Seems like it might be a waste of water no?

Thank you good sir!!

I wonder if watered down tooth paste on a white glove would polish it out. I used this method on a plastic motorcycle head light the once.

Is it 10% reduction of the print exposure in RC paper as well, or is it a different value? I did do film photography and development 30 years ago. I have just bought some 35mm and 6x6 and 6x9 cameras and a 6x6 B&W enlarger, film loaders. Just got to get film, paper and chemicals to get me started now. Nice videos

Hiya John. Thanks for this. I've done similar tests with other developers and now want to play about with the 510Ptro. If I find anything interesting I'll give you a shout. Best wishes from The Rhondda.

This comment is about BT2B. In one batch I prepared the developer, I missed to correct the sodium metaborate tetrahydrate concentration against the octahydrate in Bath B and used the whole 12 g/L. I have developed a role of Eastman 5222 exposed at 200 iso in both Sunny and overcasted situations . The film came out to be amazing with contrast and the tonal range even a little increase in film speed. Same thing I have observed for foma 200 (exposed at 160) and kentmere 400 (exposed at 400) but double X was the best. Double X developed for 4 min in bath A with initial 30 sec with continuous agitation then 10 sec every minute. In bath B 4 min with first 10 sec (4 inversion) continuous and one inversion every min. Requesting your opinion on this.

You are so spot on, those 3 are what I've tried to make same way every time, including how roughly I do agitation and how many turns I do. Trying out every combination of agitation is impossible so it needs some limiting. I've had repeatable density differences below 0.05 with keeping parameters same. Part of that is due to aging developer and needs adjusting over time. In practice that means every standard contrast image exposed right prints on grade 2. I love that when I try FX55 I have a baseline and may not need to test every parameter myself (although my agitation may differ from yours)

How about stand development? I did a film with Parodinal 1:100 stand 1 hour and I was amazed by the skies.

I bought one of these new about 40+ years ago. I used it regularly for about 25 years until I invested in a large vertical slot washer. I still use it for smaller prints and small batches. They jet water out at an angle, which will set up a circular water rotation in a wash tray. This seems prints separated. They are quite sensitive to volume of water flow. Too low a flow will not sustain the syphon operation. They have a sweet spot for flow rate, which you just have to find by trial and error.

I just had to comment. I’ve watched several RU-vid tutorials about this, and no one else has come even close to explaining it as well as you have. They all miss bits out, assuming that people know a certain amount about developing, eg terms, etc. Thank you so much for this video, I now feel much more confident for when my developing tank arrives. Liked and subscribed 🙏

Hi, I have bought a couple of my most used sizes of measuring cylinders from a laboratory supply store. They are the cheaper versions class B which means the tolerance is +/- 1% i.e +/- 1ml per 100ml. The tolerance is marked on the cylinder in those. I think that should be accurate enough even for diluted Rodinal in a 10ml or 25ml cylinder. Br, Eeli

Hi, it would be interesting to see this kind of comparison with Xtol. Br, Eeli from Finland

Potassium metabisulfate will work the same?

I have a dry mount press that will do 16x20 prints. Works like a champ

Thank you for sharing, so much to learn? I haven't mixed my own developer yet. FX55 will be the one. Have you tried it with Kodak 400TX?

I had never seen one of these before. Interesting action I learn something every time I look at one of your videos, so thanks for that

John, thank you for making such wonderful videos. This developer plus the meticulous testing gave me such a wow moment today pulling my negatives out of the tank.

I have one and I really like it for preliminary washing, i.e. after the fix, one or 2 prints at a time. But I am not sure how efficiently the wash is when several prints are in the tray. From the design it seems that the water is siphoned off the surface but not as well deeper into the tray. Those holes are just below the water output. If you place the siphon further down then it washes more efficiently, but the water is not as deep, limiting the number of prints that you can place in the tray.

When I was a naive novice printer, I got one of these in an old setup I bought. I didn't know what it was, so I gave it away. Felt terrible when I found out later on. Anyway, I now use a dehypo print washer in my utility sink and it works fantastic for my needs. But I'm always on the lookout for another one of these!

Thank you! :)

Great device. I managed to find one and mostly figure it out. Nice to see it demonstrated. I’m thinking there must be an optimal depth of tray. If used in a deep tray, would you miss drawing heavy fixer residue from the bottom? When using one, I noticed that it makes a nice horizontal current that goes across the surface of the prints. Thanks for another helpful video.

I remember using one of these when I helped my father out in the darkroom, over fifty years ago. really well designed equipment. Essential if you are doing a run of 100 prints or more.

I do belive deville (french manufacter) still makes a siphone. I'm still on the fence on getting one, as I feel the use up a fair bit of water. I've still only done RC-paper in my darkroom. As i don't have a setup for washing fibre in a proper way. Do you have a sense of how it's for washing multiple papers at once? And how long you need to wash, to remove the fixer?

Have had one for many years, great design.

I have two or three is very usefull

Interesting product, never seen one. It would be more efficient probably with more water dump when siphoning. Now it is not that much different from having water constantly overflow.

There has to be a way to reduce the amount of water used in the development process. Water is perhaps the one resource everyone takes for granted, but aquifers are dwindling rapidly. I love everything about photography except for the tremendous fresh water use.

After viewing the video I remembered I have one of those, somewhere? I dug threw a couple of boxes and found 2! Not sure if I'll use 1 and keep 1 for a spare or maybe sell both or one.

I purchased one in Canada, it was quite expensive then (1980's) many years ago and wouldn't let it go for any money

been looking for one for months! so hard to find near me, and very expensive for shipping online

No way I was looking at one of them I am sure you will be able 3d print them? Probably be more expensive 😂

I’m sure some enterprising fellow can design and 3D print one if it’s no longer available.

One on ebay

Hello, John. Firstcall Photographic do one from America, Deville they're called, £69.00, though?!

Thank you for your tutorials, very well explained and great content :)

Thank you for your videos, John. They are amazing. I have an old Kodak tri-x pan film , which expired more than 40 years ago. Developing in D76 (1+2) gets it developed but with a very heavy base fog. Is there any way to eliminate this base fog of such an old film ?

What of the idea of making contact sheets at maximum black?

Interesting. I tried semi stand on an old verichrome pan 120 found in a 6x4.5 folding I bought. I had no clue so i shot it at plus 2 ev and developed it in rodinal 1/100 for one hour with initial agitation and again once at 30 minutes. Quite flat but usable and no bromide drag as far as I can tell, but it's easier to see on 35mm because of the holes.

Going to have to buy your book thanks again man you a legend I have learnt more of you than I did in my HND 😂

I was wondering what you can do with negatives that have drying marks on them? Re-wash them and repeat the process? I also thought your idea of running the hot water in the shower first was a great idea. I have a negative that is particularly important to me and unfortunately it has a lot of drying marks on it that are showing up in the prints, so I must do something with this negative. Thank you again for another great video!

These tutorials are amazing.

Im not sure what im doing wrong but when I use semistand development with 510 pyro on medium format I get dark spots on one side of the film form what I assume is air bubbles? Seems to only occur when I develop on 120 (haven't had problems on 35mm). Am I just not tapping the tank hard enough? Never have this problem with Rodinal stand development either. Only 510 pyro. Any thoughts on how I could fix this?

Thanks John maximum respect

Slightly off topic but recent experiments using semi stand development resulted in very noticeable differences. I had purchased 100 ft roll of Kentmere Pan 400 for a general purpose film but the grain was near unacceptable. No developer really made much of a difference until….I used a weak solution of Tmax developer 1-15 @ 21c for 30 minutes and only 3 agitations every 10 minutes. It was like magic turning this film from grainy to non grainy. I tried to speed up the process by dropping to 20 minutes and longer agitation resulting in noticeably increased grain. I appreciate all the good advice John.

Thanks mate

That's very interesting, if FX 55 is "optimised" and does not benefit from reduced development what about Rodinal? It is well known that reducing agitation and diluting Rodinal works. Is Rodinal "optimised " at 1+50 with 3 minute agitation cycles? You now have me thinking about "optimising " developers. 😀

Dear John, Thank you for this great lesson in photographic chemistry. Can you please tell me if I can use in stand mode the Bellini Hydrofen (which replicates the studional)? If yes, at what dilution and time will I develop my film? Best wishes, Edoardo

Another well explained video in both the spoken and written form The classroom approach works well in certain instances. Just something that has struck me after seeing several videos from several sources is that I have decided that more contrast has more impact for me so that the print from the reduced agitatíon and increased time actually looked better for me It drew my eye to it more. Only a personal observation on my part as I agree that the reduced agitation per se was not an improvement in terms of what the video was testing

I really like your videos! What do you think about rotary development? I use it with Xtol 1+1, I like the consistency and that I can move away from it. Would FX55 also be a good option for rotary development?

Hi John! Let me start by saying that I've developed my first roll of film with the help of your great book. I'm excited to keep on developing! I also couldn't help but notice a D700 being photographed today. Any thoughts on it? Cheers!