Dear all,
Many thanks for the quick and insightful responses. For some reason, I did not receive email notifications on post replies. Thus, kindly accept my delayed acknowledgement and thanks.
I understand from the guidance above, and some further reading, that it would indeed be wise to buy/make separate stock developers for print and paper. And have thus made a trip to the chemical supplies store in the city, yesterday. Unfortunately for me, Metol was not in stock, and shall be sent only on Tuesday/Wednesday vide courier now. Therefore, no experimentation, until I get it since Metol is the key developer for both formulae. [but the bonus was, at the camera store, got some expired rolls of Agfa APX 100 in 120mm, really cheap. So, all was not wasted, after all, haha.]
As for Developers, have narrowed it down to an undivided D-23 for film, and a formula called Gevaert G.251 (found vide MDC). The latter is also quite similar to the above two paper developer formulae (from Ilford and Kodak), kindly shared by [uSER=2403817]@rodeo_joe|1[/uSER] and @JDMvW .
I want to also try PMK Pyro soon, for film. A little later, though, at the time of my next round to the Chemical Supplies store. Also because Pyrogallol itself is quite expensive (compared to most other commercial photo chemicals i.e., excepting silver, gold, et al.) :D
Thanks again to [uSER=2403817]@rodeo_joe|1[/uSER] for suggesting Metol substitution. As you can see from my story so far, I really need something to replace it, right this moment. Haha. Read up on Phenidone, and man, seems like it is certainly a much better all-round choice in terms of both speed as well as handling. Only concern that comes to mind is that due to acting slower than Phenidone, Metol might help produce lesser contrast and thus better tonality (?).
Will post on my success with these soon–perhaps here, perhaps elsewhere on the forums. Have a nice weekend! :)
Thanking you,
With humble regards,
Paresh