First go at developing 35mm B/W... Best Chemicals to start with?

brucegill

brucegill

Suspended / Banned
Messages
215
Name
Bruce Gill
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi guys

Just starting to get the gear together to get developing some 35mm B/W (Will be 99% TRI-X).

After having a read of a post on here I now realise this isn't as simple as "yeah, that'll do". Stuff goes out of date etc... Fine grain this and that and other stuff I don't understand yet. (I'm hoping to go to see a chap locally for some help/tuition for this and printing)

Can anyone point me in the right direction? or know a good source for info?

Thanks
Bruce
 
Top tip- go to your nearest Poundland and get a couple rolls of their £1 Agfa Vista 200. It's colour neg so you can't develop it, but you can use it to practice loading 35mm film onto a reel, and then bin it. You don't want to try it with your precious Tri-X photos until you're confident that you can do it without screwing it up :)
 
Carl Hall said:
Top tip- go to your nearest Poundland and get a couple rolls of their £1 Agfa Vista 200. It's colour neg so you can't develop it, but you can use it to practice loading 35mm film onto a reel, and then bin it. You don't want to try it with your precious Tri-X photos until you're confident that you can do it without screwing it up :)
Click to expand...

You can develop it - stand development at 1:100 in Rodinal works pretty well with Vista. I wouldn't swap it for "proper" BW film, and the output will need a contrast boost after scanning, but it does work and stops you binning the film :)

Here's some Kodak Gold I developed in this way:
20120527182651_scan-120527-0013.jpg
 
Last edited:
Yeah I've done it myself in Rodinal at 1+100 for an hour, but the results weren't as good as yours :LOL: Perhaps I worded it badly, you can do it but It's not something you'd want to do with your first roll :)

If you use it in the daylight to practice before trying it in a dark bag, then you can just keep taking it on and off to get the feel for it. Do that 100 times and then you should be good to go in the dark bag :D
 
That resources sticky is a gold mine, Bruce, but the thread titles are not always the easiest to decode!
 
There's an old thread about which developer folk use, but the one started this year on one-shot developers might be useful. I use Ilfosol 3, mainly because I went in to a shop and chatted to them and that's what they had (plus it's Ilford, which seemed a Good Thing to support).
 
ChrisR said:
There's an old thread about which developer folk use, but the one started this year on one-shot developers might be useful. I use Ilfosol 3, mainly because I went in to a shop and chatted to them and that's what they had (plus it's Ilford, which seemed a Good Thing to support).
Click to expand...

Great! Thanks for that one Chris. yeah, would be nice to go for Ilford. I need to try some of their film too.
 
ive used id11 (d76 is the same as id11 effectively) and found it fairly straight forward

i have a few scruffy sheets with dev times and temp charts, and use 600ml bottles for my stop and fix
 
If you have a local camera shop that sell chemicals, find out what they stock. The postage on chemicals adds an awful lot to the cost of buying them off t'internet, so it can be worth shopping local.
 
If you are near Manchester, Fred Aldous just off Piccadily sell Ilford chemicals. Not the cheapest but take off the postage and they aren't bad at all.
 
You can't really go wrong with Rodinal, it's cheap, easy to use, lasts for ages and is quite forgiving. OK there are other developers out there that will give you finer grain etc but as a beginner developer you'd be hard pressed to find a better choice.
 
I would go for D76 or ID11 They are for all intents and purposes identical ( The published formulae are the same)

They can be used as a full strength reusable and replenishable. But are sharper and finer grained used diluted, as a one shot and discarded.
There are pages of times and dilutions for it, all over the web.

I used it as a first choice developer for many years and for thousands of films, as have very many other professional photographers.
It has always been the developer by which all others are judged. in terms of Iso speed and grain.
 
... and don't forget the Massive Dev Chart, you can buy an app (which presumably has other useful bits like a timer) but get the times free from the web site, for pretty much any known combination of film, developer, dilutions and effective ISO!
 
Thanks Chris. I did find the app but I'll look online to be honest.... Digging through my grandfathers old equipment now and found a lovely old timer, Glass Safe light, trays and an old Paterson tank and contact sheet thingamajig :)
 
check the timer is acurate

the plus side of id11/d76 is its universality, can do any film and get good results. ive even deved paper in it, and its not ment todo that xD, the down side is mixing up 5litres of the stuff and storing it, the powder packets are quite small.

the 600ml bottles i use are just coke or pepsi ones, around 600ml covers 2 35mm films in my dev tank, and my id11 is stored in a asortment of collected bottles, mostly fruit juice, and i normally have some filtered water to dilute the devloper and for final wash stage. if you store it all together then the temps will be the same, so that helps

favour mid to longer dev times when you start, as any process mistakes will be a smaller % of effective doing stuff.

and its actually not hard once you know how, even i can do it xD
 
Many thanks Paul! Much appreciated :)

Edging toward ID11/D76....

Just got back from seeing a guy I found on www.http://www.localdarkroom.com
Got my first roll developed whilst he showed me what to etc... very exciting stuff for a newby :) And there's only a couple of duff frames on my first roll, so very happy!

Just building a list up of the chemicals I want to order and will run it pst you guys, just to check!

One thing he used was a Hypo Clearing Agent.... I'd not come across this is anything I'd read so far. Any thoughts guys?
 
was that in the final wash?

sharif photography have d76 cheap, or did atleast
 
I presently use Ilford LC29 and Rodinal. I have used a lot of ID11 and D-76 previously. With ID11/D76, you need to make up the stock from packets of powder and warm water. There is a saving to be made if you make up enough to last up to six months. I use to buy 5 litre ID11 or 3.8 litre D76 packets, make it up into stock, and pour it into an old five litre drum, that I could squeeze a certain amount of air out, as it was used up. I would only use it one shot.

The alternative is use one shot high concentrates such as Rodinal or LC29.
 
XA2inmypocket said:
I presently use Ilford LC29 and Rodinal. I have used a lot of ID11 and D-76 previously. With ID11/D76, you need to make up the stock from packets of powder and warm water. There is a saving to be made if you make up enough to last up to six months. I use to buy 5 litre ID11 or 3.8 litre D76 packets, make it up into stock, and pour it into an old five litre drum, that I could squeeze a certain amount of air out, as it was used up. I would only use it one shot.

The alternative is use one shot high concentrates such as Rodinal or LC29.
Click to expand...

Thanks Paul. I need to look into it more. I'm not sure I like the grain with Rodinal but need to print my stuff to check it out. This roll was with Rodinal, so at least I get to see this soon. Was VERY easy to use though, can see the appeal :)
 
brucegill said:
Hello mate. sorry for the late reply, been helping a mate all day building bloody IKEA furniture..... Joy

It was after the stop from memory.
Click to expand...

think u can use dish washing soap instead, think its just so the negs dry better, ive got something but not sure which one xD
 
brucegill said:
One thing he used was a Hypo Clearing Agent.... I'd not come across this is anything I'd read so far. Any thoughts guys?
Click to expand...

I've never personally used a hypo clearing agent. I could say that I have negatives I processed over 50 years ago that are still fine, but that would be misleading. At the risk of boring/being incomprehensible/confusing, it depends on the fixer.

My old negatives would have been fixed in sodium hyposulphate (I'm old, so allow me to not use the modern name of thiosulphate :D. As a chemist I've seen the nomenclature of various chemicals change about three times, and I do like my fixed points (pun intended)). If you don't use an acid fixer, you don't need a clearing agent. But the older sodium fixers aren't effective on modern films and papers, and you have to use ammonium based ones; and as far as I know, the only ones you'll buy are acid fixers. So a clearing agent might be a good idea.

I would recommend a final rinse in distilled or purified water with a drop of wetting agent in it. The wetting agent reduces the surface tension of water, and reduces the chances of drops drying on the film; the distilled water reduces the chances of there being anything in the water that will be left behind when it dries.

With 35mm film, the edges don't matter in the slightest, because of the sprocket holes; so if you can arrange for the film to hand with a diagonal slope so that the water runs to an edge and down that, you'll further reduce the risk of drying marks.

If you want rapid drying, a final rinse in alcohol (which evaporates quickly) will help. Agfa used to make Drysonal for this purpose.
 
Last edited:
StephenM said:
With 35mm film, the edges don't matter in the slightest, because of the sprocket holes; so if you can arrange for the film to hand with a diagonal slope so that the water runs to an edge and down that, you'll further reduce the risk of drying marks.
Click to expand...

I've heard this before, but no idea how to achieve it. I tried gripping the film by one corner, but wasn't surprised that it still hung pretty much straight, given there's a weight at the bottom.
 
Bruce, there is some great advice and direction here from some very knowledgeable and experienced folk. The only thing I would add is that you should just throw yourself into processing and try not to over think it. In reality get some developer, stop and fixer and put some film though it. You will quickly find it a straightforward process and over time you can refine it to a personal approach. The aim in the first instance, in my opinion, is to be able to treat the process of developing a black and white film as straightforward and common place as doing the washing up, washing the car or other domestic tasks. I say this in the context of just having done the washing up and now checking on the two roles of 120 TRI-X (shot at 1600 ASA) drying in the shower cubicle after development in Ilford DD-X.
 
Jao said:
The aim in the first instance, in my opinion, is to be able to treat the process of developing a black and white film as straightforward and common place as doing the washing up, washing the car or other domestic tasks. I say this in the context of just having done the washing up and now checking on the two roles of 120 TRI-X (shot at 1600 ASA) drying in the shower cubicle after development in Ilford DD-X.
Click to expand...


But don't forget, when you open the tank to reveal the newly developed film, you have to whisper, to yourself or someone else "witchcraft" :D
 
brucegill said:
One thing he used was a Hypo Clearing Agent.... I'd not come across this is anything I'd read so far. Any thoughts guys?
Click to expand...

Hypo Clearing Agent is used to clean fixer out of Fiber prints, its not normally used on film, or RC paper for that matter.

This is a chemical used in d/room printing, RC paper is thin cotton based paper coated in resin, hence the RC....Resin Coated, in to which is impregnated the light sensitive emulsion.
RC is easy to work with it doesn't soak up chemicals and can be washed clean with no hypo in minutes.
FB paper, or Fiber is much thicker, it has texture, its beautiful stuff but absorbs much more fluid than RC, it soaks up more developer, more stop, more fixer and more water.
The developer and stop aren't much of a problem but the fixer has to be completely removed, so before washing the print gets a dip in Hypo Clearing Agent, it helps to remove the fixer during washing, without it the print would have to be washed under running water for an uneconomical length of time, hours and hours.
Then there's the drying............:rolleyes:
 
joxby said:
Hypo Clearing Agent is used to clean fixer out of Fiber prints, its not normally used on film, or RC paper for that matter.
Click to expand...

It may be that this is one of the differences between the British and the Americans.

Ilford make no mention of using a hypo clearing agent on film (I just checked Monochrome Darkroom Practice for this statement - I haven't trawled all the online Ilford data).

Kodak's Black and White Darkroom Dataguide on the other hand recommend using it to save time and water (I just checked it). It's also recommended in Steve Anchell's darkroom book (also American). Steve Anchell also makes mention of Grant Haist, Kodak's once chief chemist.

So shall we say that you should use one with Kodak film, and not with Ilford; and toss a coin for other manufacturers :D.

The main problem with removing chemicals is the ease with which they can diffuse into the wash water. A hardening fixer (by definition) hardens the emulsion. Now, while this is a Good Thing to prevent scratches and abrasions, it also makes chemical removal more difficult. Hence the caveat about hypo clearing agents only being needed with acid fixers. But, if Ilford reckon that the three or so changes of water method is fine, without using a clearing agent, I can't see a problem.

My own sequence of processing is develop, stop bath with indicator, acid hardening rapid fixer, the Ilford change of water wash method, a final rinse in distilled water with a drop of wetting agent. And, naming names: PanF/FP4/Acros film, Rodinal developer, Acustop (or whatever I can buy that has an indicator and is acetic acid based - not odourless), Amfix fixer, Ilford wetting agent.

Edited for typo.
 
Last edited:
I dunno, I mean I'm no expert, I don't know how helpful to the wash hypo would be when washing film, there's nowhere for the fixer to be trapped its an acetate type base that doesn't absorb anything, heck the thing is washed in 10 or 15 minutes anyway.
On the other hand, it can't do any harm, maybe in hard water areas ??
 
It's not the acetate base, it's the gelatine emulsion that needs to have the fixer washed out of. Remember, the developing isn't just a surface reaction, the developer penetrates into the emulsion (which is why the water bath technique works). Similarly, the undeveloped silver halides are all through the emulsion, so the fixer has to get to them and convert them into soluble form. With paper, the rapid fixers penetrate the emulsion faster than the paper base, which is why limiting the time in the fixer is a good idea, as it's harder to shift fixer from the paper than the emulsion. And some by products of fixing are actually insoluble anyway (a reason for using two fixing baths, but this is well outside film washing territory).

Either way, I don't use a hypo clearing agent with film. Nor do I use a selenium toner, which increases permanence of film just as it does with prints.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top