A Bridge Too Far

This image of the Peace Bridge is a scan from a print on Ilford MG IV RC after both sepia and selenium tonering. The first bath of the sepia process went to work too quickly for my purposes, leading to a stronger than intended effect.

If this image of the Peace Bridge connecting Buffalo NY to Fort Erie Canada made one misty morning this spring looks familiar it may be because it was featured only last week in Simple Alchemy. If it looks different know that its earlier appearance was a scan from the negative whereas this is a scanned from a darkroom print on Ilford MG IV. If it looks really different it's because this print was the subject of some of my first experiments with print toning since the days of my bachelor pad darkroom. Back then it was mostly about using selenium toner, a simple bath finished prints can be put through that gives the silver grains that make up the image a coating of more stable selenium that not only helps to protect the image against the ravages of time, it affects the colour, altering the tone of the silver image with a modest but noticeable purple/blue while deepening the darkest tones giving the image a richer appearance. Selenium toning typically results in a higher D-max, the density of the darkest possible black, than can otherwise be achieved with the same photo paper untoned. While the name toning implies the object is to achieve a colour shift, with selenium toner this sometimes seems almost secondary to the benefits of increased tonal depth and archival permanence.

Since the process of reclaiming my old wet darkroom capabilities began less than a year ago it's been a given that I would resume the practice of selenium toning sooner or later. I imagined that it would coincide roughly with the return to printing on fibre based stock once I was ready to deal with its extra demands, but although that remains in the works I have been inspired recently with the notion of taking print toning a little further. The inspiration comes from numerous photographers I admire whose work often departs noticeably from the modest tonal shifts typical of results seen selenium toner alone. A leading figure the movement, if it can be called such, is the photographer Tim Rudman whose book "The Master Photographer's Toning Book" has managed to become a classic of traditional darkroom work even though it only first appeared in 2002 at the onset of the digital age. Tim is well spoken, an acknowledged authority on toning as well as many other areas of darkroom craft and a highly regarded writer and instructor. I can't imagine that I wouldn't recommend this book to anyone looking to take their print making skills to the next level... if only I could get my hands on it! This book is in such high demand and, being out of print, such short supply that on the used market this slightly over 200 page softcover book has been known command prices in the $1000 neighbourhood. A quick peek on Amazon while writing this showed 3 copies available through various sellers with prices starting at $400. That's more than can be justified for a guy working out of what is little better than a makeshift closet darkroom. Sadly the obvious demand these prices represent has not been enough to convince publishers that another printing is in order. From the account on Tim's web page one can surmise that this clear objective evidence has not been enough to trump the common "knowledge" that film photography is dead and therefore there's no demand for such a book.

For me at least this means trudging on without this authoritative reference, making the best of my existing experience along with whatever I can glean from the internet or the less comprehensive coverage given to the subject in other books. So be it.

 If there is a saving grace in all of this it's that the effect I'm after is a bit more subtle than the typically more dramatic tones that seem to be popular with so many photographers these days. For the majority of my work I'd want to see a definite departure from the usual scale of neutral greys you get with standard papers straight out of the usual develop stop fix process, but nothing that screams out that toning effects were used. I still want my prints to look black and white, but I would like to see a depth enhancing variation of warm to cool going from highlight to shadow that can be achieved with split toning. Because it works by clinging to the molecules of silver in the print, the rich cool purple effect achieved with selenium toner affects the silver rich shadows most, leaving the highlights untouched. While it's a nice effect in general I like my prints to be on the warm side overall, requiring a different toner. The plan is to combine the cool dark tones of selenium with warm browns that come from sepia toner for a split toned effect.

The word sepia evokes notions of those old timey brown toned images from photography's early days and many are those who regard sepia toner's purpose is to render an effect that evokes a sense of those old days. In truth it can be used to achieve a variety of warming effects and here's how. Sepia toning is a two bath process. The first bath is a bleach based on potassium ferricyanide, which sounds worse than it is though you still want to be careful when mixing it not to inhale any of the dry powder that may become airborne. Immersed in this bleach the print will, to the alarm of many first timers, begin to disappear from the paper, starting with the highlights and progressing towards the darker tones as it is left in the bath for longer periods. The image is still there but invisible, like the latent image on an exposed but undeveloped roll of film. Once bleached to the desired degree the print is rinsed thoroughly in running water then placed into a sodium sulfide bath (which is nastier than it sounds - even when mixing it outdoors I got complaints about the rotten egg smell that managed to waft indoors.) Within about 10 seconds the image that had bleached away is redeveloped, taking on the warm sepia tint as it reappears. The effect can thus be controlled by altering how far into the darker tones the image is bleached.

The Photographers Formulary Sepia Toner kit and my
bottle of Kodak Rapid Selenium Toner

I hadn't really played with sepia toner since photography school days. Back then I was using Kodak's sepia toner kit and trying to achieve the strongest effect I could manage. Bleaching down into the shadows seemed to take forever and I remember wishing Kodak had made this solution stronger. I was never really happy with the effect back then, toning to that degree made the print seem dull and the old fashioned look never seemed particularly genuine to me. Until my recent notions of using it in conjunction with selenium toner for split toning I hadn't given sepia much thought since.

In the intervening years Kodak has discontinued their sepia toner but there is a kit available from Photographer's Formulary which I duly ordered. Like many other Formulary kits of this kind the box contained individual packets containing each individual raw chemical ingredient. Unlike in my photo school days however I was going for just a whiff of warmth in the highlights, meaning I only wanted a slight bleaching. The Formulary bleach solution was a deeper yellow than I remembered and I should have taken a clue from this.

The bleaching started almost immediately and by the time it had a chance to even out across the print it had already gone further than I had wanted. For the second print I diluted the bleach 1_1 but it was still much too fast. As I only made a couple of good prints I experimented a bit with the seconds, the ones I had made prior to figuring out how to get the burning and dodging just right, but ran out of those before concluding there was just no way to keep from going too far without diluting even further. In fact I believe it will need to much further, perhaps 10 to 1 or more. It seems keeping a stock solution and diluting for use may be the thing here and obviously more experimentation is needed. That, unfortunately, will have to wait until next time I have a few prints to work with.

Simple Alchemy Supplemental - Beutler's Day Off

While the original article Simple Alchemy was intended as a small expose on the practice of mixing your own darkroom chemistry from raw ingredients a good deal was said about my favourite home-brewed concoction Beutler's developer. From the feedback I have received so far it seems a lot of the interest many of you had in it was about this formula itself. And so, even as the arrival of enough PMK Pyro developer to last me at least a year may see my stock of Beutler put into semi-retirement it seems a good time to add a few things that might be of practical value to anyone inclined to try it for themselves.

Willi Beutler published the formula for his namesake developer during the 1950s in response to the new fine grained, thin emulsion films that were beginning to appear on the market at the time. The idea was to create a reasonably dilute one shot developer that would exhaust in the regions around dense highlight areas while remaining more active in the thinner shadow portions of the negative, creating a compensating effect to counteract these newer film's higher contrast. At the same time the finer grain of these films made it unnecessary to create a solvency effect which reduces the appearance of grain but also has the effect of giving a mushier appearance to fine details. By avoiding this Beutler formulated his developer to favour high definition, or acutance, over reducing grain. As a bonus, by favouring development in the shadows where the telling signs of underexposure appear, while avoiding the density reducing solvency effect of fine-grain developers, the formula makes the most of true film speed, which is to say the natural ideal speed at which to shoot without "pushing".

The plan is just as valid with today's moderate to slow speed black and white films as it was sixty years ago. Beutler is used to maximum advantage with films of 125 ISO and below. This is not to say that its virtues are completely lost on faster films, but you're less likely to need the compensating effect at higher speeds and more likely to miss the grain reducing effect that even middle of the road developers like D76 give you.

While we're on the subject I should say here that it isn't really fair to call Beutler, or any other formula for that matter, a "high grain" developer. Grain is an inherent part of the film and a developer can only mask its appearance, making it less obvious. Developers that have a reputation for yielding grainy results (Rodinal is another one you may hear this about) simply don't incorporate any measures to do this. This isn't oversight, grain reduction typically comes at a price in terms of acutance and film speed. They don't boost the appearance of grain so much as show it to you like it is.

There is one small word of caution in order before we get into details on using Beutler. If you use this or any other developer containing Metol (this includes a host of common film and paper developers including D76 and Dektol) in such a way that your are in prolonged contact with the solution (such as tray developing sheet film) wearing gloves or other protective measures to prevent direct contact with the skin is recommended as develop an adverse skin reaction with prolonged and repeated contact with Metol, also known by its Kodak trade name Elon.

Beutler is prepared as two separate concentrates that are combined and diluted just prior to use, after which the used developer is discarded. Part A contains the sole developing agent Metol, and enough Sodium Sulfite to act as a preservative, In higher concentrations Sodium Sulfite acts as a solvent that can begin to dissolve the metallic silver that make up the image grain which is precisely the strategy employed by nearly all grain reducing developers. I'll also note that it is important not to confuse Sodium Sulfite with Sodium Sulfide, a nastier substance also used in photo chemistry. Part B contains Sodium Carbonate to create the alkali environment needed by every photographic developer I've ever heard of. The alkali causes the developer to oxidize much more rapidly once combined so keeping the two parts separate until just prior to use increases the shelf life dramatically. You may find Sodium Carbonate at the local supermarket, sold under its common name Washing Soda. There are plenty of photographers use supermarket Washing Soda when mixing up their developers, just be careful not to get the scented stuff. The final chemical used in both parts is water. (I wish it weren't the case that so many people are surprised to hear water referred to as a chemical, which it most certainly is.) Water quality can vary greatly depending on where you live, and hard water is always bad news in photo chemistry, so if in doubt distilled water is always a good choice and usually very cheap.

That said, here is the recipe for Beutler:

Solution A:
750ml Water (40-50^oC)
10g Metol
50g Sodium Sulfite
Cold water to make 1L

Solution B:
750ml Water (40-50^oC)
50g Sodium Carbonate (anhydrous)
Cold water to make 1L

Notes on preparation:

• To make different quantities adjust all quantities in proportion equally
• If using the monohydrate form of Sodium Carbonate multiply the quantity by 1.17
• To prevent Sodium Carbonate from clumping into hard to dissolve crystals stir while adding it to water and do so gradually in a steady stream.

Usage

You may prepare any quantity of Beutler needed by combining and diluting the parts in any of the following proportions:

"Official" dilution: 1 part Solⁿ A + 1 part Solⁿ B + 8 parts water
Popular dilution: 1 part Solⁿ A + 1 part Solⁿ B + 10 parts water
The dilution I use: 1 part Solⁿ A + 1 part Solⁿ B + 12 parts water

The official dilution is what was recommended when the formula was first published though the popular dilution seems to be what is more commonly used these days. If you look up recommendations for using Beutler with your film on The Massive Dev Chart or elsewhere you may find recommendations for either or both of these dilutions. Do not use time/temperature recommendations for Neofin Blue assuming it's the same thing. While The Photographer's Formulary sells Beutler under the alternate name Neofin Blue, Neofin Blue proper is actually a completely different formula sold by Tetenal and the Massive Dev Chart's listings are for this product, Beutler is listed separately. I began using the higher 1+1+12 dilution because it's my completely arbitrary opinion that a compensating developer needs a good ten minutes in contact with the film to work properly and lesser dilutions weren't giving this to me with my favourite film. This works fine, makes it even cheaper to use and divides nice and evenly into the 420ml of solution I need for a 120 film in my stainless tanks. One of the rare online flame-wars I have seen break out in film photography forums has been over which dilution of Beutler's is "proper". Proper is why you rent a tux to go to a black-tie event. Use what works and makes sense to you.

As Beutler is hardly the best known developer out there finding recommendations for developing the film you use in it may be difficult, especially if the film is also less common. if The Massive Dev Chart doesn't have what you need, a web search may turn up something you use, otherwise a little experimentation may be needed. If you have no clue try 8 minutes if using the official dilution, 10 minutes for the popular dilution and 12 minutes for my dilution.

Lastly here are links to a few North American suppliers from whom you can order the raw chemical ingredients needed to make Beutler and any number of other photo chemical formulations. If you live elsewhere and know of a good supplier in your part of the world I'd welcome you to post references that others may find useful in the comments.

The Photographers Formulary - As the name implies the Formulary is built on supplying the photographic specialty market. They carry a comprehensive list of raw chemical ingredients as well as prepared developers, fixers and other concoctions today's analog photographers are likely to need or want.

Bostick & Sullivan - Known primarily as suppliers to those involved in alternative photographic processes such as Platinum/Palladium printing, they do carry the substances we lowly Silver using types need as well, including all you need to make Beutler (save for the water.)

Artcraft Chemicals - An extensive list of raw ingredients, some harder to find. Reputedly they will ship items to Canada and elsewhere that other suppliers will restrict to customers in the Lower 48, but shipping for any non-US order must be arranged by contacting them directly

B&H Photo - This photo big-box store carries a respectable inventory of photo chemistry, both raw and prepared, from several brands like Kodak and Photographer's Formulary. A good choice if you need one or two ingredients and want to combine it with your order for film and other supplies at the same time to save shipping.

Simple Alchemy

My working supply of Beutler film developer, along with some of the supplies I use to mix it up. I made up the commercialesque labels for fun, printed them out and stuck them on with clear packing tape. 

One of the things that may have received passing mention in previous episodes is that I mix many of my own darkroom chemistry from scratch using raw ingredients. It's a practice I thought not all of you may be familiar with, but even you are it seems a ripe subject to share and perhaps exchange a few thoughts about.

While most of the chemistry used in the darkroom lends itself to the home-brew approach, the majority of attention falls quite naturally on developers for film. While arguably print developers and toners have a greater influence on the look of the final result, you only get one shot at developing the original image on film and the characteristics imparted by the particular concoction you chose for this are indelible. This is of course just as true for commercially available formulae as it is for the DIY variety I'm focusing on here, but mixing your own offers a level of selection and control you can't get by simply choosing from what the market has to offer, not to mention the incomparable amount of latitude it allows for experimentation.

I can't remember what triggered my interest in the alchemy of photochemistry in my younger days, but once I got my hands on a copy of Steve Anchell's "The Darkroom Cookbook" there was no going back. Prior to that my attitude had always been that any developer formula that was offered commercially must have earned that honour by being better than the other possibilities. In reality there are hundreds, maybe even thousands of possible good recipes for making photographic developers in a market that can only profitably produce a fraction of these. The ones that are most commercially viable are often the good compromises, the ones offering a balance of the characteristics most often pegged as desirable - the ability to produce images with fine grain, high sharpness, and maximize the effective film speed. Often excellent and highly useful developers exist on the margins of the photographic market because they are the proprietary formula of a lesser known manufacturer. Anyone who is familiar with Diafine will know what I'm talking about here. Other factors unrelated to desirable image characteristics also come into play - how well does a formula lend itself to the manufacturing process, what are its keeping characteristics on the shelf and so on. The bottom line is that there is a world of photochemistry, interesting worth-while and infinitely explorable photochemistry, lying in wait outside the confines of what is on offer from Kodak, Ilford and their rivals.

Recent results using my current standard combination of Fuji Acros developed in Beutler

So why bother? Fair question. I won't deny for a second that there are prepared commercial film developers out there that are just excellent. I could pick just one of these, say Xtol or HC110, and go on with my photography as before quite contentedly. A few years back when I returned to my analog roots that's exactly what I intended to do. The bottle of HC110 that had seen me through the roll of film I still shot here and there through my digital years was only half used and still going strong after at least fifteen years since I purchased it, and the results left me nothing to complain about really. Why make things complicated.

Such was the enthusiasm with which I returned to film however that it was only a few months before the second half of the bottle began to run dry, bringing to a head the decision as to whether to renew my supply of HC110 and press on as before, or whether some other choice might be more suitable. I found that when it comes to the characteristics I considered most desirable in a developer my thinking had changed over the years. Back then fine grain had been high on the list but grain isn't the enemy it once was. Not that I've gone the other way mind you, I don't intentionally emphasize grain, I just don't consider it a defect. Looking at the kind of work I had been doing I was after a high definition (or acutance) developer with a compensating effect so there would be printable detail in highlight areas (like clouds).

A bit of research allowed me to narrow the field to a few choices. One idea was to go with one of the pyro developers I had experimented with many years ago. This would mean throwing simplicity right out the window however as not only do the potential health hazards of working with pyro require extra precautions, they make it difficult to obtain from the US based suppliers who are often unwilling to ship to Canada, at least at a reasonable rate. There was another intriguing choice I found however, something called Beutler's formula. Though Photographer's Formulary sells this as Neofin Blue (perpetuating an historical error of equating Beutler's formula with another developer formula entirely, but that's a story unto itself), but it's such a simple formula and so much cheaper to whip up myself.

Beutler's formula (aka Beutler's developer or simply Beutler, and often mis-spelled as Buetler) is really just a published recipe. It consists of four ingredients including water (I have no idea where this notion came from that water doesn't count as a chemical.) The other three are Metol, one of the most common developer agents out there, Sodium Sulfite which is cheap and used in just about everything in photochemistry, and Sodium Carbonate which if it isn't sold in the local supermarket as washing soda can easily be made from baking soda. It's a high acutance compensating developer with characteristics I see compared to they pyro developers more often than any other formula that uses conventional agents. It's a one-shot developer, a virtual must for me both for consistency and the simplicity of not having to keep track to know when it's nearing exhaustion. It's prepared in two concentrated parts which are combined and diluted just prior to use, all of which helps ensure maximum shelf life. As a bonus Beutler makes the most of true film speed (which should in no way be confused with pushing film.) So while many photographers find they get better results by shooting a 100 ISO film at 50 when they use a standard developer like D76, they would probably find this unnecessary with Beutler.

To keep a long story from getting even longer, with the last of the old HC110 used up I found myself back in the game of mixing up photochemistry from raw ingredients. This did more than just allow me to use one particular non-commercial formula however. Having those few ingredients and the little electronic scale came in handy in other ways. When I found a few bottles of powdered Vitamin C on clearance at my pharmacists I was easily able to try Caffenol which, I hasten to mention, is interesting for far more than the simple novelty of developing film in instant coffee. And when I found myself wanting to do a few darkroom prints but didn't have any paper developer on hand I was able to make enough to get me using ingredients that were on hand. And there are other benefits to brewing your own photochemicals as well:

• Manufacturers are free to alter the recipe of their developers and other photochemical products without any change to the name or other indicator to let you know the developer you bought today is not the same as the one you had been using even though it was sold under the same name in the same package. Make your own and you'll never be surprised when what had been a favorite developer suddenly isn't the same.
• From a modest inventory of raw chemicals you can often experiment with many different formulae that seem interesting to you.
• You get a better understanding of the characteristics of the chemistry you use, how they're derived and often what tradeoffs may be involved than you ever would by simply choosing from whatever preparations the market offers.
• You can play with the recipes of an existing formula or even come up with your own to suit your needs, even if the need is just curiosity.
• Since you are the manufacturer you are immune from the possibility that a favourite developer will be discontinued.
• It can be a stepping stone into other interesting areas of photography such as alternative processes.

This certainly won't be for everyone, and none of this is to say I am committed solely to the use of home-brewed photochemicals. Even back when I was experimenting with home brewed pyro concoctions for film, my paper developer and most other chemicals were off the shelf preparations and there was always HC110 on hand. More recently the modest supply of Pycrocat HD I got my hands on when I wrote The Road to Pyro last fall came as a kit from Photographer's Formulary. I was able to get it without extravagant shipping charges because B&H had it in stock (if only other US suppliers made shipping to Canada as simple) though in such a small quantity it was hardly the bargain getting the raw chemistry would be. Because pyro fomulae like Pyrocat and PMK are highly diluted for use I could get a near lifetime supply or the raw chemicals for a few hundred dollars shipped, but when my small supply ran out I wasn't ready to pull the trigger on that. Not a problem, another batch of Beutler kept me in business without any interruption. More recently I discovered B&H has larger quantities of prepared PMK Pyro in stock, and again no special shipping restrictions to Canada. The package arrived yesterday. I don't know if it will become my new favourite developer or if it will continue to be as readily available. If not, there's always Beutler, and there always will be.