Matthew, Thaks for sharing your thoughts. I don't have a strong preference, but what I saw (after sending the previous message) is the note on DigitalTruth about Xtol used with Svema FN64: http://www.digitaltruth.com/devchart.php?devrow=5012 "User reports poor results with this combination, test before use."
And yet another concern is that for Tasma FN-64, - only Rodinal is listed. I suspect it is just because of the lack of data (fewer people used Tasma compared to Svema), but maybe not... http://www.digitaltruth.com/devchart.php?Film=Tasma&Developer=&mdc=Search&TempUnits=C Now, a new question: In some Russian photo forums, people are saying that the the developers with both phenidone and hydroquinone are better for minimizing fogging in these old films. Does anybody know which developers fall under this category? I googled, and it looks like neither XTOL, nor Ilfotec DD-X or D76 (three developers used by the labs that can do B&W processing) contain both at the same time. I found a Denver-based lab (DR5) that can do other developers: D23, DK-50, and Acufine, D-11, D-19, HC-110, Microphen, Neofin Blue, Perceptol, Ethol TEC, ethol UFG, Ethol Blue http://www.dr5.com/writeuptrbw.html Any ideas about these developers? (It looks like some Ilford developers should be Phenidone -Hydroquinone-based [but not DD-X], - which ones?) Thank you, Igor Matthew Hunt Wed, 16 Jul 2014 04:36:25 -0700 wrote: On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 10:33 PM, Igor Roshchin <[email protected]> wrote: > I am considering A&I as a candidate. Even though they don't use > Rodinal, but X-Tol, given the age of the film, I don't think it would > make a big difference... Honestly, in your situation, I would prefer Xtol. Rodinal is a very fine-grained developer, but it can slightly decrease film speed (reducing shadow detail). Xtol is also fairly fine-grained, but I think it will also provide better shadow detail than Rodinal. I would expect your old film to behave much like underexposed film, and Xtol should be quite good at pulling out whatever detail is still there. > I just don't know how to deal with the uncertainty in the time, as > they are using a machine, not manual processing. > I wonder how much is X-Tol forgiving for the variation in time... > Does anybody know? Even with the major US-market B&W films, the development time was different for every film (not to mention longer, but non-standardized, times for push processing). I would expect that A&I's equipment can develop for whatever time they tell it to. I would suggest discussing the concerns with them. They might, for example, want to extend development because of the age of the film and the fact that it was exposed a long time ago. Also, whether the negatives come out thick (unlikely) or thin, a lot of further adjustment can be made in the printing or scanning process. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
