Thanks Andy! You hit on a question I've had for a long time. Lately I've been experimenting with developers for Fuji X-ray film, which uses their version of T-grain structure. Looks like a densitometer is almost necessary for such experiments. Your music is great!
I've got some FX 39 II I'm going to experiment with. Trying to decide if I want to use FX 39 or Tmax RS on my roll of TMX 400; both at 1:9. I liked the XTOL results, need to make it myself though, purchased xtol makes too much waste for me since I don't use very much before it expires.
I’m continually wondering why so much emphasis is placed on examining differences between film developers. 90% of the time I’m seeing almost identical results. I suppose the very slight differences would be accentuated if making prints were the goal, but there are an almost infinite number of variables in the photographic process - shooting, developing, printing or scanning, etc., to control contrast, brightness and overall tone. I guess I’m nowhere near as critical in my thinking and judgement of image “quality”.
If the differences between developers aren't important to you, then there's nothing wrong with sticking to one like rodinal or Xtol or D76. However, for people who make fine prints or print often, it is important how dense the highlights come out, what EI the film is with that developer, how large the grain is, and how sharp the image is. All of those factors change with every developer and you might want to play around with your options as you make creative decisions.
The FX 37 song is the best. Love it. As always great method backed by great humor.
Thank you! I really appreciate it!
Thanks Andy! You hit on a question I've had for a long time.
Lately I've been experimenting with developers for Fuji X-ray film, which uses their version of T-grain structure. Looks like a densitometer is almost necessary for such experiments.
Your music is great!
I've got some FX 39 II I'm going to experiment with. Trying to decide if I want to use FX 39 or Tmax RS on my roll of TMX 400; both at 1:9. I liked the XTOL results, need to make it myself though, purchased xtol makes too much waste for me since I don't use very much before it expires.
I still like the Xtol results better. Looked to me there was slightly more snap to it, as well as finer grain.
Of course you know what you've done now
You have to make songs for all the other developers you use 😶
You brought it on yourself
😄
I’m continually wondering why so much emphasis is placed on examining differences between film developers. 90% of the time I’m seeing almost identical results. I suppose the very slight differences would be accentuated if making prints were the goal, but there are an almost infinite number of variables in the photographic process - shooting, developing, printing or scanning, etc., to control contrast, brightness and overall tone. I guess I’m nowhere near as critical in my thinking and judgement of image “quality”.
If the differences between developers aren't important to you, then there's nothing wrong with sticking to one like rodinal or Xtol or D76. However, for people who make fine prints or print often, it is important how dense the highlights come out, what EI the film is with that developer, how large the grain is, and how sharp the image is. All of those factors change with every developer and you might want to play around with your options as you make creative decisions.
It's just out of curiosity