A new developer?

D

David M

Very Active Poster
Registered User
Joined
Jan 29, 2017
Messages
3,160
Stearman Press, of developing tank fame, have a new developer, formulated they say, especially for Large Format. The packaging is certainly novel. Does anyone know more about it?

shop.stearmanpress.com

SP-ultra LF: a developer optimized for large format film

"Every film developer manufactured in the last 80 years has been optimized for 35 mm film." Okay, there are a few exceptions but for the most part, it's true. We won't spend any time defending our thesis; frankly, it really doesn't matter. What does matter is that we decided that the world...
shop.stearmanpress.com
 
It'll be interesting to see the MSDS to see what it's constituent formula is.

Mike
 
You would think they could have chosen some better photographs to publicise their new developer. They claim a speed increase but the photographs are both noticably lacking in shadow detail.
They also state that they are aiming for good tonality. Their poor choice of photographs makes it difficult to judge if they have achieved this. But it will have to be good to measure up to the tonality of Pyrocat HD or ID11 1+2. These two developers also give excellent compensating effects. As I like to make photographs in sunny light, this is an important consideration for me. Both these developers are excellent at controlling the highlights and at the same time not flattening the mid-tones, but keeping them nice and bright. I wonder if this new developer will measure up in this respect?

Alan
 
It would need to be a stunning new developer to prise Pyrocat-HD or ID11 1+1 from my hands.

And talking of ID11, Ilford still package it as two parts, so how a pouch where you just add water will work will be interesting.

Mike
 
Well you can use PQ Universal for films and that keeps in a bottle and would in that sort of packaging. The packaging isn't new I've seen similar before.

Ian
 
Yes, I thought the images didn't really match the claims. They look very much like pushed 35mm to me. Or printed two grades too high. Perhaps better examples will follow as testing proceeds.
The juice sachets are not new, of course. It was the simplification of adding water and leaving it alone that I liked. Ilford have a range of ready mixed and measured chemicals in sachets too, but I believe they are liquids
I was delighted to see proper metric measurements instead of quarts, handfuls and smigeons.
It would be easy to measure 500 grams of water, using a modern digital scale.
I wonder if he'll supply a special 450ml pack to match the SP-445 tank.
 
Special developers? C'mon...ain't nuttin new under the sun. For years, I've heard of "speed increasing" developers and I've tried a few; never have I ever measured a true increase in film speed. And, why is LF film "different" than any other format film? OK, various format films are coated on different bases, but is the actual emulsion on 120 FP-4+ different than 5x4/10x8 FP-4+? Me thinks not! As Ian said, a PQ formula will certainly last awhile in that packaging, but it ain't "special". Yawn....
 
Well, to be fair, he's talking about LF practice, not emulsions. It seems a valid point that suppressing grain is more interesting to 35mm users.
Manufacturers sometimes specify different processing times for the same brand of film in different sizes, which suggests that there may be differences between the emulsions. Each size will be coated individually, because the substrates are different, as you say, so there is an opportunity for variations. They may not all be photographic. Roll film may need a lubricating anti-scratch coating and LF film may be treated for easier retouching. Much of this might be secret.
I certainly share your doubts about genuine speed increases. Well, maybe a third of a stop...
The packaging contains only dry powder, so it should last forever.
It's a pity about the examples, but I'm hoping for something better. It seems a good idea to encourage new thinking.
 
David, totally agree that there's nothing wrong with pursuing a new formula, packing, or whatever; however, I'm grow weary of folks pontificating about "secret formulas" and "wonderful developers for X film." And, yes, you're correct that the same emulsion can vary by format. I've seen (and tested) if for myself. Over the last several years, I've been migrating back to simple, clean working developers that I can easily mix myself (like D-76, for example), and then use that for all the films I shoot. Is it the best film developer? Probably not. But, if I've done my job right I'll pull a good negative from which I can then go about the hard part--making a print that sings! ;)
 
We seem to be on much the same wavelength.
I associate miracle developers with the Church of Leica in those dear dead clockwork days before we had digits. More speed, grain-free prints of any size and no dodging or burning were promised. In my experience, anyone who produced grain-free prints from 35mm negs simply needed a new enlarging lens.
I seem to remember an article (source long forgotten) that claimed the writer could produce prints that were the equal of large format. Half-page, half-tone, single-inked images were offered to demonstrate this.
As someone who neither owns nor wants a densitometer, I'm sometimes amazed at how much entertainment can be extracted from developer formulae. Do painters exchange notes about the refractive index* of linseed oil? Do Everest climbers discuss the colour of their bootlaces?
Dangerous territory on this forum. My apologies in advance for any trodden-on toes.

( *In fact we do have a refractometer, but that's for honey.)

My main reservation about the Stearman developer system, so far, is that the single-shot packaging might be rather expensive.
Useful for travelling perhaps. You could pack a dozen and develop as you go along. You'd need fixer in powder form, but you could save a good deal of weight by taking far fewer dark slides. Perhaps he'll do a fixer pack next. Or you could re-purpose a used developer sachet.

Quite enough idle speculation from this bear of very small brain.
 
OK. Mr. M, don't go desecrating my beloved Leica M's! :D It's probably sacrilegious to speak of 35mm on a LF forum, but... I've enjoyed shooting my Leica M for 35+ years and, honestly, the results I get from up to 12x8" enlargements using my Leitz V35 enlarger is actually pretty astonishing! I use medium speed film, if I plan to shoot handheld, and EFKE 25 is working from a tripod. What I truly enjoy with the Leica M and associated Leica glass is that, IMO, it punches way above its weight class. Alright, leaving the keyboard now to go find my flack jacket... ;)

Regarding the new Stearman LF developer and packaging... Oh, yeah, didn't Ilford already do this with their Simplicity line? If I was so inclined to develop while traveling, I'd probably pack a couple of 125ml bottles of Pyrocat-HD, a liter of TF-4 fixer, and an SP-445. I can't imaging the cost of the Stearman product being any cheaper to run. But, hey, that's just me and my small brain. ;)
 
I ought to say that I have nothing against Leica equipment. Leica make very fine lenses indeed. It's a slur that they are really in the business of making necklaces for retired dentists.
It's the worship that I'm mocking. Leica enthusiasts can be almost as fanatical as early Mac adopters. (I am one of them, but Macs were entirely different, of course.)
I have a friend who uses the Leica V35 enlarger and he produces prints of remarkable quality from 35mm. I have to allow credit for his experience and skill. I've seen his negs and they are unfailingly excellent. It is a very fine and well thought out enlarger.
How are you managing to get replacement lamps for it?

We shall just have to wait and see what happens with the Stearman developer. Whatever happens, it's good to see creative thinking withinin real photography. There's a danger that it can become too enamoured of its past.
 
Yeah, I don't bow to the "Leica gods"; rather, I simply enjoy using the Leica M and the results, thereof. Honestly, I have several Nikkor lenses for my F2 that are very sharp and render very fine images (when the dope behind the camera puts something worthwhile on the film!) ;)

When I bought my V35 it was a very complete outfit, along with many accessories, including two new replacement lamps. I've yet to replace a lamp, but I doubt I'll burn through two in my lifetime. I do shoot and print 35mm, but it's not something I do all the time.

Yeah, I, too, like to see creative thinking in photography with new products brought to market. For example, I just recently exposed and processed my very first dry plate using the ChromaGraphica holder from the Kickstarter campaign I backed a year ago. I'm really looking forward to working more with this medium; though it's painfully sloooow (ASA 2!)
 
I have a Leitz Valoy 11 enlarger - a superb piece of kit - with the excellent Focotar lens. So simple, precision made; a joy to use. David asks about replacement lamps. Not sure what the V35 uses but the Valoy 11 originally used a pearl incandescent bulb. Mine still works but I have replaced it with an LED bulb, which doesn't get hot and, at a colour temperature of 2800K evokes exactly the same contrast range from Multigrade filters.

Alan
 
Alan Clark said:
I have a Leitz Valoy 11 enlarger - a superb piece of kit - with the excellent Focotar lens.
Click to expand...

Is that a 50mm Focotar? I've heard that's a pretty nice enlarging lens. My V35 came with the 40mm Focotar, but I found that the 40mm Schneider APO-Componon HM lens was visibly sharper, even at modest enlargements. I still have the Focotar, but have used the Schneider lens for years.
 
The V35 head is very neat and compact, It uses a smaller dedicated halogen lamp, specially made by Phillips (I think), but now discontinued. My friend tells me that there is a substitute available, but he finds it unsatisfacory. I have heard of someone cobbling the capsule from a new lamp into an old reflector.
 
Alan Clark said:
You would think they could have chosen some better photographs to publicise their new developer. They claim a speed increase but the photographs are both noticably lacking in shadow detail.
They also state that they are aiming for good tonality. Their poor choice of photographs makes it difficult to judge if they have achieved this. But it will have to be good to measure up to the tonality of Pyrocat HD or ID11 1+2. These two developers also give excellent compensating effects. As I like to make photographs in sunny light, this is an important consideration for me. Both these developers are excellent at controlling the highlights and at the same time not flattening the mid-tones, but keeping them nice and bright. I wonder if this new developer will measure up in this respect?

Alan
Click to expand...

In my 'early days'...(some 60-odd years ago) I believe my mentor indicated that neither you (or I) cannot 'increase' a film's "Speed" or "Sensitivity to light".

(But I have been 'proven wrong'... many times)

Ken
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top