Gainer's Phenidone/Borax/VitC Formula
Suibu Liu
I have mixed my developer based on Gainer's formula found at:
http://www.digistar.com/rollei/2002-11/0407.html
I developed my first TMX 135 at 20C for 7 minutes, the negatives came
out excellent. Many thanks to Pat Gainer and Gene Johnson for the
formula.
I have one question now. How many rolls of 135/120 can this 1000ml
working solution develop? I know it is a one shot developer and I am
going to use it as one shot.
However, my tank requires 600ml of developer for 120 and 375ml for
135. So it is kind of waste if I use 600ml of developer for one roll
of 120 compare to one roll of 135. I am thinking to roll two rolls of
120 back-to-back and I can still use 600ml of developer, Or can I use
it 1:1?
Before switching to Gainer's formula, I used XTOL. For XTOL, there is
a minimum "100ml stock solution for one roll 135/120, or one 8x10
sheet" rule. Is there a similar rule for this formula?
Thanks a lot!
Suibu
Nicholas T.
From my experience with that developer you will be fine with 2x120s in
600mls of water. Some time ago I used to develop in Rodinal and
developed 6 x 120 films in a 1.2 ltr tank. I did have to alter the
development a little (no more than a minute from memory) but I think
that was more to do with the baffling effect several rolls of film has
with the agitation of the film than the ability of the developer to
develop film.
What I'm trying to say is that you will be fine within reason. From
memory, that alkaline (borax alone) is not very concentrated and you
_might_ find more consistent results with with several films in a tank
and a Borax/Carbonate alkaline component--but that's a guess.
PATRICK GAINER
Suibu Liu wrote:
You should have no trouble with 2 rolls in 600 ml. I do one 35 mm 36 exp.
in 250 ml. The area is roughly the same as a 120 roll.
Borax is a good buffer which tends to minimize changes in pH. The amount
of ascorbic acid used per roll is very small. The products of reaction
are acidic, but not very.
Dan Quinn
>
> However, my tank requires 600ml of developer for 120 ...
>
What sort of tank takes 600ml of developer for a roll of 120? Dan
Suibu Liu
Suibu Liu
Is 250ml the minimum for one roll of 135/120?
I have another question, hope you don't mind. In one of your posts I
found on the internet (quoted below), you said "5ml of 1% phenidone in
alcohol" solution will be fine for one liter. This is 3ml less than
the 8ml in your original formula.
If I use 5ml of %1 phenidone, will 250ml still be enough for one roll
of 135/120?
Thanks again,
Suibu
>> In other forum, I just read about messages from Gene, talking about
>> your new formula of "Vitamin C developer", that you don't use NaOH
>> any more.
>>
>> I wonder if the new "Borax only" formula is better than the very
>> first "Carbonate only" formula, or just they are substitution each
>> other?
>>
>Well, it certainly is easier without the NaOH. It works very well. I
>have to give credit to Ryuji Suzuki for reminding me that enough of
>any alkali would do. Borax is soluble enough to work by itself. 16
>grams /liter of borax, 4 grams/liter of ascorbic acid, and 5 ml of
>1% phenidone in alcohol. A stock soution of borax is handy. The other
>ingredients dissolve in it very rapidly. 1 teaspoon of ascorbic acid
>powder has always been very close to 4 grams when I checked the
weight.
Suibu Liu
It is a cheap plastic tank, I can develop 2 135 rolls side by side,
but for 120s, I can only use one rail.
Actually, the tank says it requires 590ml for 120 film to be exact.
Thanks,
Suibu
dan.c...@att.net (Dan Quinn) wrote in message news:<b379902d.04082...@posting.google.com>...
PATRICK GAINER
Suibu Liu wrote:
The phenidone is not what gets used up. It is the amount of ascorbic acid that
sets the capacity and the ratio of ascorbic acid to phenidone that sets the
activity, along with the pH. A ratio of 80:1 ascorbic acid to phenidone is
quite good. Some of these things I have found out since my original article.
LR Kalajainen
I've been using a variant of your formula for some years--it was in one
of the articles you wrote a few years ago for Photo Techniques. The one
I use calls for Kodalk rather than borax, I think. Did that originally
come from you, or did I make that substitution myself? I can't remember
now. Anyway, it works great; I get great negs with Delta 400 which I
develop for 6 minutes at 70 Fahrenheit. I also found that if I develop
two 120 rolls in one liter, I can re-use it and develop two more by
increasing the developing time 20% with no appreciable difference. I
like the idea of the borax stock solution, however. Makes it even quicker.
What would you suggest as a concentration of Vit. C and Phenidone for a
paper developer?
Larry
PATRICK GAINER
LR Kalajainen wrote:
I have used double the film concentration, with some additional carbonate. You can
play around til you find what you like. A lot of RC emulsions have developer
incorporated in the emulsion, which makes a difference. Test a piece of the paper
you want to use by putting a bit of it in some strong carbonate solution in room
light. If it turns black, it has developer in it. While it will not hurt to use a
standard developer on this paper, the results you get by using it as a developer
test will not apply accurately to paper that does not have the developer in it.
Dan Quinn
>
> What would you suggest as a concentration of Vit. C and
> Phenidone for a paper developer? Larry
>
What? You are quiting divided development of prints? I mentioned
your interesting posts of that subject on the "Water Bath" thread.
FWIW, I've found that FX-1 at twice film strength works very
nicely as a print developer. I think it may do as well at
film strength adding an additional minute or two.
I process prints one-shot so it is easy for me to do tests.
Pre-wet then use two ounces of solution A and the same for
B in a 5x7 tray. Dan
LR Kalajainen
No, I'll never give up divided development. Essentially, I'm lazy, and
when I can get absolutely consistent results from print to print with no
possibility of overdevelopment or change in contrast due to development,
no time/temp considerations, and in addition, can vary the contrast by
varying the first bath composition, why would I give it up. I'll
experiment with Patrick's suggestions (thanks, Pat, by the way) with a
divided formula: the carbonate will still be all in Bath B. Thanks,
too, for the FX-1 suggestion. The only time I do use single bath
development is when I'm using RC paper for contacts. I find that the
plastic coating often makes for weak, muddy gray/blacks in divided
developer, because the emulsion isn't thick enough to physically absorb
sufficient developing agent. Although, it seems to be fine where
there's actually been exposure, i.e. where the negative is in contact
with the paper, but around the film edges, it never gets to maximum
black. So I sometimes will wait until I've got a bunch of contacts to
do and then mix up a single bath and do them all at once.
Larry
PATRICK GAINER
Dan Quinn wrote:
What did I say to give you that idea, Dan? I only meant to say that a
developer you concoct to work on papers without incorporated developer
will work as well on the others, but not always the other way round. You
can develop some papers with a strong alkali solution. I used to do that
in trays with Kodak's stabilization papers. That won't work with, say,
MGIV FB.
Dan Quinn
>
> You can develop some papers with a strong alkali solution. ...
>
And it won't work with ANY Graded RC or Graded FB from Freestyle. Dan