From: clay (wcharmon@wt.net)
Date: 11/26/01-07:20:14 AM Z
Carl:
Yes, I've been advised that as well. I just got a new 500 ml bottle of
Rollo from B&S and plan to use that this week instead of the 5 month old
bottle I had previously. Is the thought that the developer oxidizes with age
and acts in a 'pile-on' fashion when combined with the natural oxidation
that occurs with any rotary based method?
Thanks for the tip. I'll let you know if that solves the particular problem
with ABC+. I do recommend that you try the Pyrocat. With my materials (Tmax
400) it has a great feature - different development times (5-22 minutes)
give identical shadow contrasts - pretty high - with the curves literally on
top of one another, but at about Zone V, they split, with the shorter times
giving a really nice bend in the H&D curve, but then continuing on in a
straight line. In other words, it appears to be a great highlight
compensating developer. It doesn't shoulder, just changes gradient. I
haven't seen that with any other developers.
Thanks,
Clay
----------
>From: Carl Weese <cweese@earthlink.net>
>To: alt-photo-process-l@skyway.usask.ca
>Subject: Re: Dense or Density
>Date: Mon, Nov 26, 2001, 6:53 AM
>
>Clay,
>
>ABC+ appears to have a fairly short "window" of shelf life. It needs to be
>aged some days before use, and then used in a period of a few months.
>Missing the window can result in high fog from what I've heard though I
>never encountered it. Since I work in trays I use PMK which has a long shelf
>life. For rotary, Sandy's Pyrocat may be a better choice. I plan to test it
>soon for tray processing of big negatives.---Carl
>--
> web site with picture galleries
> and workshop information at:
>
> http://home.earthlink.net/~cweese/
>
>NEW PICTURE GALLERIES: Flags and Pumpkins: Halloween 2001
> Coal Country
> Skinny Buildings
>
>----------
>>From: clay <wcharmon@wt.net>
>>To: alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca
>>Subject: Re: Dense or Density
>>Date: Sun, Nov 25, 2001, 9:12 PM
>>
>
>> I've had the same problem with Rollo Pyro (ABC+) resulting in incredibly
>> long exposure times although I use mostly TMax 400 and TriX. I get a very
>> high base+fog using the technique outlined in the Weese article in Photo
>> Techniques with the Rollo Pyro. For what its worth, I DO NOT have the same
>> problems with Sandy's Pyrocat-HD, but do agree that adding an extra stop of
>> exposure (just in case) is a very bad idea with Pt/Pd printing in mind. In
>> fact, the whiz-bang analysis tools in the BTZS plotter program indicate that
>> my actual film speed with Tmax 400 and Pyrocat-HD is actually around ISO
>> 600.
>>
>> I have been advised (but haven't yet tried) that skipping the second, post
>> development metaborate bath with Rollo pyro will reduce some of the high
>> degree of overall staining you seem to be getting. I'm going to give that a
>> shot this week now that I have some time and curiosity to do a little
>> investigation into the staining problem. I'll let the list know if anything
>> earth shaking results. I CAN say that the Pyrocat-HD has pretty much solved
>> the problem for me though, and it seems to give all the benefits
>> attributable to a pyro developer (e.g. high acutance, great highlight
>> definition, actinic filtering for UV sensitive processes, and reasonably
>> short development times) without the high base+fog and toxicity. Check out
>> www.unblinkingeye.com for the formula. It is incredibly cheap and easy to
>> mix yourself.
>>
>> Good luck. Just wanted to let you know that you are not alone in finding
>> this difficulty with Rollo pyro.
>>
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Clay
>> ----------
>>>From: Jeff Buckels <jeffbuck@swcp.com>
>>>To: alt-photo-process-l@skyway.usask.ca
>>>Subject: Re: Dense or Density
>>>Date: Sun, Nov 25, 2001, 7:28 PM
>>>
>>
>>>OK: I've been making the FO the night before and actually using it late
>morning
>>>or so the next day.... The ambient humidity lately has been 30 to 40%.
>Before
>>>coating, I humidify the paper (Platine) in front of a smallish sonic
>humidifier
>>>for about a minute. After coating, I dry the paper (cold air double window
>fan
>>>at four feet dries to 75% or so, then med-heat hair dryer till dry), then
>>>re-humidify as before, then expose. The range has been pretty good, but not
>>>great -- I'm not getting to real black black (brown brown). I used sodium
>>>dichromate just with this one print; mind you, the brightness range of the
>>>subject was a good stop short of normal. I exposed and developed normally,
>>>figuring to kick up the contrast a bit with the sod dichromate. This worked
>>>pretty good. It was not full range, but I intended the look I got (pretty
>much)
>>>from the get-go. Believe me, if the exp. time hadn't been 50 minutes, I
>>>wouldn't have thought there was a "problem"... I've only done two non-pyro
>>>negatives. The exposure times were well within normal ranges, around 5-7
>>>minutes.... Finally, these pyro negatives that have printed so slow in pt/pd
>>>are correspondingly slow on Azo. For this reason, I think we can eliminate
>bad
>>>FO or bad pt/pd or bad humidifying etc. ... I sure appreciate these
>responses.
>>>-jb
>>>
>>>Eric Neilsen wrote:
>>>
>>>> Jeff, There seems to be many things left unsaid by you about your whole set
>>>> up.
>>>>
>>>> FO should be well mixed and will take hours (pushing it) and a day or so to
>>>> fully dissolve. It will last many many months. Mixing it fresh is a
>>>> problem, not only to get it mixed, but weight properly the same for small
>>>> batches. If you are using AFO, that is a different animal.
>>>>
>>>> Are you drying your paper? dry palladium paper or one with a low RH is
>>>> slower than a humidified paper?
>>>>
>>>> Is the film printing full range? 80 minutes seems quite long. How much
>>>> dichromate in your developer? this will also slow your print times.
>>>>
>>>> What are your times for a non pyro negative?
>>>>
>>>> EJ Neilsen
>>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> From: "Jeff Buckels" <jeffbuck@swcp.com>
>>>> To: <alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca>
>>>> Sent: Sunday, November 25, 2001 10:04 AM
>>>> Subject: Dense or Density
>>>>
>>>> > Hello from Albuquerque NM. This is my first posting to this fine
>>>> > list....
>>>> >
>>>> > I've started doing platinum/palladium. Have done two sessions in my
>>>> > newly up and running home rig. I'm excited by the results I'm getting
>>>> > but am plagued by preposterously long exposures. Here's what I do: I'm
>>>> > shooting FP4+ (5x7 and 8x10) @ EI 64, erring on the side of
>>>> > over-exposure. Nothing fancy as to reading; for the time being, to keep
>>>> > it simple, I'm just doing split readings (mostly between the darkest and
>>>> > lightest readings on the palm of my hand), leaving any particular
>>>> > contrast control to the printing stage. I'm developing the film in PMK
>>>> > for 12 minutes at 70F. All exposures, regardless. The printing is on
>>>> > Platine. I've done a couple prints with pure palladium, a couple with
>>>> > about 55/45 Pt to Pd, adding some contrast on one occasion with a small
>>>> > amount of sodium dichromate in the pot/oxalate developer. The color and
>>>> > contrast need tweaking but I'm happy with both. The exposure times are
>>>> > an outrage: From 20 to 80 minutes. I can live with 20, and I
>>>> > understand there's only 2 stops difference between that and 80, but most
>>>> > the exposures are over 50. The light source is a new "oven" from
>>>> > Edwards, which I feel is working correctly. Can anyone tell me if
>>>> > anything jumps out of the above procedure as the likely repeat cause of
>>>> > these pokey exposures?? I'd sure like to stick with Pyro and know that
>>>> > that is the principal culprit. But, you know, if I could just get to
>>>> > 15-20 minute exposures, I'd be satisfied.... Thank you.
>>>> >
>>>> > jeff buckels (albuquerque nm)
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 12/10/01-11:12:21 AM Z CST