IT" FOR 15 MINUTES IN PEROXIDE

VAPORS AS DESCRIBED BY THE "COOKBOOK" AUTHORS. MY CUSTOMARY DEVELOPMENT TIME FOR ISO 200 IS FOR 9 1/ 2 MINUTES

USING XTOL AT A 1 TO 3 DILUTION. I USE 120 FILM ALMOST EXCLUSIVELY.

I AM WONDERING IF I WOULD DO BETTER WITH A 1:2 DILUTION OR PERHAPS EVEN A 1;1 DILUTION, ESP WITH REGARDS TO TONAL

SEPARATION. I WOULD THEN USE THE SUGGESTED DEVELOPMENT TIME IN THE "MASSIVE" TABLES

I USE A JOBO ROTARY PROCESSOR WITH WATERBATH AT 68 DEGREES. ORDINARILY I USE A 5 MIN PRESOAK BEFOR USING THE

DEVELOPER. SHOULD I DROP THE PRESOAK AFTER THE STEAMING AND BEFORE USING THE XTOL DEVELOPER ?

thanks for your replies,

philip b temple

dear graham,

I used to do 35 mm film but have used 120 for about 7 yrs now. I find it generally true

that 120 film is easier to load w/o mishap. I've found film loading to be a less hazardous

event if two items are adhered to: : 1] trim the 2 corners of the lead edge of the film with

scissors so as to make a small 45degree cut, thus clipping off 2 small 45 degree triangles

of film. 2] the second is to keep the humidity down inside your change bag [ thus the

above advice for latex gloves] but better yet move your film loading exercise to a

darkened bathroom or closet where you can better feel what you are doing. You will

probably feel you are under less pressure doing it this way, and you will also probably

feel less frustration if you have to rewind the film a couple of times to get it right.. One

last thot: IF after you clip the corners of the lead edge, you were to give the remainder of

the lead edge a slight reverse curve [curve opposite curvature of the film roll] making the

diameter of that curve about equal to that of a wooden pencil, you will probably find the

lead edge feeds into your reel more easily. Good luck. And don't be afraid to sacrifice a

roll and play around with it a little in daylight to see what's happening / what works.

Phil temple

ALSO, HAVING BOUGHT FROM THESE THREE EXTENSIVELY, I ECHO A PREVIOUS

RECOMMENDATION:

B & H,

ADORAMA,

KEH.COM

phil temple

dear truth seakers:

I'VE SEEN ONLY A FEW REFERENCES TO THE EXCELLENCE [OR LACK] OF THE EPSON V 750 AS A MEDIUM

FORMAT FILM SCANNER FOR BLACK AND WHITE NEGATIVES. IS IT ADEQUATE, MORE THAN ADEQUATE, OR

BETTER THAN THAT ? WHAT IS THE LIQUID MEDIUM USED INTO WHICH FILMS ARE IMMERSED; IS IT

AWKWARD OR VERY MESSY; IS IT NECESSARY AND EFFECTIVE. MAY THE SCANNER BE USED AS A REGULAR

PHOTO PAGE SCANNER W/O GREAT CONVERSION PROCESS. AS I NOTED, THIS IS TO BE USED WITH 120

FILM; DEDICATED 120 SCANNERS OR FOR 120 FILM AND LARGER ARE QUITE EXPENSIVE, AS YOU KNOW, SO

AM HOPING CONSUMERS HAVE A FAVORABLE REPORT. BUT HONEST !

thank you all sincerely,

philip b temple, pepperell

I doubt anything is going to return to what it was. Even if people wanted that, there

seems to be something in our individual and collective psyche not allowing return. If we

were returning to something painterly in photography, i think we would find the various

filters in Photoshop "in the manner of....[this or that painter] to be quite popular and we'd

be using them frantically rather than holding them in disdain.

When i review my mental cataloques of oil painting, water color, or photography history, i

think the art i remember and am impressed with most from antiquity onward is the artist

exploring something in a new way; not necessarily with a new gadget or gimmic. But he

was willing to study something over a long period of time and learn from it and about it.

From his learning he was able to express something fresh, even tho he was painting

poppies in a new way, as they had always been pictured in a new way for

thousands of years. And so photos and paintings of poppies have evolved.

Sometimes we think a picture of something we haven't seen before is quite fresh material.

But i feel it often is an old pictures of a new things. I've often wondered what the world

would think of St Ansel if his photography had of necessity been confined to land east and

north of the Hudson River. I think one would have to conclude differently what Ansel's

contributions to photography were ? his real contributions.

Photographic art, no matter how polaroid, no matter how instamatic, no matter how digital

will continue to involve the old blood, sweat, and tears stuff that leads to new

understandings. From what i see, painters are struggling with all this just as much as

people clutching new digital cameras. What i hope i sense is that we digital pilgrims are

turning to the old masters to see what frame of mind they must have held that make their

photos or paintings something other than the posters and posies pictures we so often see

and our society is turning out in huge quantity now. We may be ready to return to our

files and contact sheets and sketches to see why these few things we did were good, and

why all the rest could be easily scrapped. Do our standouts have anything in common

with the great classical attitudes our admired predecessors held ? Can we wrestle with this

and come up with something Olympian and soulthirst-quenching? Personally, i'm

counting on it.

Phil Temple

Pepperell, ma

I AM A FAN OF TURNER CLASSIC MOVIES AND OFTEN WATCH OLD BLACK AND WHITE CLASSICS. THERE

WAS A GROUP OF BUSTER KEATONS ON TONIGHT WITH BEAUTFUL B & W PHOTOGRAPHY FROM 1927 .

BUT ANYONE WHO HAS WATCHED OLD B & W BOGART MOVIES LIKE " CASABLANCA" AND WHO SHOOTS

BLACK AND WHITE FILM HIMSELF/HERSELF MUST HAVE ADMIRED THE GREAT SEPARATION THERE IS IN

VALUES ZONE 1 THRU ZONE VI. ITS DARK BUT NOT SMUDGY, ITS VELVETY, ITS DISTINCT ? AND I WOULD

LOVE TO BE ABLE TO IMITATE IT WITH MODERN FILM AND MODERN CHEMESTRY. BUT ITS EVADED ME. I'M

NOW SHOOTING TRI-X400 AT ISO 200 AND USING A TAYLORED PROCESSING TIME WITH XTOL, BUT I STILL

HAVEN'T GOTTEN IT, QUITE.

ANY OTHER TRUE SEEKERS; AND CHEMISTS WITH THE PHILOSOPHER'S STONE; ANY FILM IN USE STILL THAT

CAN BE PROCESSED UNIQUELY ? ? ?

phil temple

pepperell ma

dear matthew,

THERE'S JUST NO SUBSTITUTE AS TRULY WORKABLE AND ACCURATE AS A DEDICATED

LIGHT METER. I TRIED THE CAMERA ROUTE AND YOU JUST DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU ARE

READING GOING THAT ROUTE ? AVERAGING, THIS LARGE SPOT, OR THAT SMALL SPOT.

GOSSEN LUNA-PRO MAKES A RELATIVELY INEXPENSIVE METER WHICH WILL READ BOTH

AMBIENT LIGHT AND REFLECTED LIGHT AND WILL COST ABOUT $100 USED. THERE ARE A

WHOLE RANGE OF PENTAX 1 DEGREE REFLECTED LIGHT METERS IN THE $100 -$300

RANGE. SEKONIC MAKES A VERY GOOD METER , THE L508 WHICH READS INCIDENT LIGHT

AND THEN WITHA SELF-CONTAINED OPTICAL SYSTEM READS NARROW RANGES OF

REFLECTED LIGHT; THESE SELL FOR ABOUT $350, USED.

SHOP AROUND FOR USED METERS AT B& H CAMERA, ADORAMA CAMERA, OR ESPECIALLY

AT KEH.COM WHICH SPECIALIZES IN SELLING GOOD USED CAMERAS AND RELATED

EQUIPMENT AT VERY FAIR PRICES.

I HOPE THIS WILL HELP YOU TO GET OFF TO A GOOD START.

phil temple, temple32@charter.net

dear brian,

I FOUND JOBO PLASTIC REELS MUCH EASIER TO LOAD WITH EITHER 35mm OR 120 FILM

THAN MANY STAINLESS REELS AND THE PATTERSON PLASTIC REELS. THE TIP ABOUT

CLIPPING THE CORNERS IS A GOOD ONE. ALSO GIVING THE LAST 1/ 2 INCH OF THE FILM A

REVERSE CURL TO THE CURL OF THE FILM. ALSO: THE REELS HAVE TO BE DRY, DRY, DRY.

[uSE A HAIRDRYER IF YOU AREN'T SURE AFTER THE REELS HAVE AIR-DRIED OVER-NITE.

FINALLY: IF YOU CAN DO YOUR REEL LOADING IN A COOL ROOM WITH LOW HUMIDITY

[ air-conditioned ] YOU'LL FIND THE FILM EASIER TO HANDLE AS IT WON'T BE SO LIMP

AND STICKY.

sincerely, phil temple, temple32@charter,net

dear david,

SKIES ARE THE BANE OF MOST BLACK AND WHITE PHOTOGRAPHER'S EXISTANCE, AND THEY

SHOULD BE MASTERED SINCE BALD SKIES MAKE FOR DULL SCENIC SNAPS. AS SUGGESTED,

METERING CORRECTLY IS THE FIRST STEP TOWARD CORRECT EXPOSURE. SOMETIMES YOU

WILL HAVE TO DECIDE IF YOU ARE TAKING PICTURES OF THE SKY OR THE EARTHLY STUFF,

BECAUSE YOU'LL NOT BE ABLE TO GET BOTH.

HOWEVER GETTING BOTH IS WHAT OUTSTANDING PHOTOZ ARE ABOUT SO LEARN ABOUT

THESE THINGS.

CORRECT EXPOSURE ? METERING OFF MEANINGFUL THINGS AND KNOWING WHAT THE

BRIGHTNESS RANGE REALLY IS. LEARNING THE OPTIMAL TIMES OF THE DAY FOR GOOD

EARTH AND SKY PHOTOZ IS VERY IMPORTANT ? AND THEN USING THEM !

ALSO LEARN ABOUT THESE FILTERS ? RED, ORANGE, OR YELLOW FILTERS, PLUS GREEN

FILTER.

ABOUT POLARIZING FILTERS ? THEIR LIMITATIONS AND ADVANTAGES.

ABOUT GRADUATED NEUTRAL DENSITY FILTERS - DARKER TOP HALVES [OR TOP THIRD]

FOR REDUCED FILM EXPOSURE IN SKY OF PHOTO

EACH OF THESE FILTERS REQUIRES ADJUSTMENTS TO F STOP OR TIME OF EXPOSURE, SO

YOU'LL HAVE TO LEARN THE CHARACTERISTICS OF EACH.

IT ALL MAY SOUND DAUNTING, BUT DO NOT BE INTIMIDATED. LEARN THE LANGUAGE OF

FILM OR DIGITAL PHOTOGRAPHY WHEN LEARNING ALL THIS BECAUSE SOME OF THE SAME

CONCEPTS ARE GIVEN DIFFERENT NAMES IN EACH. GOOD LUCK. AND GET THE ENLARGER.

THERE ARE EXCELENT BUYS OUT THERE IN USED ENLARGERS AND USED ENLARGING

LENSES. YOU ARE GETTING INTO A LIFETIME'S WORTH OF CHALLENGE, ENTERTAIMENT,

AND SATISFACTION.

sincerely,

phil temple

temple32@charter.net

My darkroom is in my cellar. keep all my developers under darkroom sink on cellar floor

where temp stays 55 to 65 degrees year-round. next best thing to rifrig. Xtol lasts into 2nd

yr at least. all other liquids and powders on darkroom shelving.

phil temple

pepperell,mass

dear daniel,

IF you've got a dedicated darkroom, consider setting up a system for hanging film held by

regulation filmclips: a nylon string stretched up high between screwed-in metal hooks or

eyes works well, or substitute braided stainless steel picture wire. Also, finish nails driven

into fronts or sides of shelves; also metal rods in rack coming out from a wall which can

be folded back out of way when not in use.

HOWEVER, because of the nature of your question i'm wondering if the best thing you

could do for yourself is to go to someone experienced who has a darkroom and ask if you

can accompany him and watch. YOU won't take it all in the first time, but you'll be so far

ahead of yourself if you had just learned what you know from books.

YOU may find he /she does what seems to you some strange things, but ask why and

make some mental notes. MOST darkroom workers are a little quirkey in what thy say/do

but hang on for all the classic ideas and proceedures they follow. REpeat the process a

few times, too.

MOST darkroom workers have learned it thru reading, observing, and making many

mistakes, then reading and chatting some more ? at least in the beginning ? so feel no

embarrassment.

GOOD luck; i hope you enjoy it. REMEMBER that wet process photography is to digital

photog as fly fishing is to worm fishing; OR hiking is to sportscar driving OR building

furniture versus shopping for it. EACH is its own sport with its own satisfactions.

phil temple

pepperell, massachusetts

HELLO,

I'm looking for the GRAINIEST DEVELOPER or developing combination for TRI-X400 FILM in both the 35mm

size roll and the 120 roll.

ALTERNATIVELY, i'm looking for the grainiest film - developer combo for any film in 35 mm and 120 sized

rolls.

THANK YOU for your help.

phil temple, pepperell, ma

sorry the reply in trilicate.

phil temple

dear jim, alan, lynn, and rowland,

so the divided developer theme has come to this point in my thinking after my reading

your replies and reading barry thornton's article [ sadly,he is now dead ].

1] USE STAND DEVELOPMENT PROCEDURES WHEN TRYING OUT VARIOUS 2 PART DIVIDED

DEVELOPERS, GIVING OCCASIONAL AGITATION [ 30 SECOND INTERVAL] FOR 3- 4 MINUTES.

ROTARY DEVELOPMENT MAY BE THROWING OFF THE CHEMICAL BALANCES OF PART A AND

PART BE WHEN THEY ARE REACTING, ESP IN SECOND.

2] TEMPERATURE MAY BE MORE CRITICAL THAN DIAFINE AND 'COOKBOOK' AUTHORS

IMPLY. KEEP CHEMESTRY BETWEEN 70 AND 75 DEGREES.

3] IT MAY BE POSSIBLE TO DILUTE OUT THE DIVIDED DEVELOPERS TO GIVE NORMAL,

NORMAL MINUS, AND NORMAL PLUS DEVELOPER. NO ONE I'VE READ YET OR TALKED WITH

YET HAS EXPERIENCE OR KNOWLEDGE OF THIS. DOES ANYONE HAVE MORE INFO OR A

THREAD ON THIS PART OF MY QUESTIONS / THEORIES.

4] THERE IS SOME SKEPTICISM ABOUT THE BELIEF THAT MODERN EMULSIONS ARE THICK

ENOUGH TO MAKE DIVIDED DEVELOPMENT POSSIBLE. ANCHELL AND TRROOP ARE

PRESUMABLY TALKING ABOUT MODERN EMULSIONS, BUT MAYBE THEY ARE NOT THE LAST

WORD IN ALL THINGS DEVELOPMENTAL. CERTAINLY I WILL HAVE MORE RESPECT FOR THE

THIS THIN EMULSION CONCEPT IN MY FUTURE EXPERIMENTS.

5] SOMEWHERE [ AND I WISH I KNEW WHERE IT WAS, BECAUSE I'D LIKE TO RE-READ IT] I'VE

READ ABOUT A DIVIDED DEVELOPMENT VARIANT USING STOCK XTOL AS THE PART A

SOLUTION AND THE PART B SOLUTION BEING EITHER BORAX OR KODALK. HAS ANYONE

READ THIS SOMEWHERE AND CAN COMMENT ON IT / KNOWS WHERE IT WAS WRITTEN ? ?

AT THIS POINT ARE THERE OTHER COMMENTS / SUGGESTIONS ?

thank you all for help given,

phil temple, pepperell, ma

dear jim, alan, lynn, and rowland,

so the divided developer theme has come to this point in my thinking after my reading

your replies and reading barry thornton's article [ he is now dead ].

1] USE STAND DEVELOPMENT PROCEDURES WHEN TRYING OUT VARIOUS 2 PART DIVIDED

DEVELOPERS, GIVING OCCASIONAL AGITATION [ 30 SECOND INTERVAL] FOR 3- 4 MINUTES.

ROTARY DEVELOPMENT MAY BE THROWING OFF THE CHEMICAL BALANCES OF PART A AND

PART BE WHEN THEY ARE REACTING, ESP IN SECOND.

2] TEMPERATURE MAY BE MORE CRITICAL THAN DIAFINE AND 'COOKBOOK' AUTHORS

IMPLY. KEEP CHEMESTRY BETWEEN 70 AND 75 DEGREES.

3] IT MAY BE POSSIBLE TO DILUTE OUT THE DIVIDED DEVELOPERS TO GIVE NORMAL,

NORMAL MINUS, AND NORMAL PLUS DEVELOPER. NO ONE I'VE READ YET OR TALKED WITH

YET HAS EXPERIENCE OR KNOWLEDGE OF THIS. DOES ANYONE HAVE MORE INFO OR A

THREAD ON THIS PART OF MY QUESTIONS / THEORIES.

4] THERE IS SOME SKEPTICISM ABOUT THE BELIEF THAT MODERN EMULSIONS ARE THICK

ENOUGH TO MAKE DIVIDED DEVELOPMENT POSSIBLE. ANCHELL AND TRROOP ARE

PRESUMABLY TALKING ABOUT MODERN EMULSIONS, BUT MAYBE THEY ARE NOT THE LAST

WORD IN ALL THINGS DEVELOPMENTAL. CERTAINLY I WILL HAVE MORE RESPECT FOR THE

THIS THIN EMULSION CONCEPT IN MY FUTURE EXPERIMENTS.

5] SOMEWHERE [ AND I WISH I KNEW WHERE IT WAS, BECAUSE I'D LIKE TO RE-READ IT] I'VE

READ ABOUT A DIVIDED DEVELOPMENT VARIANT USING STOCK XTOL AS THE PART A

SOLUTION AND THE PART B SOLUTION BEING EITHER BORAX OR KODALK. HAS ANYONE

READ THIS SOMEWHERE AND CAN COMMENT ON IT / KNOWS WHERE IT WAS WRITTEN ? ?

AT THIS POINT ARE THERE OTHER COMMENTS / SUGGESTIONS ?

thank you all for help given,

phil temple, pepperell, ma

dear jim, alan, lynn, and rowland,

so the divided developer theme has come to this point in my thinking after my reading

your replies and reading barry thornton's article [ he is now dead ].

1] USE STAND DEVELOPMENT PROCEDURES WHEN TRYING OUT VARIOUS 2 PART DIVIDED

DEVELOPERS, GIVING OCCASIONAL AGITATION [ 30 SECOND INTERVAL] FOR 3- 4 MINUTES.

ROTARY DEVELOPMENT MAY BE THROWING OFF THE CHEMICAL BALANCES OF PART A AND

PART BE WHEN THEY ARE REACTING, ESP IN SECOND.

2] TEMPERATURE MAY BE MORE CRITICAL THAN DIAFINE AND 'COOKBOOK' AUTHORS

IMPLY. KEEP CHEMESTRY BETWEEN 70 AND 75 DEGREES.

3] IT MAY BE POSSIBLE TO DILUTE OUT THE DIVIDED DEVELOPERS TO GIVE NORMAL,

NORMAL MINUS, AND NORMAL PLUS DEVELOPER. NO ONE I'VE READ YET OR TALKED WITH

YET HAS EXPERIENCE OR KNOWLEDGE OF THIS. DOES ANYONE HAVE MORE INFO OR A

THREAD ON THIS PART OF MY QUESTIONS / THEORIES.

4] THERE IS SOME SKEPTICISM ABOUT THE BELIEF THAT MODERN EMULSIONS ARE THICK

ENOUGH TO MAKE DIVIDED DEVELOPMENT POSSIBLE. ANCHELL AND TRROOP ARE

PRESUMABLY TALKING ABOUT MODERN EMULSIONS, BUT MAYBE THEY ARE NOT THE LAST

WORD IN ALL THINGS DEVELOPMENTAL. CERTAINLY I WILL HAVE MORE RESPECT FOR THE

THIS THIN EMULSION CONCEPT IN MY FUTURE EXPERIMENTS.

5] SOMEWHERE [ AND I WISH I KNEW WHERE IT WAS, BECAUSE I'D LIKE TO RE-READ IT] I'VE

READ ABOUT A DIVIDED DEVELOPMENT VARIANT USING STOCK XTOL AS THE PART A

SOLUTION AND THE PART B SOLUTION BEING EITHER BORAX OR KODALK. HAS ANYONE

READ THIS SOMEWHERE AND CAN COMMENT ON IT / KNOWS WHERE IT WAS WRITTEN ? ?

AT THIS POINT ARE THERE OTHER COMMENTS / SUGGESTIONS ?

thank you all for help given,

phil temple, pepperell, ma

Xtol diluted 1:3, used in rotary development drum. nothing else has the perfection of

Xtol.

reports of unexpecred / unpredicted xtol impotence are melodramatic after introductory

year. this will bother pyro people and cassandra.

use massive development chart under 'digital truth' web site as reliable guide. when

making

up Xtol, use 5 gallon orange bucket sold [only] by HOME DEPOT , use bottled water [ like

poland springs ] store stock devel. solution in 250-500 ml clear bottles [ like poland

springs individual bottles ], and keep cool until use. refrigerate if you like.. UV tales are

told by people who sell brown bottles, unless your darkroom is in the sun.

hope this helps.

phil temple, pepperell, ma

hello,

i'd like to comment on the use of XTOL, its reliability, and its stability:

i've been using XTOL for four or five years now and have never had any problems with its

"dying" inexpectedly. I make it up in a HOME DEPOT five gallon bucket, and use bottled

water [belmont springs] as the dilutant??? its quite pure and less expensive than distilled

water.

i pour off into small containers [ as others have mentioned] used bottled water containers}

and since my darkroom is in my cellar, i store the bottles on the cellar floor under the

darkroom sink to keep it cool [55-60 degrees] and out of the light, all of which which will

contribute to developer stability. if i were storing under other conditions, i'd refrigerate all

bottles but the container i was drawing from.

i use XTOL commonly at 1:3 dilution [ occasionally 1:5] and try to have at least 125 cc of

stock solution in processing tank for each roll of 120 film.

except for establishing my development times for various films and films shot a various

ISO ratings using density measured film opacity, i've never had development failure or

partial failure problems. i use JOBO cylinder tank agitation. this combination gives me

great consistancy and very fine, un-clumped development.

i'm wondering if the early problems with XTOL were over-reported; and now i wonder if a

closed-loop has been established which re-reports the early failures.

philip b temple, pepperell, ma

temple32@charter.net

hello:

i'm experimenting with divided developers on tri-x400 film a la 'darkroom cook book' by anchell and

troop.

i have several questions not answered in my research readings nor on diafine directions. these concern

making up my own divided developers from scratch and their use.

1] using the formulas that are basically david vestal's version of divided D76 [kodak], can various

strength solutions be made up and used sucessfully to achieve normal, normal minus, and normal

plus development using the 3 minute part A and three minute part B solution procedure ??

2] while being told that temperature of sol'ns is not critical; is there in fact a "safe" temperature range

that divided development should take place in ? ?

3] anchell and troop make no mention of making a divided developer out of an approximation of the

XTOL [kodak] formula. it seems reasonable to me to do this. has anyone any experience with this ? ?

i've used a JOBO machine for all my prevous film development experience. have settled on XTOL 1:3 as

my primary developer with tri-x400 and find it most satisfactory in most all respects. however, filling

the JOBO resevoir up with 68 degree water [ and later dumping it after developing session], getting

made-up solutions of developer, stop bath,, fix, ect, etc at 68 degrees can be kinda tedious, and

definitely time-consuming. if divided development can yield approximately the grain quality and also

the adjustment of degree of development of XTOL or D76....well, then i'm all for it.

any takers or contributors ??

many thanks

phil temple

pepperell, ma

temple32@charter.net