Another new developer for me and when I find a new developer I’m usually excited to see how different films react to it. And to make it even. Let’s say i have 1 litre of Microphen stock solution, and i can use it for 10 films. My film developing tank takes only litre, so i should poor While I do experiment with other developers often (Golden Bullet Syndrome), Microphen is my consistent favorite. I use Ilford FP4 (EI) and.
|Published (Last):||5 April 2018|
|PDF File Size:||16.11 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||2.67 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Leave a Reply Cancel reply Your email address will not be published. Temperature and time are less critical. The latter effect varies according to film. This works out to be about as cost effective as several one-shot 1: Rated 4 out microphwn 5 by photonick from Awesome! Refer to the data sheet for more information regarding times for speed increasing. The best results have come from TMX in Microphen.
Good shadow detail, excellent gradation in very tough conditions, not terribly grainy – no worse, really, than TMY 35mm when normally exposed and developed. Share This Page Tweet. Ilford also makes a liquid version: Does anyone use it as their normal developer?
A sludge presumably silver will accumulate in the bottom of the bottle after a couple of reuses. I don’t exactly have a well trained eye for grain changes due to development, but I can say that the results were quite good, and I suppose I would say they did look a bit different, but not in a way that would make me not want to use it again. According to the Ilford Product page this is a fine grain developer designed for push processing faster films.
It is optimized for use at the faster end of the exposure range. In Stock Update Location close. Yes, I would recommend this to a friend I’ve used so any different developers over the years, and this might be my favorite yet. So with Microphen being a developer good for push processing, and I do enjoy Tri-X at ASA I gave it a shot and was rather pleased with the results! The difference here is stark The TMX negs came out just fine.
Overview Discussions Photos Members Map. There is just no other product on the market speed increasing fine grain developer that is so easy to use. Even atgrain is surprisingly small and shadow detail remains good relative to most push processing results. With Ilford Delta I actually found that Microphen pretty much produced a level playing field with the tradition FP4 and the modern Delta films and actually both take ten minutes in the soup.
Your email address will not be published. Use it as one shot would be perfect, did you noticed any difference on negative when developing in stock solution vs. That is, there is a speed increase while giving the type of grain associated with a standard developer.
Overall I was really happy with this developer, and will certainly use it again especially if I do a project that would be best done on Pan F. So, taking your example, for a ml tank you will need ml of stock solution topped up with ml of water. It was micropnen easy to mix – just slightly more complicated than say, D76 it has two packages of powder.
ILFORD Microphen To Make ml (Chemistry) – analogue photography
Though Microphen is a tad more expensive than other developers, I would definitely use it again in similar circumstances. Let’s say i have 1 litre of Microphen stock solution, and i can use it for 10 films. Rated 5 out of 5 by Summer from A great pushing developer! Large expanses of same-toned areas such as skies are virtually grainless, as you’d expect from TMX. So for slow and medium speed films I chose to shoot at llford speed, while faster films I went and did some pushing. nicrophen
It is tough to put into technical terms but the grain is fine, the tonal range is very, very good and the negatives print with a nice snap. I recently just finished my thesis exhibition for my MFA and 98 percent of the images included in it were film based. I expected grainy results, but instead had excellent images with nice tonal range, and relatively low grain.
Edited by HairyHippy member 4 years ago. And better than that, they didn’t have a ton of clumpy grain all over the place.
That, of course, is what makes it ideal for me as a push processing developer. Hasselblad c — Carl Zeiss Planar 80mm 1: The grain was very subtle and the mid tones were great Date published: I’ve used TMax developer before to develop it at andbut never as atit already has too much grain.
You won’t get better results than with this. It is not really all that expensive. Because of its compensating effect when used carefully minimal agitation, longer intervals between agitationsit may be difficult to increase contrast as desired through extended development.
Stay tuned for Part 5 where I go over the best and worst in the way of Ilford products at least in my humble opinion. And I’ve found it nearly impossible to overdevelop TMX to the point of creating unusuable negatives. You could use it as an everyday developer. The TMY results weren’t bad at all.