Adjusted Tempatures

Discussion in 'Darkroom Developing and Printing' started by Tom Elliott, Jul 17, 2003.

  1. Tom Elliott

    Tom Elliott Guest

    What ever method you use, IMHO I strongly suggest NOT to use a tempature
    higher than 68F and the temp that works for me is 65F.
    I discovered that 65 with stand development and intermittent agitation
    (divide the time by 4 and at those intervals is when I carefully agitate.
    For example:
    12 minutes at 65F divided by 4 equals 3.
    So I agitate for the first minute gently and contiusoly. Let stand, then
    agitate for one minute, and so forth until completion. All chemicals and
    wash at 65. If you can't wash at 65 then raise the other chemicals until
    they reach the wash, preventing grain and reticulation.
    I have found that even though there are charts out there that give you
    adjusted times for higher temperatures, I always got grain.
    Yours,
    Tom
    From: "Sam G" <>
    Subject: Development times??
    Date: Tuesday, July 15, 2003 10:44 PM

    If I start from a certain development time recommended by Kodak for TriX
    with Xtol at 68degrees. Then if my developer is at a higher temperature,
    Kodak's chart shows recommended times for these higher temps. I also have
    the temperature graph that appears in the Massive Dev. Chart (the same chart
    appears with Ilford products) for extrapolating the a given temp/time
    relationship to another temp. Using that graph (obviously a set of linear
    relationships) I find that these times are quite far off from the times in
    the Kodak tables for other temps. (maybe 15-20% off at 75degrees). Can
    anyone explain why that might be so? I would tend to follow Kodak's
    recommendations, but does this mean that, for example, most other developers
    follow a more linear set of time/temp relationships and Xtol doesn't???

    Thanks for any light someone can shed on this matter


    Sam
     
    Tom Elliott, Jul 17, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Tom Elliott

    John Guest

    My current working temp is 80F. No problems.
    High granularity is caused by ;

    1) High pH developers
    2) Extended development time
    3) Over-exposed film
    4) Variation in processing temps

    D-23 works fine at 80F

    John
     
    John, Jul 17, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Gee! 30 plus years at 75 degrees, can't figure out
    what I am doing wrong, since I notice no
    difference with negatives developed a lower
    temperatures (before I moved to this house)

    --
    73 es cul

    wb3fup
    a Salty Bear

    message
    Massive Dev. Chart (the same chart
    relationships and Xtol doesn't???
     
    WB3FUP \(Mike Hall\), Jul 17, 2003
    #3
  4. Tom Elliott

    Tom Elliott Guest

    This discussion is what I love about photography.
    Ten photographers taking the same photo come up with at least ten different
    specs to get to the same final print. In reality it has to do with
    calibration. Which is also true in the digital realm.
    Water is the most important ingredient then comes the chemicals and then the
    "nut" behind the wheel.
    The most important thing is do what works for you and then stick to it.
    I know that others get great results from T-max and all of the associated
    chemicals, however, I have never been able to get the results I like using
    T-max.
    My favorite:
    Tri-x-x at various ASA ratings with D23 at various dilution's and A/B split
    development but at 65F.

    The photos at http://www.tom-elliott-photography.com/special.htm were all on
    35mm TriX with D23. The only exception was the Flamenco Dancer series done
    on 2-1/4 Rolieflex, Tri-x-x at 1000 ASA with Ultrafin powder while in
    Germany.
    Metol at low temps helps hide the grain at pushed ASA's.
    I need all the help on that end for I use an old D-2 Omega that has been
    further modified to use a point source when needed.
    My equivalent here in the states is now D23 1:1 at 65F with Tri-x-x.
    Since 1992 and hurricane Andrew, I have been in the darkroom on a few times,
    and that was to turn my grandson on to photography. I now work in a
    digital/analogue highbred environment - shoot on film, transfer to Kodak
    PhotoCD Standard or Profession (18MB to 75MB files).
    I can do things in Photoshop that I could NEVER do before in my own
    darkroom.
    One of the best is to make a master digital file to be printed by my photo
    lab. I have four prints of the same image done over a span of five years and
    you can't tell the difference between them. Plus it is a B&W converted from
    a color neg.
    Anyway, calibrate, and have fun.
    Yours,
    Tom
     
    Tom Elliott, Jul 17, 2003
    #4
  5. What is even more fun is to project a transparency
    at a gathering of photographer's, 10% will
    compliment the work; 20% will not be sure what is
    wrong, but they will vocalize that "something is a
    tad off;" the remaining 70% will be vocal about an
    error in exposure, which as we all know is the
    critical part of reversal images. What is
    interesting is that for everyone that can see a
    1/3 to 2/3 stop over exposure you can find someone
    who is certain that 1/3 to 2/3 is correct, but the
    image is underexposed. You pays your money and
    you place your bets.

    --
    73 es cul

    wb3fup
    a Salty Bear

    message
    comes the chemicals and then the
    various dilution's and A/B split
    http://www.tom-elliott-photography.com/special.htm
    were all on
     
    WB3FUP \(Mike Hall\), Jul 18, 2003
    #5
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.
Similar Threads
Loading...