FX55 Diluted - A Wow Moment!

[@GreyGhost-r4z]

I have been so inspired by your darkroom work the past couple days of watching your channel I pulled my Beseler 45M out of storage and set up my darkroom again. 🎉

[@PictorialPlanet]

Excellent news!

[@nevilleholmes1324]

I like FX55 for films with that clear base that do not work well with Pyrocat. After yout video I gave the FX55 1+1 a try with Delta 400. Negatives were not sharp? The other half of the roll I used Pyrocat HD and were OK. I canot account for the softness, 2/3rd of frames were taken on a trypod at 1/125th with an easy focus. I am confient that all solution were easily within +-2 deg C. My small working container of Sodium Ascorbate has been used for a while but looked normal. The negatives looked developed OK. So the lesson is to test any combination before using it. This was a test of lens vignette so nothing lost.

[@randallstewart1224]

When working out details of a modified developer I started using about 15 years ago, I discovered this same effect of a greatly diluted developer. Greater sharpness, finer grain, more evenly spaced tones, and greater micro-contrast. I felt like I had repealed the laws of photo-chemistry. I've never explored the technicalities, but my guess has always attributed it to the great reduced concentration of sodium sulfite in the working solution. (My result was unexpected. I found my modification to require unacceptably short developing time, which I countered by increasing dilution. In the final result, I went from a 1:3 to a 1:9 dilution, just to get to a 6-minute developing time. These experiments were all done with step wedges and a densitometer to reach a set of target film densities, so I didn't discover these "side effects" until my first roll of images, which were quite a surprise.)

[@PictorialPlanet]

Very interesting, Randall! We might be seeing the same phenomena here.

[@alanreid208]

Thanks John, another very interesting video. I'm so impressed with my results with FX 55. I was so excited with my first 2 rolls of film, and how sharp and clean the negatives were. I thought at first my negatives were a bit thin until i realised that I didn't add the 10% to 15% time you mentioned on page 206 in your book when using FX-55 part B Mod. Have a great holiday, with plenty of great images.

[@PictorialPlanet]

Thanks Alan and great news of your experiences with 55

[@davidottman9501]

This exploration of FX55 has been fascinating, thank you John!

[@PictorialPlanet]

Cheers, David!

[@raybeaumont7670]

Cheers John. Dilution does seem to enhance the effects you get. I often used ID-11 diluted 1:3 with HP5 for studio work - it produces great skin tones. I now have a copy of your book to peruse and enjoy - and I'm also awaiting delivery of some 510 Pyro. You are certainly giving me plenty of excuses to go play in the darkroom. As always - best wishes from The Rhondda.

[@PictorialPlanet]

You've got some 510 coming? Lock yourself in the darkroom for a week to enjoy it :)

[@RBain]

Really interesting John... thanks for sharing your investigations and excitement. Going to have a go myself now :)

[@PictorialPlanet]

Excellent 👍

[@17xyz]

As always - very useful information. The chemistry for making FX55 is in the post - looking forward to testing it. Have a nice trip to wonderful Copenhagen.

[@PictorialPlanet]

Thank you, 17! My camera is loaded with film. Bring on Copenhagen!!

[@canoedoctor]

Great video, very interesting. Really makes me want to try FX55. I'm looking forward to your next exploration. I'm also really interested in how FX55 compares to other developers.

[@PictorialPlanet]

Great comment! Thank you, CD. Yes, what's next? The excitement, but I can't say. I have a lot of fun demonstrating these things in the hope it will peak interest. Thanks again!

[@jph364]

Hi John, when you speak of FX55 1+1 you mean to use 50 ml of part A per liter and also half part B (i.e. 10 ml of part B of Gainers modification per liter)

[@PictorialPlanet]

Perfect! Are you going to try it?

[@jph364]

I probably will once I settle my personal times on the regular dilution first. Thanks for bringing us all these interesting videos and enjoy your break.

[@alanhuntley55]

Very informative, as usual. Based on your videos and my own recent use of FX-55, it seems to be a very versatile developer, indeed. I'm very interested in trying the 1:1 dilution. Please pass along any info on amount of stock developer needed, once you've played around with full rolls of film. Thank you.

[@PictorialPlanet]

I will, Alan, I'll let you know. Thanks for your comment as always.

[@g-r-a-e-m-e-]

It is a fabulous channel! Happy travels.

[@PictorialPlanet]

Thank you, Graeme!

[@tonyhirst3628]

I've seen blogs where they're diluting it as thin as 1:19, times for semi stand, 25-35 mins? Dave's Dogma (Flickr) shows interesting results.

[@PictorialPlanet]

Thanks, I'll take a look.

[@tonyhirst3628]

@@PictorialPlanet the shot, 'spider web on a foggy morning ' looks good, what he's shot with the 1:19.

[@ehsanesbati]

Great video as always, John. What agitation regime do you recommend when using 1+1 dilution?

[@PictorialPlanet]

I used Ilford agitation

[@canescens]

Very enlightening again, I had some beautiful skies to. To me the scan and print from the 14 minute development looked just a bit darker. That could also give the improvement in tonality.

[@PictorialPlanet]

Dropping it to grade 1.5 would lift the lower zones. After my trip to Copenhagen I will try 12.5 minutes for my FP4 at EI160.

[@hoggif]

This is interesting. I always liked best D76 1+1, Xtol 1+1 and Rodinal in 1+100 (not stand, turns or two every minute). After years of digital and coming back to film your videos give food for thought. I really should shoot a test roll with suitable subject as soon as choose a way to include a gray scale for densitometer measurements too (to measure film speed and correct development). I think reasons for dilution varied based on my old notes, it often is a compomise. They included grain, sharpness, reasonable developing time (not too short, not too long like 20min) and probably cost too.

[@PictorialPlanet]

Many wise words. Welcome back to film and especially welcome to my channel!

[@moonglow9251]

Thanks, John!! I like Ilford, but I also have some bulk rolls of the much cheaper Fomapan 100. Is there any way to get decent images out of that film?

[@PictorialPlanet]

Sounds like some future videos perhaps?

[@moonglow9251]

@@PictorialPlanet Oh yes. I think that would be very useful. Even if we would have to "sacrifice" a lot of the light sensitivity in the process, it would be interesting to know that the film can be used for serious photography (or in worst case cannot).

[@OldJockOldjock]

I could certainly see an improvement with dilution of 1+1 whereas I had more difficulty in detecting worthwhile improvements in either of the 2 bath versions. In this one I suspect that other viewers of the persons prints who were not conversant with FX55 would be able to say the same. Often I do wonder if non aficionados of developers see any real differences that are sometimes claimed Once again the format of the presentation actually delivers the proof. Thanks again

[@PictorialPlanet]

Great comment! And yes, I really believe in showing. The proof is in the pudding 🍮

[@Gulfmannen90]

Some questions that i can't seem to find a good answer for. Do you need some ventilation system when developing on photopaper? or is it just for some type of developers? I have a "dehumidifier" thats pretty big. Will that help with the "fumes"? if there are any that will say. Really nice tutorials, im soon starting with developing on paper aswell. Regards Johan

[@PictorialPlanet]

There are no fumes to speak of with paper development except sometimes the stop has a slight vinegar smell and the fix can smell a little of ammonia. Ilford Hypam fix is a good commercial fixer that doesn't seem to smell to me.

[@Gulfmannen90]

@@PictorialPlanet oh thanks for the answer! im going for ADOX ADOFIX Plus and i use that for my film developing! will check out Ilford Hypam!

[@jeta1383]

Hi, I'm wondering if you have produced a video using ILFOTEC DD-X for developing? If so, may I ask what your thoughts are of this developer?

[@PictorialPlanet]

I don't do videos on commercial developers that you can't make at home.

[@MrFilipFabulous]

Hi, thanks for the video, I love using stand and seni stand developemenr, unfortunately I can only get my hands on fx-39 type II from Adox, where I live, I can never get good results using it in the 1+19 dilution....negatives always come out way underdeveloped, and there's very little information about using this developer online. Is there any chance you might talk about this developer in the future ?

[@PictorialPlanet]

I don't cover commercial developers. Why don't you make one of the ones I cover? You'll be very happy with it. I recommend Pyrocat for stand and semi-stand. Also 510-pyro and Rodinal.

[@MrFilipFabulous]

@@PictorialPlanetThank you for your reply, much appreciated. I live in a small non EU country, extremely difficult to get a hold of some of the chemicals needed, I always end up with at least one that's impossible to ship here. I have seen recepies for Rodinal using pipe cleaner and crushed up paracetamol tablets.. I dont know how I feel about such concoction though....

[@PictorialPlanet]

@MrFilipFabulous You might try D23 which uses just two chemicals, metol and sodium sulphite. It's a lovely, soft working developer so you wouldn't need to semi stand develop. I wonder if you can get those two chemicals?

[@MrFilipFabulous]

@@PictorialPlanet Thanks a lot! As a beginner, I like to keep costs as low as possible (shipping costs for different chemicals from different sellers adds up quickly). I also like keeping things simple, which is why I prefer stand with Rodinal, developing time is the same for all films, doesn't get any simpler than that! However, there are shipping restrictions for Rodinal, its classified as hazardous. I managed to get it shipped by buying a kit, I've been developing for 6 months now and the 100ml bottle is not even half empty! I can develop 2 films with the same 'concoction' just fine, it keeps in the fridge for a few days too! I've been printing and scanning them with no noticeable loss in quality. I'm glad i discovered your Rodinal videos, it gets a lot of hate but honestly I don't see why, grain is quite fine at 1:100 or 1:200, sharpness and tonality are great, they turn out bit flat, but I like to think it gives me more options when printing. If i could get my hands on more of it, I wouldn't bother with anything else. I'll definitely be trying my hand at D23, thank you so much!