Thanks!

You should look at PMK, WD2D, Pyrocat, and Dixactol too. All excellent modern pyro developers! It's come a long way since those days.

Thank you Rolando! Good news.

Absolutely, Steve, more to come on this channel.

Excellent!

Ha!

I'm very pleased you're enjoying the videos. 510 is the bees knees!

@@PictorialPlanet what I did realise js that my Ilford Rapid Fixer is not recommended. Now on the hunt for more raw chemicals, 👍

@@redtreephotography4197 Did you find the chemicals you needed?

@@PictorialPlanet yes I did. Already mixed although yet to use. But now I'm not sure if I should just mix some FX-55 or something else given your subsequent videos! ;-)

Ha! Go for it, I still use 510. It's more versatile at the end of the day and simpler to use.

Thanks for your detailed comment, normusarms, and the formula for an alkaline fix. I’d like to pick up on your comment about TMax films and their purple tinge. I like that you explain it’s a washing issue and not a fix issue. I agree completely and using a hypoclear solution, like your sodium sulphite, for 2 minutes and wash again, is the way to remove most, if not all, the tinge. For other readers, one can also use sodium carbonate or sodium bicarbonate also - same dilution.

@@PictorialPlanet I have not tried this but I read on a forum that putting Tmax negatives in direct sunlight also clears the purple cast. Obviously uv light at work. To be honest I have not found the purple cast any hinderence to making prints. Just to satisfy your own curiosity it may be a good idea to cut a film in half and develop one half in alkaline fix and the other in Hypam and compare the stain. I enjoyed your video and your book, regards Peter Norman

Frankly, I can't remember but with this development technique I suspect I measured the shadows and let the developer do the compensation. If you are photographing a snow scene, and using regular development, try placing the snow in zone 8. Thus is just right to get that white snow with just a touch of detail and nuance. Let the shadows fall where they fall. They are usually fine because the snow reflects light into them lifting them a tad.

Hi Alvaro, thanks for the comment. Yes, semi-stand really keeps the ‘zen’ in developing. The 20 minutes will get you in the ballpark for many stocks and then just tweak to taste. Slower films will need slightly less, faster slightly more. Also, the iso should be about box speed with 510... this was FP4+ shot at iso 100. Love the comments, keep them coming.

If it's too cold in the room (or hot) I use a water bath but with stand development temperature isn't as crucial. Just try to keep it around 20C (or whatever your chosen temperature is).

That's food for thought Chris. I'll add it to my list. Always wanting to hear from viewers what they might want. Cheers!

@@PictorialPlanet I’ll second that request. I have a hybrid workflow, shooting film but scanning and then printing via inkjet printer.

Hi Kit! Thanks for your kind comments. This video should give you a good starting point.

Hi Doug! 510-Pyro and semi-stand really works well. If you pre-rinse there’s no problem. I don’t pre-rinse. This is usually recommended for more powerful dilutions where uneven development might take place or for temperature control, something I do if the darkroom is very cold when I start. I’ve found, with 510 at 1+200, and more, there’s no need (on the uneven development front) and the 1 minutes initial agitation seems to do a good job of saturating the emulsion evenly. I’ve never had a problem with this, Rodinal, or Pyrocat-hd, all with semi-stand or full stand. Thanks for your comments!

Yes, very applicable. You will have to perfect the timing of course, to suit that particular film, but the concept is valid for any film.

Thanks for your comment, Austen! I'm sure I'll enjoy your vlog! Once the pyro developer is diluted it's a one-shot because it quickly oxidises. I really appreciate you subscribing and I'll take a look at yours :)

Hi Jerry You should have had decent negatives so I'd suspect something went wrong with the developer mix. Did the developer come out of the tank at the end the usual colour?

When you speak of "under developed"...did the negatives look "muddy"? Describe a little more... Were the negatives very thin (this indicates problem with the developer)? T-grain (tabular) emulsions (Delta and Kodak T-Max) - tend to have negatives that look flat and muddy, unlike classic cubic grain found in TriX. FP4+ HP5+. This is inherent in the grain. I also developed some Delta 100 and the negatives looked somewhat underwhelming, while with TriX the negatives looked stunning. In fact I developed both films one after the other. T-grain is designed to be processed and done right the positives come out very nice.

One more thing..what dilution did you use? if you use low dilution it is always good practice to increase your volume substantially (40% more), otherwise there is risk of developer being exhausted. It may be your developer was exhausted... I usually use the large two roll paterson tank for semi stand and put in between 600 to 700 ml developer fluid. In fact having more developer volume is always good practice even for normal development - developer is cheap, negatives are not.

Hi, Delta and Tmax films do not perform well with extreme dilute developers due to the high amount of restrainer in them. Use 510 Pyro 1:100 and the Zone Imaging recommended respective timings for either the intermittent or semi stand agitation methods and you will find your results to come out perfectly

This is a technique passed on to me by Jay DeFehr and has proved very good with my films FP4 and HP5. I expect it will work with many others too. You might need to fine tune your total time to get the contrast you like (I use a diffuser enlarger). Expect good acutance and microcontrast due to local developer exhaustion between agitations. I think Fred Picker would say "try it".

Same dilution, just increased proportionately to 500ml (or 600ml if the math is easier). 120 film development times are the same as 135.

Thanks Bernard. I leave my film on the reel when using wetting agent. I wash the reel and tank well after I’m finished and that, together with a clean with a toothbrush occasionally, has kept my reels running smoothly for donkey’s years.

Hi Gary and thanks for your compliment. I'm hardly worthy but I'll take it! 510-Pyro is not a developer that's replenished and is used as one shot dilutions. This is a good question and makes me realise that I should be more specific in my descriptions. Thanks for that insight my friend.

Thanks for your comment. Because of the reduction in agitation it's not exactly double the time. I'd try 20 minutes and agitate at 10. It'll be trial and error for a couple of films until you get the negs you like.

Thanks for your kind words. For using Pyrocat as a semi-stand developer check out my website.

Hi Daniel and thanks for your comment. I don’t recommend a presoak as I’ve found it makes no noticeable difference. It’s sometimes mentioned as a way to stop uneven development with more concentrate (and therefore more intense) developers like PMK but with 510 there’s no need - this is my own experience. Bromide drag is a concern with stand/semi-stand development but a lot depends on how much the developing agent reacts (is slowed down) by the natural bromide by-products of reduction. Of the three developers I use for semi-stand, that is Rodinal (1+100 or 200), 510-Pyro (1:200 to 300), and Pyrocat-HD (2+2+500), I’ve seen no bromide drag. However, if one uses metol based developers for this technique they will find there’s much more of a problem with bromide drag (I wonder if diafine uses metol?). A good pyrocatechin developer, that will last as long as 510-pyro is Pyrocat-HD in glycol.

@@PictorialPlanet Hi John, thanks for your detailed answer! Re Diafine - I know that there is hydroquinone in sol A, but the full recipe is not officially disclosed (though there are unofficial formulas circulating on the net). I plan to make some side by side testing of 510-pyro and OA, I will shoot two rolls of 120 negative (same scene using two different camera backs) and will further test standard development with agitation once every minute and semi-stand development. Once again thanks!

It's a good starting point for your HP5

Good question and hard to answer. I haven't tried them all plus people have their own favourites. Mine is FP4 Plus.

I use nitrile gloves when using these developers - you want to keep them off your skin. I wear a mask and goggles only when making the developers from dry ingredients.

@@PictorialPlanet Thank you so much. I've read about the dangers of the powdered variants. I purchased the eye protection assuming that this was still something I wanted to keep away from my eyes, even in liquid form. I was literally about to skip the nitrile gloves until I read your response. Phew!

These tests should be carried out for any developer, even staining such as 510. However, if you use stand development it might be harder but semi-stand can be calibrated. If you use a water stop bath your calibration will take that into account but you must water stop the same way every time.

@@PictorialPlanet Thanks of the detailed reply. I use a few cameras and am looking at purchasing an older less expensive analogue meter to match with my development and also get more accurate incident readings. I've read that these can drift of over time and may not be 100% accurate and looked into calibration but then it occurred to me that once the meter, film speed and development are locked in for open shadows and good highlights the meter accuracy becomes irrelevant.. so long as its consistent. Am I on the right track?

Yes, you are spot on! The reason we use one meter for our lock-in is to negate any slight error our meter might be giving us. You will automatically be compensating for meter age. I recommend a spot/incident meter if you can get one as it will enable more accurate zone work.

@@PictorialPlanet Don't suppose you know how temperature and agitation affect the speed one might achieve with a particular film and developer combination? I always use 20C with 30 seconds slow inversions to star then 10 seconds on the minute...

If you shoot with HP5 then use 510, they work really well together. If you shoot with PANF use Pyrocat, they are a great couple. I love Perceptol and used it for quite a while but staining developers are better. You should try pyrocat and PMK so you have experience of them too before deciding on which I gives you the look you want.

Good question. PMK needs a lot of agitation because it's prone to uneven development. In fact it's one of the few developers that recommends agitation every 15 seconds (although I gave safely used 30 seconds). But why don't you try stand development with it Rolando?

@@PictorialPlanet Yes I 'll give it a try. Thank you

No, I rarely pre-wash. PMK can cause uneven development without a pre-wash but most developers are ok without. Now, if I need to bring the developing tank up to temperature then I pre-wash.

LFN is a trademark for an Ilfotol type wetting agent. It's my preferred wetting agent.

Mmmmm... definition of an eco developer. Well, I do pour mine down the sink and I have a sceptic tank. But to have an eco developer you would be looking at a vitamin-c developer like FX55 or Xtol (or one of its clones). That would be the safest bet.

Here I have demonstrated the simplest method of semi-stand which will give good results and no bromide drag based on tip "Starting with 510-Pyro" page 142 of my latest book. However, in my book I go into more detail with an extreme minimal agitation technique p149 and Casework: Ogham Stone. My website has good but sometimes older information from over the last 16 years. I add interesting info to the website to help photographers but have focused on my book. Both work well but for the best info buy my book which I have just updated to the 5th edition.

I fixed the website, thanks for that heads-up :) Feedback like this helps me a lot to keep everything synced up. Thanks again!

I looked at the film after 20 seconds to see if it had cleared and returned it to the fixer until twice the clearing time. All films are fully fixed after twice the clearing time.

@@PictorialPlanet does it mean you’re fixing twice longer than usually? Sorry I’m not a native speaker.

Good idea with the final rinse.

Yes, you can use the same time for both although with more use you can fine tune your times for each.

@@PictorialPlanet Thank you for the reply! I am still a bit of a beginner when it comes to developing and printing and your channel has been extremely helpful for learning. Probably the best film photography channel on youtube

I really don't know Justy. That's a pretty old and awesome film! If you have enough of it you could try some tests but I really can't give you any timings for it, sorry.

@@PictorialPlanet I appreciate your reply thanks

@@justyjust you could try a 1:300 or 1:500 full stand development for an hour in 510-Pyro. That would be my guess for a starting point. Or you could try Rodinal 1:100 stand for an hour.

Yes, it starts to deteriorate within a few minutes.The way I use it is to mix it, make sure it's at the correct temperature, and use it. It's all within five minutes.

@@PictorialPlanet Thank you for the information. 🙂

Hi Jerry. Sure you can, and as a starting place for development times reduce time by 5% to 10% per degree above 20C. Adjust to taste from there. Start with 5% with a test film to see if you like that first.

Thank you so much Sir. I will try that. I will let you know the results. Thanks again for your time , help, and videos. Stay safe. Jerry.

Other ways around here. Water comes out about 9-11°C. And once brought to 20°it cools rapidly to 17° room temp...😄

Hi Adrian! Yes, the twizzle stick works fine with this way of developing. To help get rid of air bells use a little more developer (100 ml more is good) and rap it after the initial agitation. See my agitation video for rapping.

Oh, and bromide drag is unusual with 510 unless the concentration is too high. I would say a minimum of 1+200 is great for stand and semi-stand. Try mix 510-Pyro 1+200 with distilled water. • Develop for a total of 25 minutes @ 20c. • Agitate for the first minute, then 10 seconds every 7 minutes (that is minutes 7, 13, and 20). Then at 25 minutes stop with three agitated water rinses at 20C and fix. This is for Ilford FP4+ at EI of 100.

@@PictorialPlanet thanks I’ll give it a try

Hello John-Paul. I mostly use Ilford films and enjoy the results on these very much but have no reason to doubt this wouldn't work on other films too.

@@PictorialPlanet I did try your stand development method of FP4+ in 510-Pyro and it worked great!

Wonderful! Thanks for letting us know.

Hi Zab! Check out later videos, especially Getting the best from PanF

@@PictorialPlanet I will, thank you.

Oh excellent! Somehow I did not notice that one. Great information, thank you.

Hi Chacker I'm afraid I don't have any experience with 510 and CMS20II. However, you might reach out to Rüdiger Hartung who blogs here: experimentelle-fotografie.blogspot.com/2017/09/jay-de-fehrs-510-pyro-der-entwickler.html?m=1 He might have tested it. I know he's done a lot of work with 510 and many films. Secondly, for years there was talk about pyro stains and VC papers and I did much testing and in my opinion 510 stain is not detrimental to multi grade paper and the various contrast filters. I use it all the time with multi grade and love the results. I have to try CMS20II now!

@@PictorialPlanet Thank you John! Yesterday I put my first roll of Delta 100 into 510 and it came out well. This stain looks good :) Currently I'm scanning and the photos do look very promising. In the Afternoon I might try how they print in the darkroom... Regarding the CMS20 - Oh yes. It's really worth a try! Be aware of finding dust that was hiding in the grain in all other films before. If you like, have a look at my channel. I made three videos with CMS20 impressions. Greetings Chris

@@chacker I'll check it out!

@@PictorialPlanet Hello John, good news! I made my first roll of Delta 100 having a bath in 510-Pyro - 7 minutes/rotary proces 1+100. Also I applied your "match your film ISO to developer tip" and got slightly more than ISO80. Had only 1/2 stops to work with. I'm very pleased with the results in terms of grain and highlights separation and will go on with playing around with this developer. Thanks again for sharing your experience here! Greetings, Chris

Hi Rolando! Thanks for your comment. My preferred way to use 510 is on page 149. Defehr shared that method with me and it's very nice. Give it a try, otherwise follow this video.

@@PictorialPlanet thank you for you answer ❤️

Straight from my book, my preferred method is: For FP4 and HP5. Mix 510-Pyro 1+200 with distilled water. • Develop for a total of 25 minutes @ 20c. • Agitate for the first minute, then 10 seconds every 7 minutes (that is on minutes 7, 13, and 20). This was shared with me by Defehr. Adjust your time for your taste.

Perfect, thank you John, I’ll give this a go this week with HP5!

Thanks John, followed your recipe for HP5 plus all went well !!

Excellent

Yes, this works with any fix. You're over fixing at the moment with 4 mins. Are you using stop bath?

@@PictorialPlanet truthfully not until now :-) as for the 4mins its the time on the bottle so went with that until I saw this video. So adding a stop in between then about 15 or so seconds fix then dip and until clear.

Definitely start using stop bath, I have a video on making your own from white vinegar. This doesn't just stop the development promptly but stops any development happening when you open the tank after 15-30 seconds in fixer. It also mitigates possible staining of your negatives. Highly recommended. Remember, time the film in the fixer and fix for a total of twice the clearing time, that is twice the time it took for the milkiness to go between the frames. If you don't see milkiness (quite possible with newly made fixer) fix for one minute.

@@PictorialPlanet I watched your vinegar stop bath video a couple of days ago and have bought a bottle for my next development. Thank you so much for the advise and looking forward to my copy of your book to keep by my side in the studio (shed) 👍😁📷

No, never tried it.

Hi, I recommend you to look at the 510 Pyro technical data sheet, there is a time for pushing HP5 to 1600

Good question Thomas. My larger Paterson tank (used for 1x120 or 2x135) can take 600ml of developer easily and this is what I'd use for 2x135 films. That guarantees you'll have enough developer.

@@PictorialPlanet I use steel tanks and reels and the one I have that fits 2 x 135 films takes 500ml. But with 2 reels it actually doesn't quite get the full 500ml in. I do have a larger one that can take up to 4 reels 135 or 2 in 120. I could use that but don't like the idea of the reels sliding back and forth when agitating. Would you suggest to put the 2 135 reels on the bottom and an empty 120 reel on top to keep them from sliding? And should I fill it to the top or just use 600ml?

I'd place an empty 120 reel above the two 135 reels and use 600ml.

I don't know said fixer, sorry

If it is acidic - then it is not recommended..you can check whether the fixer is acidic or not using an acid/base strip.

Shouldn't you be telling Martin?

@@PictorialPlanet you are right of course lol. But I've just done one based on your stand dev video and its not good either! Would say better but still not good. Am getting a strange pattern on the film! The two rolls I've done we shot on the same RB67 and the same back. Am going to dev a third roll today shot on a different camera same film as before HP5. Its either bad film as its out of date but refrigerated or its some thing else. It's a motteling effect bizarre.

Mottling is usually bad film in my experience. Sorry to hear that.

@@PictorialPlanet Right! Many thanks. I've noticed one or two frames are perfectly clear of it. BTW I am using Ilford Rappid Fix as from what I've seen online many are saying it works well enough! Got no idea where to get alkaline fix from.

@@PictorialPlanet Mr Finch you were correct we film!!! I ran son retro 400s through it. Came out perfect! Thanks :-)

You should probably pose that question to a 510-Pyro group. This channel covers many good developers that have a multitude of attributes. A similar question might be "Are there any occasions that you wouldn't want use Ilford Delta 100?"

@@PictorialPlanet I see what you are saying, that it is subjective. I have not used this developer and I was thinking about Rodinal, which works more fine grained while still enhancing sharpness and acutance, and that is what made me think of using it with lower speed films. I am going to use 510 Pyro the next time I develop and find out for myself! Thank you for all the great info you share in your videos!

For me, 510 is good with faster films in 35mm where it controls the grain well. A little like D23 but sharper. For slower films I like other developers with Rodinal being one of them. Right now I've been using Pan F developed in Prescysol. It's giving me some lovely photographs.

@@PictorialPlanet That’s great to know. Thank you so much. I look forward to developing with 510 Pyro for sure.

It does sound too strong. For a Paterson development tank (35mm or 120) I use 500ml water + 2 1/2 ml Rodinal developer. Both films (120 and 35mm) have the same surface area to be developed so you'll have enough developer.

Adox website: If you are using high dilutions and small developing tanks, make sure to apply at least 5 ml of concentrated developer to each 35mm film of 120 ten. Sheet films require 5 ml of concentrate for every 4 supports of 4×5 or one sheet

Yes, I've read this too but in my experience it's not required.

Yes, just warm it up and the water will evaporate.

Are the dark spots all along one side or spread across the film randomly?

@@PictorialPlanet It is just on one side. The side at the top of the tank

@alexanderpedranti6278 definitely sounds like bubbles being trapped by the reel. Harder tapping might do it, especially after the first few agitation cycles. Make sure you are using enough developer to cover the reel and then some. Try using 600ml if you are presently using 500ml. This adds more pressure to release the bubbles when you tap-tap. Another idea would be to scrub the reel with warm water and a toothbrush, just in case it's contaminated.

@@PictorialPlanet Thank you for the suggestions, I will try that out next time!

Yep, that'll do it. Btw , my 35mm Paterson tank, which says it needs 290ml for a 35mm film actually will take over 500ml liquid. Yours might too. For the 120 tank with 120 film you should use the 600 ml so 3ml Rodinal to 600ml water.

@@PictorialPlanet 👍

Thanks for that .

I, sorry

Do you know who put that time in the Massive Dev Chart?

@@PictorialPlanet No clue!

@@PictorialPlanet Got this from Digitaltruth web page abt Dev Chart: "..Continually updated, the chart has been online since 1995 and contains both manufacturer's published times and user submissions. All data is curated for accuracy using multiple source verification and actual user feedback."

What was the dev chart agitation?

The internet is full of nonsensical development times and iso ratings for a variety of film and developer combinations. Very much depends on who put the times up. I cross reference any times found on the internet, with as many sources with photo examples to see what the heck the guy was shooting and what was the end result was.

No Frank, I have not. Have you and is it a good pyro developer? I'd love to hear about it.

@@PictorialPlanet I haven't yet. But it's on my photography to-do list, along with 510-Pyro.

Hi Daniel. No, 510 has never given me issues of bromide drag. If I’m doing a semi-stand development I use 1+200 minimum dilution or more. Keeping a developer weaker tends to reduce the chance of bromide drag but some developers are just more prone to this problem. Metol, for instance, is effected a lot my bromide, so trying stand development with D76 is going to be a problem. Pyrogallol (510) is less affected by bromide. Here’s the thing, don’t let previous problems stop you from experimenting :) Go for it!

@@PictorialPlanet I'm going to give it a shot.

@@PictorialPlanet One more question about 510 semi-stand: Is the 1+200 and 20 minutes good for HP5 or Delta 100? Massive Dev Chart doesn't show a 1+200 time for either of those.

You’ll have to tweak the length of development to get the contrast you like.

Other comments?

Good morning Thomas! I'm sorry about your negatives. Of course it is possible that you have a bad batch but there's other ways to tell. Firstly, I would ask if you used the correct dilution, 1+200? Some folk have tried this with 1+500 and have washed out negatives. Secondly I'd ask if the developer works properly with a regular development of 1+100? If these other dev methods are ok then it could be film choice. Certain films don't work as well as others. Ilford films are very good for this kind of development especially FP4+ which matches pyro developers very well.

@@PictorialPlanet Thank you for replying. I did use the 1:200 dilution. The two films I tried were Tmax 100 and rpx 25. Same result on both. I tried again with rpx 25 in 1:100 and the negatives came out fine. Will just have to do more experimentation. Thank you.

Very strange. Have you got an Ilford film to test, FP4 for instance? It’s almost like the 510-pyro is half strength, but then the batch would be recalled I think. Try an Ilford FP4 - it’s a classic film that acts very well with 510.

@@PictorialPlanet I don't have any Fp4. I am not a fan of Fp4. and unfortunately I am just not in a position, financially, to buy some just for the purpose of testing. I have seen amazing results with RPX 25 and Tmax 100 online. The poor results were on 4x5 film at 1:200 whereas the good result was on 35mm film at 1:100. Thanks again for trying to help. I think I will stick to the 1:100 next time I do 4x5 and see if that helps. Nothing like flushing money down the toilet. lol

@@PictorialPlanet Sorry to keep bugging you but I just had an epiphany. Instead of using my brain I used the Massive Dev Chart volume mixer calculator and I just noticed it is incorrect. My 4x5 tank holds 500ml of liquid. At 1:200 that should be 2.5ml of pyro 510 correct? 1:200 for 400ml is 2ml and 1:200 for 600ml is 3ml so for 500 it should be 2.5. Dev chart evidently does not do decimals so it said 2ml. I think that missing .5ml might be the issue. What do you think?

The latest I heard was that it is used successfully by 510-pyro users.

@Pictorial Planet went ahead and ordered the alkaline. Rapid fix seems like the acidity may effect stain

I use alkaline myself. You'll enjoy 510.

Sorry I meant semi stand not stand

This is a one shot developer so I wouldn't use it again.

Thanks

Good question, G. It actually does go down into my septic tank.

Can you compare it to an FP4 that you fixed in alkaline fix?

@@PictorialPlanet sadly I don't have any alkaline fix yet I made contact with one of your recommend suppliers who's away until May 2nd he has some TF4/5. Bought your book by the way:-)

First, thanks for buying my book! Glad your getting the fix, it'll mean you get maximum stain.

@@PictorialPlanet yes looking forward to getting it didn't realize it was coming from the US! Or are they having it printed and shipped from here? Just deved some xp2 in 510 lol well it worked as far as there's something on the negs -) Am treating all my existing film stocks as sacrificial after I discovered the bad HP5 the other day so nothing lost eh! Treating my experiments as optimization data so no failures really just knowledge!

Your book will be printed locally, one of the smart things Lulu does. I've just been reading a review of a new improved FP4+ batch. Apparently, Ilford have fixed the "measles " issues with their films. I've only seen one bad batch myself, a Delta 400 120 film but I know others have had worse luck. Hopefully now it's behind us. Good idea to consider your films as testers.

You can develop them together although I don't tend to do that. Then if something went wrong I've only messed up one film.

@@PictorialPlanet Thank you, that makes it a lot easier. In which cases you use this method and when the normal 1+100 and normal agitation at shorter develop time?

I use stand development when I have high contrast and I need to bring down the high values. Stand developing controls the contrast. I use normal development when contrast range is good or I want to increase contrast (by extending the 'normal' time).

The best way to develop FP4 and HP5 together is to use Thornton's 2-bath developer, 4.5 minutes in both baths.

@@PictorialPlanet thank you. That developer will be on my list for my next self mix. At first I will try my this week new mixed 510 Pyro....

This is a good comment, thank you. Yes, I like to know how exhausted my fix is, I think it's important to know. Over fixing can reduce the silver in the shadows (lightest/thinnest part of the negative) so twice clearing time is good advice to maintain delicate detail. This is worse with regular rapid fixers than alkaline fix.

Yes, very good developer. I test it in my book and show it's one of the best developers you can use. Sharp as a pin. This technique with FP4 works very well. Now, down to your question Grey. As I explain in the video, you want the film (or paper in the darkroom) to be in the fix for as short a time as possible while being fully fixed. The way we have always done this is to fix for twice the clearing time. I use an alkaline fix and keep it pretty fresh. I show in the video that I open the tank at around 30 seconds and examine the film looking for any milkiness. This can be seen easily around the frames - if you can't see the individual shots then you have cleared the film. Now leave it in the fix, gently dunking for that same time again. Now it's fixed. Fixing for longer will begin to degrade the delicate shadow and highlight detail and I really want them. I once used the Kodak fix you describe and was not happy with it. The better fixers for me are TF4, Ilford rapid fix, or Hypam. If you make your own I have videos in line for you. Fixing is an important but straightforward part of the process that has had a lot of misinformation posted over the years. Some people fix to try to get rid if the purple dye in the film for instance. Some fix for three times or more of the clearing time. The age old technique of twice the clearing time is perfect for films. Thanks for your question, Grey.

@@PictorialPlanet Thank you.

Ok i ordered some Hypam and some Delta 100 sheet film. And will be ordering your book shortly. 🙌

I really like PMK too and, as my demonstration showed, it's as good as any of them.

It is thick. Have you tried using a syringe?

@@PictorialPlanet I tried a 1 ml syringe but it couldn’t create enough suction. I also tried a 3 ml syringe, which pulled the developer with air bubbles which made reading the 3ml mark difficult.

Have you tried pyrocat? It's dissolved in water so is much thinner.

@@PictorialPlanet No, I haven’t. 510-pyro is the first staining developer I’ve tried and the first time I’ve tried stand development. Primarily used HC-110 for general development. Actually, you’re videos and book got me interested in 510-pyro. I was looking for a compensating developer for 120 pinhole and for general 35mm. Both of which I spot meter for the shadows. Want a developer that can help reign in the highlights. If I warm the pyro in a water bath, would that make it flow better? And about pyrocat, there are several variants, which would you recommend?

Warming doesn't make much difference to 510. Pyrocat HD is the one to start with or, if you want to a buy pre-made staining developer, Exactol Lux or Prescysol EF

Thank you for your comment , Flavio. Of course, you know you are in the minority. I'm sorry you didn't learn the plus sides of pyro and catechin staining developers. If so you would be more balanced in your view.

Dear Sir, of course the D76 users are the minority. Certainly, You can stay a lot of time to experiments new formulas instead to take pictures and print in the darkroom. It is a choice. So I prefer to spend time to take pictures and use the D76 on great films like the TRI-X or the Delta 100. Thank you about your answer.

It would be an interesting statistic, what percentage of film developers use D76/ID11 these days. I'd be very surprised if they were more than say XTOL which is a great improvement on D76. The statistic would be even more interesting if staining vs non staining developers. In this case I would agree that there's probably more non-staining users that staining. However, my answer to you was not supposed to say that there's less D76 users but more that people who try staining developers usually like the results and don't have the issues you have observed in your trials. By the way, statistics aside, try XTOL. It's a better developer than D76 in every way. Also FX15 will give you those results if you want to make your own. Also, this channel is about options and skills in the darkroom, there's plenty of channels about taking photographs.

@@PictorialPlanet I'm here again... after many rolls on many films I stay on my opinion. Perhaps it is good in some pictures, in some style images, or camera lenses, but not like a generale purpose developer. Easy to prepare... yes of course. But the results are not good at all. In many film the grain is too big, lights details are not good, stain is not every time a advantage with modern variable contrast papers. So.. I like it but not in all situations. For general purpose I prefer my old fried D76.

Good for you, to give it a try! Yes, stay with D76 and make great photographs. At the end of the day that's what we all want. Thank you for letting me know how you got on.