Why Phenidone? Why Not Metol?
Dan Quinn
in film speed it confers. I can't think of any reason to use it
for printing.
What has it got going for it? I've some phenidone but have been
using the metol. An increase in film speed is a good reason and
tempting in itself. It's use for printing though escapes me. Dan
Jorge Omar
Phenidone costs me less than metol per gram and is used in about 1/10
quantities.
I believe final results are equivalent.
Jorge
dan.c...@att.net (Dan Quinn) wrote in
news:b379902d.0311...@posting.google.com:
Gregory W. Blank
dan.c...@att.net (Dan Quinn) wrote:
Metol Poisoning, if you get enough of it on or in you over any
length of time from what I understand it will make your life hell.
A little on your skin will make you break out in a rash.
--
Martin Jangowski
> In my case, at least, it's a matter of cost.
> Phenidone costs me less than metol per gram and is used in about 1/10
> quantities.
> I believe final results are equivalent.
We pay about 5 (Euro-)Cent per gram Metol. A typical film-developer
uses about 2-5g Metol per liter. The 100g Sodiumsulfite it needs
costs about 30-50Cent... a larger cost factor in my eyes.
BTW, Phenidone costs about 14 Cent/gram. If you want to go really
cheap, use Beutler's formula, about 70 Cent for 40 films.
Martin
Jorge Omar
In my case, 100g metol US$60 (of course, I refused to pay that).
100g phenidone US$ 8.
Jorge
Martin Jangowski <mar...@jangowski.de> wrote in news:bp2lk4$2ed4$1
@inside.p-i-n.com:
Jean-David Beyer
> In article <b379902d.0311...@posting.google.com>,
> dan.c...@att.net (Dan Quinn) wrote:
>
>
>> I know of only one reason to use phenidone and that is the increase
>> in film speed it confers. I can't think of any reason to use it
>> for printing. What has it got going for it? I've some phenidone but
>> have been using the metol. An increase in film speed is a good
>> reason and tempting in itself. It's use for printing though escapes
>> me. Dan
>
>
> Metol Poisoning, if you get enough of it on or in you over any length
> of time from what I understand it will make your life hell.
For some individuals, Metol acts as a sensitizer and promotes allergic
reactions. For other individuals, nothing happens. Of course, this is
also true of Sodium Sulfite, Sodium Carbonate, and many other household
chemicals.
Actually, Metol's bad reputation is probably an exaggeration these days.
In the past, (70 to 100 years ago), the stuff was frequently
contaminated with paraphenylenediamine (a nifty fine-grain developer if
you can tolerate a 2-stop loss of film speed), which is definately a
sensitizer and thought, by some, to be a carcinogen. It is my
understanding that paraphenylenediamine is no longer a contaminant of
Metol and has not been for many decades.
>
> A little on your skin will make you break out in a rash.
>
A little on your skin _may_ make you break out in a rash. It does not do
that to me, nor did it, AFAIK, to Ansel Adams. I would worry more about
color developers which do use paraphenylenediamane derivitaves (that
have been modified to make them less soluble in the fats of human skin
so as to reduce their sensitizing (to people) properties). Or the Sodium
Carbonate in paper developpers.
--
.~. Jean-David Beyer Registered Linux User 85642.
/V\ Registered Machine 73926.
/( )\ Shrewsbury, New Jersey http://counter.li.org
^^-^^ 9:05am up 20 days, 7:40, 2 users, load average: 2.23, 2.13, 2.10
Michael Scarpitti
It is longer-lasting than metol, with higher capacity.
Jeff Novick
papers. They seem colder and in certain formulas, I've seen blue/black
effects.
"Dan Quinn" <dan.c...@att.net> wrote in message
news:b379902d.0311...@posting.google.com...
dr bob
DEADLY! Don't ever touch it or work with it. In FACT you don't even need
to be near it for it to cause all sorts of maladies from birth defects to
death. Boy, am I in trouble having worked (molded, machined, stamped) this
stuff for years before I retired. However in my research work I did
determine that Teflon will ignite and burn furiously in a 100% oxygen
atmosphere and that it makes a reasonable explosive when mixed with lithium
powder. So I guess we are really in trouble if we ever encounter these
conditions. Also - don't breathe the combustion products - it may burn your
lungs or make you want to photograph. To test these theories, just heat you
frying pan to 600 degrees F.
Truly, dr bob
Messing about in photographic chemicals since 1947.
"Jean-David Beyer" <j@d.b> wrote in message news:3FB4E2E5.4080905@d.b...
Richard Knoppow
Phenidone tends to make prints with more neutral color
than Metol and developers have somewhat greater capacity. It
is advantageous to those who are sensitive to Metol, which
can cause serious rashes in some and its rather more
environmentally friendly.
Ilford Bromophen is a Phenidone-Hydroquinone developer,
essentially a Phenidone version of Dektol. Agfa makes a
Phenidone-Ascorbic acid print developer, AFAIK the only one
on the market.
--
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dick...@ix.netcom.com
Eduardo Benavidez
> than Metol and developers have somewhat greater capacity. It
> is advantageous to those who are sensitive to Metol, which
> can cause serious rashes in some and its rather more
> environmentally friendly.
> Ilford Bromophen is a Phenidone-Hydroquinone developer,
> essentially a Phenidone version of Dektol. Agfa makes a
> Phenidone-Ascorbic acid print developer, AFAIK the only one
> on the market.
Please tell us your opinion about advantages/disadvantages of
Bromophen against Dektol. Thanks. Eduardo.
Jorge Omar
This is not an opinion re Bromophen X Dektol, but re paper devs using
bromide (Dektol) X devs using benzotiazole (Bromophen?)
Bromide, with some papers, may present a greenish tint I simply dislike.
Not so with benzotriazole ones, that gives a blue-black tone - that, BTW,
I like.
Jorge
bena...@yahoo.com.ar (Eduardo Benavidez) wrote in
news:fb5e6a40.03111...@posting.google.com:
Dan Quinn
While reading a post by Dr. M. Gudzinowicz, I was reminded of the
need for developers of low ph in order to obtain fine grain results.
Patrick Dignan maintains that phenidone can be used in developers
at a lower ph than can metol.
How significant that may be in practice I don't know. That lower
ph does favor phenidone over metol.
BTW, IIRC, Dr. M. G. has mentioned borax in regard to finer grain.
In context I believe he is speaking of the low ph of developers using
borax and the harder emulsions resulting there from. Dan
Jorge Omar
knows, metaborate, help grain due to hardening the emulsion and reducing
swelling.
So, according to my understanding, a carbonate-bicarbonate buffer could
be grainier than borax at the same pH.
This poses an intriguing possibility - increasing borate content of a dev
(say, D-76d) could result in finer grain.
I tried that with an ascorbic-phenidone dev, but it had too short a life
(due to metal impurities in boric acid) and I was unable to do a real
compare. Just to place numbers, there were 50g/liter of boric acid in
it...
Jorge
dan.c...@att.net (Dan Quinn) wrote in
news:b379902d.03111...@posting.google.com:
Jean-David Beyer
If low pH is desireable in a developper, why not use Amidol that can be
used in an acid solution?
--
.~. Jean-David Beyer Registered Linux User 85642.
/V\ Registered Machine 73926.
/( )\ Shrewsbury, New Jersey http://counter.li.org
^^-^^ 9:40pm up 24 days, 20:15, 3 users, load average: 4.05, 4.19, 4.10
Jorge Omar
Thanks,
Jorge
Jean-David Beyer <j@d.b> wrote in news:3FBAD91B.4080204@d.b:
Dennis O'Connor
phenidone, and the grain looks good...
Denny
"Dan Quinn" <dan.c...@att.net> wrote in message > BTW, IIRC, Dr. M. G.
Jean-David Beyer
I have no idea if it was ever used routinely as a film developer. I have
never used amidol, much less acid amidol, as a film developer. It is a
very nice paper developer, but it really has no particular advantage
over D-72 with the bromide replaced by benzotriazole, at least for the
papers I have used.
It might have been used as a film developer; it has been available since
about 1891, so a lot of research would have to be done to answer your
question authoritatively. L.P.Clerc says, in part:
"If ... a weak acid (bisulphite, or boric, lactic, or glycolic acids)
the solution becomes much more stable and the developer can be held for
several days in a dish."
I do know that when I use it for paper, adding a little citric acid
makes it last a lot longer, but I never kept it more than a few hours in
a tray.
L.P.Clerc continues:
"When an amidol developer is acidified to the point where there is no
longer any neutral sulphite in solution, it acts as a depth developer,
the development commencing at the bottom of the emulsion layer." So, in
cases where that kind of development is wanted (possibly in a process
like Kodachrome, but I do not suppose they ever processed Kodachrome
that way) it would have been used. He says this is useful for
overexposed negatives.
--
.~. Jean-David Beyer Registered Linux User 85642.
/V\ Registered Machine 73926.
/( )\ Shrewsbury, New Jersey http://counter.li.org
^^-^^ 8:05am up 25 days, 6:40, 3 users, load average: 3.85, 3.92, 3.54
Jorge Omar
looks good...
Photographers...they hardly agree on anything ((-:
Jorge
"Dennis O'Connor" <doco...@chartermi.net> wrote in
news:vrmqja1...@corp.supernews.com:
Robert Vervoordt
This was used for the early Agfa color reversal films. The
development time was very long; as I recollect, something like 75
minutes.
A fellow named Peckham concocted some unique Amidol film developers,
and Ansel Adams described some uses for film development in at least
one of his books.
Robert Vervoordt, MFA
Bruce Osgood
>, but it [amidol] really has no particular advantage over D-72 with the
bromide replaced by benzotriazole, at least for the
papers I have used.
I would be interested to know if your list of papers includes Ilford MG FB VC -
Warmtone.
Thanks,
Bruce
Brooklyn, N.Y.
Jean-David Beyer
Ilfobrom, Ilford Galerie,
Kodak Polycontrast, Kodak Elite, Oriental Seagull, and maybe a few
others. I never liked warm tone paper (although I have seen some nice
portraits done on Agfa Brovira), and my efforts were to make the tone
colder (less green), not warmer. I tone slightly in KRST, but only to
protect and deepen the shadows, not to get a color change.
--
.~. Jean-David Beyer Registered Linux User 85642.
/V\ Registered Machine 73926.
/( )\ Shrewsbury, New Jersey http://counter.li.org
^^-^^ 2:55pm up 25 days, 13:30, 3 users, load average: 3.67, 3.49, 3.32
John
>> While reading a post by Dr. M. Gudzinowicz, I was reminded of the
>> need for developers of low ph in order to obtain fine grain results.
>> Patrick Dignan maintains that phenidone can be used in developers
>> at a lower ph than can metol.
>> How significant that may be in practice I don't know. That lower
>> ph does favor phenidone over metol.
>> BTW, IIRC, Dr. M. G. has mentioned borax in regard to finer grain.
>> In context I believe he is speaking of the low ph of developers using
>> borax and the harder emulsions resulting there from. Dan
>
>If low pH is desireable in a developper, why not use Amidol that can be
>used in an acid solution?
I doubt if pH would effect the granularity of the image that Amidol
develops as much as it does with developers such as D-23 and D-76.
Regards,
John S. Douglas - Photographer, Webmaster & Computer Tech
Please remove the "_" when replying via email
Website --- http://www.darkroompro.com
Dan Quinn
>
> If low pH is desireable in a developper, why not use Amidol that can be
> used in an acid solution?
I've not come across any suggestion or formula where in amidol would
be used in a film developer. Perhaps it is too strong an agent. Dan
Michael Scarpitti
There are some old ones around, by Agfa and others.
brook
>
> I've not come across any suggestion or formula where in amidol would
> be used in a film developer. Perhaps it is too strong an agent. Dan
None other than Formula #1 in the Darkroom Cookbook.
Sodium sulfite 20g
Amidol 5g
water to make 1 liter
Its a low contrast water bath developer acording to the text.
In the Film Development Cookbook its said to have been popular in the
30's for low contrast. Adams "Moon rise over Hernandez" was apparantly
developed in an amidol water bath.
Brook
Jean-David Beyer
development, 30 seconds in developer, 2 minutes in water, a sequence of
10 iterations. He later intensified the lower portion of the negative in
IN-5.
--
.~. Jean-David Beyer Registered Linux User 85642.
/V\ Registered Machine 73926.
/( )\ Shrewsbury, New Jersey http://counter.li.org
^^-^^ 3:10pm up 26 days, 13:45, 2 users, load average: 2.15, 2.14, 2.09
John
For one, Gordon Hutchins added it to PMK. I'm sure there are others though
I think you are correct as I seem to remember that Amidol was known to produce
significant levels of fog.
brook
> Ansel Adams said he developped it in dilute D-23 using water bath
> development, 30 seconds in developer, 2 minutes in water, a sequence of
> 10 iterations. He later intensified the lower portion of the negative in
> IN-5.
Oops, I was looking at a paragraph in the Film Development Cook book,
not The Negative. I stand corrected.
Brook
Dan Quinn
So who's correct Ansel or Anchell or Troop? Maybe somebody else needs
the standing corrected. Dan
P. MacGahan
> Forget Metol! Ban Teflon! According to NBC's latest exposé, ...
> determine that Teflon will ignite and burn furiously in a 100% oxygen
> atmosphere and that it makes a reasonable explosive when mixed with lithium
> powder. So I guess we are really in trouble if we ever encounter these
> conditions. Also - don't breathe the combustion products - it may burn your
> lungs or make you want to photograph. To test these theories, just heat you
> frying pan to 600 degrees F.
>
> Truly, dr bob
> Messing about in photographic chemicals since 1947.
powder, in a pure oxygen atmosphere, and heat it to 600F ... has anyone
ever survived this?
Jorge Omar
Jorge
p2mac...@compuserve.com (P. MacGahan) wrote in
news:332944ce.03112...@posting.google.com: