Anyone using Diafine?

[timor]

Diafine developes to completion so there is no real need for an acid stop.

This applies to every two bath developer. But still to save the fix short mild acid bath could be used or two bath fix is good to.

 

[Josh66]

I ordered some from Freestyle this morning. $42 for a developer kit to make one gallon - that's the most I've ever paid for developer before.

Also got some other odds & ends - bag of Xtol, a couple 1 gallon bottles for the Diafine, 10 rolls of Rollei Retro 400S (120), bottle of LFN, etc... I always spend way too much at Freestyle...lol.

 

[compur]

Diafine developes to completion so there is no real need for an acid stop.

This applies to every two bath developer. But still to save the fix short mild acid bath could be used or two bath fix is good to.

Or, better still, use a water bath stop and an alkaline fixer like the ones from Photographer's Formulary.

 

[Josh66]

Diafine developes to completion so there is no real need for an acid stop.

This applies to every two bath developer. But still to save the fix short mild acid bath could be used or two bath fix is good to.

I get that it isn't necessary to use stop bath, but will it hurt anything if I do? Like you said, fixer lasts much longer with stop bath...

Before Efke films were discontinued, I shot a lot of it and never used stop bath - it DOES mess up Efke films. That made a very noticeable difference in the life of my fixer.

I use Kodak Indicator Stop Bath, not sure if that is considered strong or weak...


Presoaking with Diafine seems to be a bit of a controversy too. The directions say not to, but some people say they get better results after washing off the AH layer.

One point that was brought up in a discussion I was reading about it in the Diafine Flickr group is that if you do presoak, you will slowly be diluting part A - about 10mL per roll is what the guy claimed. If that's the case, I'll probably skip the presoak. Normally, I always presoak/wash 120 film to get rid of the AH dyes. Also that presoaking may inhibit the absorption of part A into the film, so you would have to develop longer than normal.


edit
I use Kodafix, BTW.

 

[compur]

I suggest just following the Diafine instructions.

 

[timor]

Compur is right, if you use alkaline fixer short stop could be skipped altogether. I personally never use stop just two bath fixer (regular). The supposition is, that for flat grain films drastic changes in pH might cause dislocation of the grain in emulsion reducing the sharpness. The same with temperature, which should be constant through the whole process and the contact with water should be also short etc.
Presoaking with two bath developer seems to be of not that much importance since the first bath is a constant agitation. In theory AH layer should have no influence on development, but you never know, if some of it didn't stain the emulsion, even a little. It may have an influence on contrast. Then, if 120 is not prewashed this dye will stay in part A of Diafine forever and build up with every new roll. What that will do, I don't know. I am using two bath development system every day, but in totally different way, so no experience here.
Kodak stop indicator is rather aggressive, try very light concentration to bring the emulsion to neutrality rather, than to acidity so fixer doesn't have much to use up it's buffer.
What films are you shooting ? Remember, tabular emulsion is thin, absorbs less, 5 min in part B might be an overkill. How long part B of Diafine should last ?

 

[Josh66]

In theory AH layer should have no influence on development, but you never know, if some of it didn't stain the emulsion, even a little. It may have an influence on contrast. Then, if 120 is not prewashed this dye will stay in part A of Diafine forever and build up with every new roll. What that will do, I don't know.

From what I've read, the dye should have no effect remaining in the developer. I have sometimes had issues with certain films that had a TON of dye in them (I want to say that Rollei Retro 400S was one of them) - clouding the developer, preventing it from contacting the film, I assume. That's when I started doing a prewash, as a general rule. Those issues went away as soon as I started doing that.

What films are you shooting ?

Fuji Acros, Rollei Retro 400S, Kentemere 400, Ilford Pan F+, and Ilford Delta 3200. Those are my "main" films. Acros and K400 make up the bulk of it so far though.

 

[timor]

Those issues went away as soon as I started doing that.

Here you go I always pre-wash my films to.

What films are you shooting ?

Fuji Acros, Rollei Retro 400S, Kentemere 400, Ilford Pan F+, and Ilford Delta 3200. Those are my "main" films. Acros and K400 make up the bulk of it so far though.

None of them are my films, in 120 I shoot Tmax 100 and 400, TX, Some Retro 80S, now starting HP5 and soon Deltas. Kodak went crazy with the prices of Tmax, looks like they really have a death wish.

 

[Josh66]

looks like they really have a death wish.

Don't they?

I thought I had heard that Xtol was discontinued (Freestyle sells a LegacyPro copy - it's also not that hard to make on your own, from what I understand), but they had it in stock, so I got some. Used to use it a lot, but I haven't used it in a couple years. Great developer for pushing.

They sure seem to be pushing everyone towards Ilford... Ilford certainly seems to be the only one with their heart still in it. I might have to start migrating away from Kodak chemicals, just so it won't be such a shock when they aren't available one day.


Really, I have already given up on Kodak films, lol. I still use a lot of Kodak chemicals though.

Fuji was just always so much better than Kodak with color film, and in B&W, I just haven't seen anything 'special' from them. They don't really seem to have a film that is just better than anything else of the same format/speed... IMO, of course.

 

[timor]

They (Kodak) don't really seem to have a film that is just better than anything else of the same format/speed... IMO, of course.

Yes... it is a matter of opinion and this is shaped, as I experienced it. by personal "relationship" with given material. For most situations I prefer Tmax, I just know it very well. It will be too bad for me to loose it. But I heard that some Brits took control over Kodak film division. The question is if they are willing to loose half a billion bucks to eliminate Ilford competition. :=)) Anyway, looks like Hollywood still wants film.

 

[Josh66]

Anyway, looks like Hollywood still wants film.

Let's hope that is more than some hipster fad or whatever...

I am starting to despise Hollywood, but if they can keep film going strong a little longer, I can bite my tongue, for now. They don't use the emulsions I use though, so even that may be a wasted thought.

"The arts" are in peril. This anti-intellectual trend worries me...

 

[timor]

"The arts" are in peril. This anti-intellectual trend worries me...

Me to, remember "Idocracy" ? Is just too many of us, history took revers course.

 

[Josh66]

Just developed my first roll in Diafine (a roll of Fuji Acros) - it's still drying, but so far it looks pretty good.

The one stop push is nice too - I've found Acros terrible for pushing in other developers.

 

[timor]

Just developed my first roll in Diafine (a roll of Fuji Acros) - it's still drying, but so far it looks pretty good.

The one stop push is nice too - I've found Acros terrible for pushing in other developers.

With this pretty good wait 'til you start printing or scanning. With tabular emulsions pushing is not that "healthy". Let's wait and see how the grain and tonal separation will look in enlargement.

 

[Josh66]

I think the "this is new" excitement has worn off... Nothing I've tried so far looks better in Diafine.

The grain is just ... unpleasant to look at too...


Also, the necessitated one stop push seems to result in one stop underexposure in most films. Pan F Plus and Kentmere 400 being the exceptions.



I honestly can't figure out why it's so popular...