Pancro 400 in DD23 Test
I'm doing more large format materials testing - comparing developers and how they act on certain films. I've recently become aware of how good certain older, simple developers can be, specifically Divided D-23. I exposed two sheets of Bergger Pancro 400 identically, and processed one in Xtol 1:1 (which is one of my standards) and the other in Divided D-23*
This image was the one processed in DD-23
The difference? Normally I would think of Xtol as the perfect developer for delivering full emulsion speed, contrast, shadow information, and retrained highlights. But in comparison with the DD-23 negative, the Xtol neg was far more contrasty and the brightest values were far hotter than I wanted. The DD-23 negative was beautiful; excellent contrast, good shadow values, excellent tonal separation, and the highest values were much more restrained/balanced than the Xtol negative. This, frankly, surprised me. I expected the two negatives to be much more alike.
This prompts me to continue exploring the Divided D-23 option, and maybe try Divided D-76 as well. Of course, you don't want to apply this technique to any and all images, as there may be too much contraction of the tonal scale in low contrast situations. I knew that with the contrasty window lighting, and the fact that this was a 90 second exposure, contrast was going to be quite strong. You might not think so, looking at the image, but directional light can be contrasty even when its subdued window light on a cloudy day. And of course, reciprocity builds in more contrast too - something to be aware of.
Camera: 8x10 Deardorff
Lens: Gundlach Turner-Reich 12" convertible, both cells used. This is a 100 year old lens (give or take), and in spite of its limitations its capable of making spectacular photographs. This is one of the better lenses for giving very soft out-of-focus areas, devoid of vibrations or aperture shapes, etc. (many lenses fare really poorly in this regard. My Hasselblad is one of the worst, with its pentagonal bokeh!) If it was good enough for Edward Weston, its good enough for me.
Exposure: 90 seconds at f22
Anyway, this was mostly just a technical test image, but I hope you enjoy it just the same. I have a second image made in the same way that I like much more and I'll post it shortly.
Divided D-23 is a two part developer; the developing agent + preservative in Part A, and the accelerator in Part B
In this case, Part A was 3 grams of Metol and 50 grams of Sodium sulfite in 500 ML of water, and Part B was 2 grams of Borax in 500 ml of water.
Depending on the film, time in Part A is between 4 and 12 minutes, and time in Part B is pretty much a constant: 3 minutes, plus or minus.
Pancro 400 in DD23 Test
I'm doing more large format materials testing - comparing developers and how they act on certain films. I've recently become aware of how good certain older, simple developers can be, specifically Divided D-23. I exposed two sheets of Bergger Pancro 400 identically, and processed one in Xtol 1:1 (which is one of my standards) and the other in Divided D-23*
This image was the one processed in DD-23
The difference? Normally I would think of Xtol as the perfect developer for delivering full emulsion speed, contrast, shadow information, and retrained highlights. But in comparison with the DD-23 negative, the Xtol neg was far more contrasty and the brightest values were far hotter than I wanted. The DD-23 negative was beautiful; excellent contrast, good shadow values, excellent tonal separation, and the highest values were much more restrained/balanced than the Xtol negative. This, frankly, surprised me. I expected the two negatives to be much more alike.
This prompts me to continue exploring the Divided D-23 option, and maybe try Divided D-76 as well. Of course, you don't want to apply this technique to any and all images, as there may be too much contraction of the tonal scale in low contrast situations. I knew that with the contrasty window lighting, and the fact that this was a 90 second exposure, contrast was going to be quite strong. You might not think so, looking at the image, but directional light can be contrasty even when its subdued window light on a cloudy day. And of course, reciprocity builds in more contrast too - something to be aware of.
Camera: 8x10 Deardorff
Lens: Gundlach Turner-Reich 12" convertible, both cells used. This is a 100 year old lens (give or take), and in spite of its limitations its capable of making spectacular photographs. This is one of the better lenses for giving very soft out-of-focus areas, devoid of vibrations or aperture shapes, etc. (many lenses fare really poorly in this regard. My Hasselblad is one of the worst, with its pentagonal bokeh!) If it was good enough for Edward Weston, its good enough for me.
Exposure: 90 seconds at f22
Anyway, this was mostly just a technical test image, but I hope you enjoy it just the same. I have a second image made in the same way that I like much more and I'll post it shortly.
Divided D-23 is a two part developer; the developing agent + preservative in Part A, and the accelerator in Part B
In this case, Part A was 3 grams of Metol and 50 grams of Sodium sulfite in 500 ML of water, and Part B was 2 grams of Borax in 500 ml of water.
Depending on the film, time in Part A is between 4 and 12 minutes, and time in Part B is pretty much a constant: 3 minutes, plus or minus.