Topic: Sell it to me ... staining developers

[Sandeha Lynch]

Straight up, I've been pretty happy with the tonality I get from Rodinal and DDX on HP5 or Wephota NP22, or FP4 and a few other traditional emulsions on 4x5 and 5x7, so I've no real reason to try anything different ... except for the fact that staining developers exist, and a deep-seated belief I have that research is it's own reward.

Right now, I'm moving into Whole Plate as it's such a nice size for contact printing, and (from reading a few articles) I'm wondering whether larger negatives benefit from staining ... and why?   On the other hand, I tend to shy away from naturally high contrast scenes if I can avoid them ... though in between the leaden clouds, high contrast is sometimes a major feature of landscape and sky here in South Wales.

I'm no chemist, and try to stay away from witches'  brew type recipes.  Changing developers might be more trouble than I need ... but then again, am I missing something if I don't give it a go?

The WP negs are all dev'd in a motorised roller drum, if it makes any difference.

Thanks

[LT]

The one thing I particularly like about using catechol developers (never used pyrogallol ones) is the highlight tonality.  I cant make any empirical statement as to them being better at this than any non staining compensation developers, but it just seems better.  the stain seems to acts like a low grade burn on the highlights.  That and the accutance edge effect is often strong because of the developers being used in very dilute concentrations. - that and the grain masking from the stain, and the extra compensation from the tanning, and the economy etc etc.

That said, I have finally thrown in the towel with using them - I find catechol devs are very finnicky and prone to quite bad contamination in certain water supplies and conditions.  That and I've had no end of problems with reel contamination making me lose substantial amounts of negative area - so I'm going back to simple dilute metol developers.  I like Perceptol a lot , but I'd rather mix my own for economy, so D-23 is the order of the day for me.

The developers are worth a try though  - if you are lucky to get it working without a problem as many do, then all the better.

One thing I would say is, the main benefit for me with using the Pyrocat was the compensation effect on roll films.  12 different shots in different conditions would all come out with very printable negs.  You are using sheet film so will be able to match development with each shot so you dont need to worry about the roll film problem ... so if you're happy with what you are getting, why upset the applecart? 

[Sandeha Lynch]

Thanks, Leon.  The good reasons for sound like good reasons, though at least with contact printing grain is not much of a problem.  And economy is a temptation, though while Rodinal and low ISO sheet film remain available it's not a major issue.

I guess it's an idea I can leave on the shelf until I feel like living dangerously.  One day.

[Francois]

The good thing about Pyrogallol based developers is that they keep forever.

[LT]

but they also kill fish - mind you, so do i - perhaps I'd better rethink that arguement ....