The photographs I made were not very exciting, but it still turned out to be a great photo walk. I ran into Marco Wikstrom who is a member of our New Mexico Film Photographers group as well as a participant in the co-op which runs a photography gallery in Old Town. I walked with him to the gallery which he was going to open for the day. We looked at his photos which he has on exhibit now, and we talked about a couple of his current projects which include an upcoming trip to New Zealand.
On the way home I cut through Tiguex Park and came upon our friend Lana who was a neighbor and the first friend we made when we move to Albuquerque over ten years ago. Lana and a friend were walking their dogs. She recalled that I had made a picture of her and her dog, Buddy, some time ago and asked if I would make some more to bring things up to date. So I did.
 |
| Buddy |
I have been getting some thin negatives from my home development, so I decided to process semi-stand in 5ml of HC-110 in 650ml of distilled water. It is hard to mess up with that combination and the negatives looked ok, but I may abandon HC-110 even though it has been a long-time favorite.
In looking around on the web I have found that a lot of people are reporting problems with a number of Kodak developers including TMAX, HC-110 and Xtol. Kodak has apparently had to make changes in the chemical components of the developers which has degraded both longevity and effectiveness. Fortunately, there are alternatives. I have Rodinal and PMK Pyro for black and white, and I am happy enough at present with Cinestill C-41 for color work. I may also try LegacyPro LMAX from Freestyle which is said to be identical to TMAX developer before it was altered.
6 comments:
Ansel Adams-like clouds in some of those shots!
We often get nice clouds over the Sandia Mountains, but I never seem to be in the right place to capture them on film. Yesterday and today some heavy weather blew in from Arizona and there were a lot of nice clouds right overhead.
I personally swear by XTOL. As long as its mixed with distilled water initially, and diluted as needed (Also with distilled water), it'll hold for at least a year. I've never had density issues with XTOL, though it is a speed boosting developer, so it generally produces negatives with a bit more shadow detail. It also is incredibly competitive with HC110 in terms of price, when diluted 1+3. Never tried HC110, so I can't speak to what's wrong with your batch.
I've never used XTOL, but I have seen very nice work done with it. The personal experience I was reporting was with HC-110. The issue with a number of Kodak developers is recent changes in the chemical components. There is an extensive discussion of changes in results from various Kodak developers in a forum thread at rangefinderforum.com entitled "New Xtol not the same" (https://rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=170004).
Just checked, and also did a Google search. That really sucks. My newest 5L batch of Xtol was made yesterday from my old package version, so I guess I can't even comment on the current reliability of the new Xtol. As people in that forum mention, EcoPro Ascorbic Acid is functionally interchangeable, at only a dollar above the price for Xtol. I can't believe that Kodak would let this happen so early into this revision of all their chemicals. Guess I'll cherish my old formula Xtol for as long as I can, hopefully long enough for Kodak to sort out what I'll be referring to as "The Great Developer Kodaclysm". It seems that Kodak have at least acknowledged the problem on their Facebook. https://www.facebook.com/kodakprofessional/photos/a.272982146053466/3010366608981659/?type=3&theater
Yes, very disappointing. I was interested in trying xtol, but hesitated because of the requirement to purchase in large quantity. Now it seems I need to look at some other possibilities. I have never been one to look in detail at the chemical properties of any of my developers. If it works and I like it, I am fine.
Post a Comment