Tim L Lowe
Project No 2
This project, so far, has been a series of disasters and near disasters. I have heard so much about Pyrocat so I decided to try some. I developed 6 sheets of pricey ACROS Neopan according to the Massive Dev chart times and temperatures and got: 2 completely clear sheets, 2 sheets with an image so faint that I couldn't tell which shots they were and 2 sheets with barely recognizable images what were completely unscannable. To call them thin is such an understatement. They were anorexic and then some.
Undaunted (OK, slightly daunted) I undertook a research project. I scanned the forums, I studied the documentation in the box and on the company web site, I asked friends. To call the body of literature on this developer "cryptic, inconsistent and contradictory" is similar to the characterization of my thin negatives above.
Now, admittedly daunted, I undertook the scientific method. I loaded 6 sheets of the fogged Delta 100 (I still hate the TSA) and fired off 6 identical shots of a contrasty but easy exposure of the fence in my yard.
I tank developed two sheets as per the directions on the web site: 5:15 mins at 80F 1:1:100. The thin but scannable result is the upper image above.
Next, I stand developed, in a tray. One sheet was removed at 45 minutes and the other at 1 hour. 1:1:200 at 60F. This is the fairly good (allowing for the fogged film) and is shown in the bottom above.
The last two sheets I'll try stand processing in my tank to see if that works.
Anyone who knows anything about this developer, particularly for processing sheet film in tanks, please let me know.
Project No 2
This project, so far, has been a series of disasters and near disasters. I have heard so much about Pyrocat so I decided to try some. I developed 6 sheets of pricey ACROS Neopan according to the Massive Dev chart times and temperatures and got: 2 completely clear sheets, 2 sheets with an image so faint that I couldn't tell which shots they were and 2 sheets with barely recognizable images what were completely unscannable. To call them thin is such an understatement. They were anorexic and then some.
Undaunted (OK, slightly daunted) I undertook a research project. I scanned the forums, I studied the documentation in the box and on the company web site, I asked friends. To call the body of literature on this developer "cryptic, inconsistent and contradictory" is similar to the characterization of my thin negatives above.
Now, admittedly daunted, I undertook the scientific method. I loaded 6 sheets of the fogged Delta 100 (I still hate the TSA) and fired off 6 identical shots of a contrasty but easy exposure of the fence in my yard.
I tank developed two sheets as per the directions on the web site: 5:15 mins at 80F 1:1:100. The thin but scannable result is the upper image above.
Next, I stand developed, in a tray. One sheet was removed at 45 minutes and the other at 1 hour. 1:1:200 at 60F. This is the fairly good (allowing for the fogged film) and is shown in the bottom above.
The last two sheets I'll try stand processing in my tank to see if that works.
Anyone who knows anything about this developer, particularly for processing sheet film in tanks, please let me know.