From: Judy Seigel (jseigel@panix.com)
Date: 12/31/01-06:12:27 PM Z
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 02:30:37 -0500
From: Sandy King <sanking@clemson.edu>
Reply-To: alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca
To: alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca
Subject: Re: Stain Redux - Pyrocat HD and Tri-X: was Double Dipping
Clay,
I did not see your original message regarding the fog+ stain you got
on the border areas when using Pyrocat with TRI-X. The first thing
that pops into my mind is to ask about the age of your stock solution
of Pyrocat? I mention this because the shelf life of Pyrocat, when
mixed with phenidone, is probably no greater than about three months.
When the Pyrocat stock solution goes bad the result is a lot of extra
base stain, somewhat irregular - even splotchy- and very observable
on the clear edges of the film.
With TRI-X developed in fresh Pyrocat I have not observed elevated
overall stain levels or excessive general fog.
Sandy King
>Clay,
>I really can't answer your question about Tri-X and Pyrocat-HD, however I
>can share some very recent results with Pyrocat.
>
>I first tried Bergger's BPF 200 with PMK pyro (trays) and was underwhelmed
>to say the least. Such a high overall "fog stain" that contrast for Pd/Pt
>printing was terrible. Rollo Pyro was better, but I still was not terribly
>pleased with these negatives. In my hands, Rollo Pyro/BPF negatives just
>did not have the contrast of Rollo/FP4+ or Rollo/Tri-X.
>
>This weekend I developed a few 8x10 sheets of BPF 200 negs (rated at 100)
>in Pyrocat-HD, using the older metol formula, rotary agitation (8 min) and
>the 1:2:100 dilution. The result was excellent negatives for Pd/Pt! These
>negatives were FAR superior for Pd/Pt to the previous BPF200 pyro negs and
>I now consider this film useable. Before, I honestly could not understand
>how anyone liked BPF for Pd/Pt. I need to try Pyrocat with Tri-X, because
>I absolutely love Pyrocat results with FP4+ and now BPF 200.
>
>Linas
>
>> [Original Message]
>> From: clay <wcharmon@wt.net>
>> To: <lkudzma@earthlink.net>
> > Date: 12/29/2001 8:05:00 PM
>> Subject: Re: Stain Redux - Pyrocat HD and Tri-X: was Double Dipping
>>
>> Anybody on the list had problems using TriX and Pyrocat HD? Pyrocat has
>
>> turned out to be the easiest developer for me to use for getting a nice
>
>> proportional actinic filtering stain on my normal films: TMax 400, FP-4,
>and
>
>> HP-5.
>
>>
>
>> Today I was out shooting 7x17 with Tri-X, and was shocked to see a lot of
>
>> fog+stain even in the border areas of the negative. I seem to remember
>Sandy
>
>> saying something about a foggy result when he tested the developer on
>Tri-X
>
>> as well. Anybody else had experience, good or bad, with this film and
>
>> developer combination?
>
>>
>
>> As an aside, I am really sold on Pyrocat as an inexpensive easy-to-use
>
>> alternative to Rollo. On the first three films I mentioned, I get really
>
>> great results without a lot of fussing. It really tames the hair trigger
>
>> response of TMax 400 nicely. Seems like 10-11 minutes at 75 degrees with
>
>> that film will almost always give me a palladium ready negative.
>
>>
>
>> Any input would be enlightening.
>
>>
>
>> Clay
>
>
--
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 01/02/02-04:47:33 PM Z CST