Click to expand.I have used it in the past. What I do is mix a tray of SS and my normal developer (Zone VI which is nearly identical to dektol) in a 2nd tray. The way I use it is to maintain my standard print development time of 2 minutes and split the development between the two developers.
So, if I am printing on a grade 2 paper and feel that the contrast is too high, I develop for the first minute in SS and the final minute in my standard developer. I mix the time based upon my needs e.g. If 1:1 is too much, I could go 45 seconds in SS and 1 min 15 secs in standard and so on. I never change my 2 minute standard because I always like to have a firm reference point.
SELECTOL-SOFT Developer 1:1. Selectol Soft The Kodak, Kodak Professional, and Kodafix Trademarks are used under license from Eastman Kodak Company. SELECTOL-SOFT Developer 1:1. Selectol Soft The Kodak, Kodak Professional, and Kodafix Trademarks are used under license from Eastman Kodak Company. Jan 25, 2017 Gerald Koch submitted a new resource: Selectol Soft - Selectol Soft The following formula is said to be very similar to the discontinued Kodak.
Doing this gives you multiple grades of contrast downward to the next lower grade. I think the real value to me is printing on a grade 3 and achieving contrasts between 2 and 3 rather then taking the full step to 3. If you are using VC or MG papers, I wouldn't think that this technique would buy you a lot. You should be able to accomplish the same thing with filtration.
I only use graded papers; I use this technique sparingly because I have tested my film development time to closely match my grade 2 paper. Click to expand.I don't know the formula for nor have I worked with Selectol Soft. I do know about Ansco 120 and Beer's A.
Beer's, as you may know, is a VC paper developer. Beer's A is the exact same developer as Ansco 120 save for being 2/3 the strength when compounded. At the suggested working strengths they are the exact same. Beer's B is the hydroquinone portion. While A will work alone, B will not. A alone or A and B mixed in a choice of ratios provides contrast control. My little work so far with Beer's shows it can deliver a considerable range of contrasts.
If you've already Beer's A, Ansco 120, brew up some B and give it a try. Another is Ansel Adam's Ansco 130 A and B. There again B is the hydroquinone.
Following a suggestion in Les's book I have been using Tetenal's Dokumol and Centrabrom S. They are are easily found here.
I generally start with 30sec in the hard Dokumol 1+6 then finish with 2min in Centrabrom 1+15 then change the time from there. I noticed the difference in my VC prints immediately- blacker blacks and a longer smoother tonal range- based on side by side comparison of prints of the same neg developed with this two tray method versus a one tray of Ilford MG developer.
The dokumol cannot be used again. But the Centrabrom lasts longer, usually two printing sessions depending on how many prints have beeen run through it and how long I wait between sessions. Click to expand.I once made up a soup of just Metol, sulfite and carbonate and some Benzotriazole.
I was after a cool-to-cold tone on a cold tone paper. It worked pretty slowly, but the results had this beautiful, subtle gradation in the mid to high values, and a lovely blue-gray print color that I never got using anything with hydroquinone. Interestingly, about the simplest developer of all is the old Kodak film developer, D-23, which is just Metol and sulfite. I wonder how that would work for a print developer?:confused.
Dektol and Selectol Soft is a combination that I have often used but I do not use the standard dilutions. For example if the suggested dilution is 1 to 9 for liquid Dektol I dilute 1 to 3, making a considerably stronger developer while the Selectol Soft (normal diluton 1 to 1 or 2) would be diluted 1 to 4/5 or even 6 making a very weak and slow working soft dev. My normal process then is to leave the print in the strong Dektol until the first sign of tone, about 20 seconds, and then transfer the print into the very dilute Selectl Soft until I am satisfied with the tonality of the print. Sometimes this can be 3 minutes but often it is longer. I still get very deep rich lower values as anyone who has seen my prints will testify, but the long development in the soft dev allows total control over the highlights and midtones.
The effect of adding small amounts of Dektol to Selectol-Soft to reach the necessary contrast is a bit different than using Selectol-Soft / dilute Dektol as consectutive baths. Beers A and Beers B work the same, and are virtually identical. The advantage of using a single bath is when making an edition of prints, it is more consistent than consecutive baths. 'Consecutive baths' are an easy way to work for normal, low volume printing.
I expose the print to get correct whites in a normal time in the Soft developer, adjusting the paper grade, or filtration, as needed. When the scale of the negative is so long that my blacks are too soft ( after drying the print! ) I use the Hard bath as needed. It is important to dilute the Hard bath. Dilution does not change the contrast, it merely slows the development rate.
ALSO, adding Pot Bromide 10% will effectively shield the whites from the effect of the Hard developer. ( note: mixing 120 from scratch, do not add bromide. Only add drops of 10% if you need it, which you probably won't ) 6. Published formulae for both Soft ( Selectol Soft, Ansco 120 ) and Hard ( D72 ) are virtually identical when corrected for dilution. The longer the print is in the Soft developer, the cooler the tone.
Using Selectol Soft / 120, one can expose to a higher density negative that will print with greater clarity than is common with a Hard developer. This alone solves the old problem of making different negatives for Silver and Platinum. Higher density negatives also make it possible to make strong and clean shadows with low contrast filtration, reducing the need for N- development. Glycin developers work very well with two bath technique.
The Ansel Adams variation of Ansco 130 was a common application of the pre WW2 era. Without the HQ, 130 becomes an extra long scale developer capable of strong blacks without losing the whites of Selectol-Soft / 120. Selectol is NOT the same as Selectol-Soft. The effect of using Selectol Soft is absolutely NOT the same as changing filtration: the two techniques are HIGHLY complimentary.
Brother McLean does this technique BACKWARDS with wonderful results. Click to expand.Suzanne I use it with both VC and graded and the method is not confined to Dektol and Selectol Soft.
I use it with any combination and hard and soft working developers, many from old formulae that I mix myself. I am also prepared to use neat hard developer stock if it will achieve the result that I want. I have been told by some printers that iit's pointless using this method when we have VC papers, I disagree for I feel that it provides another level of subtle control in the search for the expressive print.
Here's an example from a study I made yesterday of an old favorite at the Detroit Institute of Arts, 'Reverie' by Elie Nadelman, c. I wanted to bring home the modeling of the marble face, while keeping a sense of full shadows in the galerie. I exposed TMY at 1/30 @ f/1.4, knowing that would be adequate for the shadows, but knew it would drive the densitiy of the bust to the moon. And I was confident the film would hold it. It got normal development in Aculux ( could have been any normal developer ) to maintain the local contrast. The highlights on the bust read D 1.7.
And, no, the grain was not terrible. It printed on unfiltered Ilford FB MG in my Focomat V35. First developer: Ansco 120 ( normal dilution ) Second developer: D72, diluted with about 3 times the normal restrainer. An easy print to make.
Had to 'print the scan down' to read the highlights on a display. The point of the study?
To get the right feeling. I'm happy with it. Too bad I missed the chin leaving a 'trap' against the shoulder.
Practise, practise, practise. This afternoon, I'll try it Les's way. Shadows first.
I once made up a soup of just Metol, sulfite and carbonate and some Benzotriazole. I was after a cool-to-cold tone on a cold tone paper. It worked pretty slowly, but the results had this beautiful, subtle gradation in the mid to high values, and a lovely blue-gray print color that I never got using anything with hydroquinone.
Interestingly, about the simplest developer of all is the old Kodak film developer, D-23, which is just Metol and sulfite. I wonder how that would work for a print developer? Click to expand.With only sulfite D-23 makes for a little activated print developer.
Add carbonate and you've an Ansco 120/Beer's A type. Both have a 1:3:3 metol, sulfite, carbonate ratio. And that is just what I was reminded of when looking at that 5 x 7 put through D-23.
Restrainer may not be needed. Perhaps it's a hangover from generations gone. Of four or five papers I've worked with over the last few years only one was in need. A few milliliters of bromide solution did the trick. Bromide does delay image emergence. All other matters being OK, tone, contrast, whatever, leave it out. I'd say neutral.
Beer's A, BTW, is the lowest contrast combination of the A and B combinations. It is the metol only portion.
It is exposed properly based on the detail in the dark hair. It is one to two paper grades over developed. If the times match those on Kodak`s website, you mixed it wrong or the thermometer is off. Kodaks times are for a diffusion enlarger, reduce 10-15% for a condenser. Reduce the time if time and dilution is correct or dilute the developer more. Patterson tank is at 1:31 10cc syrup and 310 cc water. For a stainless tank it is 8cc to 248cc water and throw away what you don`t use.
Measure in a 10cc graduate or a syringe. This has to be very accurate and that is why Kodak doesn`t recommend it. The problem is not overexposure. Look at the shadow detail. It is adequate, but certainly not excessive. Taking away three stops of exposure would eliminate it.
The problem is overdevelopment. The high values are too high. The time seems right for HC110 dilution B with intermittent agitation at 20C. In my opinion, the three most likely errors are 1) using developer at the wrong dilution 2) continuous agitation 3) temperature too high due to miscalibrated thermometer of warming of the developer. Jose, how did you dilute the HC110?
I'm at work now and don't remember the dilution (I think it is 200 of syrup + 800 of water. Then to make the stock solution I use 38cc + 262cc of water.
Tomorrow I will tell you exactly what it was. The photo number 2 (the child) has been developed on paper number 2, 30 seconds. For what you say, the general opinion is that the negatives are a little overdeveloped and especially overexposed. I agitate softly during the first minute and then 5 seconds every minute very softly. It is not a question of agitation I guess. The themometer seems to be okay as I have two (one mercurio from germany and an alcohol jessops) and both measures the same.
My camera is a EOS 1v recently tested. Thank you very very much to all for the help. If you're close to 200 ml syrup to 800 ml water (or 800 ml final volume) you're developing with stock solution, which would give a correct time on TMY of around 1:45 at 20 C. Your time of 5:45 is close to right for Dilution B, which would be made by diluting your stock solution 1:7 with water (32 ml stock, 224 ml water for a stainless 35 mm tank). That would mean you effectively pushed the film by at least two stops, possibly close to three (which is about as far as you can go with HC-110 on TMY); you gained little or nothing in shadow detail, but contrast was greatly increased and thus your highlights are extremely dense. Jose, you are at a critical part of your artistic development.
You have a good eye for making meaningful images. You have many of the variables of good technique in hand. You are at the place now where some concentrated study and work will produce a technical level of skill for you where printing becomes a joy. I hope you will stay the course! Keep working with your present film and developer combination.
Don't confuse yourself by adding extra variables. Forget things like 'push or pull' developing. Concentrate on becoming consistent with basic development.When you can control exposure to produce rich shadow details and development to produce delicate highlights, your prints will sing. May I make a couple suggestions for printing these negatives? With graded paper, a softer developer such as Kodak Selectol Soft is very useful. An easier way is to use variable contrast paper.
With VC, think of making two prints, a soft and a hard. Start with the soft print. Use your softest filter. Make test strips to determine how long to expose to make your whites print right. Don't worry about the blacks at this point. Then, switch filters and expose using just your hardest filter.
This time look only at the blacks. The soft time will pribably be considerably longer than the hard time.
Then make a print using the soft filter and exposure time and then the hard filter and time. I believe you would find this easier than trying to find a single filter time. Please keep up the good work and keep us posted. Jose, discarding your old HC110 solution was probably a good idea. It simplifies your procedure not to have doubts about it.
I have always used HC110 (dilution B) mixed directly from the bottle (no stock solution). I realize the world is metric, but in my 'asynchronous' darkroom, I use half an ounce of HC110 syrup with sixteen ounces of water. I pour the HC110 into a small (1 1/2 oz.) graduate. Run some of the developer water into the small graduate a couple times and shake it with the top covered by your thumb to make sure all the solution goes into the developer. This method might not be accurate enough for a research laboratory, however, it works fine in the darkroom.
It has the added benefit that the syrup in the bottle stays fresh indefinitely, much longer than the stock solution. You mention a thirty second development time for your print. I am not familiar with Neutol developer (that is not a criticism of it; I am merely noting that I have no experience with it.) With my developer (Zone VI, similar to Dektol) and fiber paper, I use a minimum development time of two minutes. If the print appears too dark in that time, it means I must reprint using less exposure. I try to print with a base exposure in the range of twenty one seconds.
Kodak Selectol Soft Developer Formula
I use a foot switch and have my timer set for three seconds. I use multiples of three seconds. Twenty one seconds works out to be seven three second bursts of light. My point is the longer exposure time gives me more control.
With a five second printing time, a second off would be very noticable. At twenty one seconds, a second more or less is not critical. This method allows longer burning and dodging times, which help make the changes seamless. I use a longer enlarger lens (I use an 80mm. I have used it for twenty five years, so I guess it's now an 'old' lens.) Using the longer lens means the light source must be further from the easel. That requires more time for the same exposure. This is like driving slower on a narrow road.
It takes a little longer, but is much more controlled. Using a longer lens with a 35mm negative means you are only using the center area of the lens. Therefore, even inexpensive lenses should perform well. (I should add that I rarely make a print larger than 8x10. That is a matter of personal taste with me. I like the intimacy of being able to hold and view my images in my hands.) If your enlarger light source is too bright to allow longer printing times, try a lower wattage bulb or place a filter in the light path.
I was most fortunate to have found an excellent book twenty five years ago. The book is called the Zone VI Workshop by Fred Picker.
Fred Picker was an outstanding teacher. It is now out of print, but is very readily available used online, either from used book dealers of by auction. Mercedes-Benz. Price several, it is easily found. Your local library may have it, and certainly can get it via interlibrary loan. However, it should be part of your personal library. Some of the materials and products mentioned in the book are out of date.
Kodak Selectol Soft Developer Formula
However, the technique is very solid and presented in a user friendly way. You will not find this book difficult.
It will help you find firm footing with your technique. Have faith and keep working.
There are images to be found and preserved.