[smidsy]

Hei Folks,
Going to be doing some black and white developing after a few years out of the game, and just wondering what a good all round developer is.

I should point out, I have some film in my bulk loader but I have no idea whether this film is 100 or 400 ASA so the plan is to shoot and develop a roll at each speed and see what results I get.

With that in mind I'm after a good general purpose developer - and since I'm a uni student, cheap would be nice as well lol.
Cheers
Paul

[lithos]

One letter, a piece of punctuation and two numerals:

Kodak D-76

Can't go wrong, with most films (save TMax, but I'd stay away from what is, technically speaking, "horribly shite.")

Even with our inflated prices in Aus, it's still only six bucks for a Yank gallon's (3.8 litres) worth of dev, and that's from an inner city retailer in Brisbane. Hell, if you can get the raw chems, you could mix the formula yourself.

As bulletproof as Tri-X (Tri-X and D-76 are the gin and vermouth of the BW film world. Bogie and Bacall. Thommo and Lillee. You get the idea.) I'd call it the "standard" developer - good grain (it's not Xtol, nor is it Rodinal) and therefore good sharpness, still awesome for pushing, good contrast. It's been around so long, and so many people have used it, there's more than enough info out there on the 'net for pretty much every kind of film, and ever iteration each film, out there.

Six bucks. Can't go wrong.

There's an excellent photostore in WA (can't remember what it's called) that should have it.

And, as a side note, Ilford's ID-11 is pretty much a clone of D-76 (might be a few tiny changes, but Ilford lists the exact same dev times for ID-11 as D-76 for its film, and most reports confirm this.)

My advice is to a) don't load a whole roll of this film for your test shots - load only five or six frames. Or b) take a piece this film (at least two frames long so you've got a good chance of reading the edge marks), load it in the dark into your dev tank, and soak in D-76 for about ten minutes, fix, and read the edge marks. Not only will this tell you the speed, but also the brand and version of the film, as well as giving you something to go on in order to find out the version of the film - film manufacturers love changing the film formula and dev times, but not the name.

This way, you're less likely to lose important shots you might get if you fly blind by not knowing what you're shooting.

More importantly, you might have something rare in your bulk loader - Tech Pan? Agfa?

As a uni student, I know how you feel .

And, once you find out what the film is, head on over to the bible of dev times: The Massive Dev Chart: B/W Film Development Times, Processing Data

As for other developers, here's a few tips:

Kodak's Xtol is very fine grained, and one of the fine grain devs good for pushing (ie, when you want fine grain, mostly). But it is hard to find in Aus - you're left to mostly order it online, which can be expensive. Also cures scurvy (bonus points for those who get that.) Good resource page is Kodak Xtol Developer - Unofficial Resource Page

Kodak's HC-110 is cheap, easy to use as a one-shot developer as it's VERY concentrated - for a lot of low-speed films, most dev times for it are its Dilution "B" nearly breach the five-minute minimum. It comes as a syrup, so when you want to dev with it, grab a large syringe with .1ml gradations, suck out enough from the bottle (you need AT LEAST 6 mls of syrup per 36 frames of 135, which normally means mixing more than you need for a roll.) Note: Kodak's own instructions, as found in its Tech Pubs, are needlessly complicated and pointlessly hard to work with. Better off to go with instructions from Kodak HC-110 Developer - Unofficial Resource Page than mix up the four litres or so it says to. The syrup keeps for upwards of two decades, apparently.

Frankly, I haven't used much else. I have used Ilford Perceptol which is great for pulling film - but I don't pull film that much. Gives a good, fine grain on low speed films - this is good for the kind of people who want their negs to look like they were shot on ISO 100 on a full-frame digicam and converted to BW in photoshop.

If you get BW devved at a lab (and where's the fun and economy in that?) nine times outta ten the lab will use Kodak TMax developer. Apparently, TMax Dev can make TMax films look good (some say the TMax line is unlike any other BW film, visually and chemically) and my theory is TMax dev is used because Kodak aggressively pushes its TMax film, for better or worse. You can dev with TMax Dev at home - note that it's bloody expensive.

Still, mate - D-76. Cannot go wrong. Costs less than a large Big Mac meal.

If you want some examples, let me know.

[barondla]

Instead of wasting time and film shooting to see what is in the bulk loader, why don't you snip off about 6 " of the film in the dark and develop it. The negatives will say what the film is. No reason to waste time shooting it wrong.
D76 and Ilford ID11 + are the same except Ilford adds one extra chemical that helps reduce fog ( Think I remember what its for correctly). They got this chemical from color processing.
HC110 is a beautiful developer. But can be very grainy (and sharp) for 35mm. It is easier to mix than the powder.
Have fun with the project. Had to justify in photo class tonight why anyone owning a dslr would shoot film. B&W was one of those reasons. Have never seen digital look as nice as real B&W. It might be possible - just haven't seen it.
thanks
barondla

[smidsy]

Hei Guys,
Thanks for all the info, looks like D76 or ID11 are the way to go.
The interesting thing about film vs digital is that there is a band of people who think film will make a comeback.
Maybe it won't, but I like developing my own film, and as a student design & technology teacher I'm hoping to be able to teach what they now refer to as "wet photography".
Eventually I'd like to shoot and develop colour slide film as well as B/W but that's a while off yet.
Cheers
Paul

[Chako]

I can also easily recommend Ilford from experience. It is what I used to use in my basement, and also at work.

Film cannot make a comeback, because it has never left.

You could also have the students make pinhole cameras, using pieces of photographic paper as the film. The cameras can get really elaborate or simple depending upon the scope of your course. In the years that I taught photography, this was always a fun and exciting project for the students to do.

[lithos]

Little Miss PopTart taking drunken photos of each other on their 'phones as the E they've bought in the night just starts to make DJ's sound talented is what drives it. God forbid having to wait for prints, or having a hard copy, even, of the image (although in a situation like that, it might be best, for legal reasons, to have a photo that's easily destroyed.)

Sadly, what drives photography is the lowest common denominator. Which is true in most successful businesses.

Er, much like democracy. Nov 24th, people!

*runs like the dickens*