used film developper for paper

[Yourix]

Hi there

As most of us I use my film developper "one shot" and toss it after processing. I occasionally reuse it for a second batch right after the first and the results are perfectly fine.
But I was wondering if this slightly exhausted chemical was any good for processing something less critical and more controlable by view like paper prints ?

Has anybody tried it ?
Maybe it could be added to more conventional paper dev to make it last longer ? What would be the effect on tones ?
My darkroom is not ready yet so I can't try rn...

[jnantz]

Hi Yourix

I haven't really done the exact same thing but something similar ..
no harm in trying to re-use your developer. You might find that using a universal developer ( like D72 or Ansco 130/125 &c )
work better for that sort of thing. I've done what you are doing ( or hope to do ) with both Ansco 130 and D72 (and Caffenol c ).. everything
worked out fine .. but im not a stickler .. There are people can probably recognize differences in films and prints who might be able to point out my (and my film/prints') deficiencies ..
the trick is to turn the deficiencies into benefits. 1 less chemical in the darkroom is a benefit (for me at least .. )

good luck !
John

[nolindan]

Expect very slow developing times - 10 minutes or so. I tried this in my youth when I ran out of paper developer and gave it up as a bad idea.

There are "universal" developers, with these you are developing film with a paper developer rather than the other way around.

[Michael R]

One obvious potential problem I can think of when trying to use an unmodified film developer for paper is chemical fog. Film developers are not formulated to totally suppress fog - this is acceptable for negatives but for paper you clearly don't want any fog. On the other hand, contemporary enlarging papers emulsions seem to need less developer restrainer than they once might have, so I guess in the end it's hard to give a definite answer. You'd need to try it for yourself and see.

[Drew Wiley]

Why would prints be less critical? - I guess that you could redo them if you don't like the results, unlike film. But unnecessarily wasting paper can get expensive. But the ideal developer characteristics involved differ anyway. Paper developers need to be more energetic. I tried it long ago. Wasn't worth the extra fuss.

[Doremus Scudder]

Add to all this the fact that used film developer in a dilution for one-shot development is, well... used. It is likely very close to exhaustion if not already there. The number of prints you might be able to make with it will likely be limited. Furthermore, an 8x10 print tray needs a liter of solution. How much used film developer do you have on hand anyway? It won't last long after use, even stored in a bottle, so you'd have to develop film to get a liter of used developer, switch to printing, use that developer for a few prints (with really long developing times and possible fog) for the few prints you can make before it reaches exhaustion and then go back to develop more film...

Sounds like more trouble than it's worth to me. There's a good reason there are print developers.

Best,

Doremus

[Yourix]

Thank you everybody for your answers

I understand film dev is not concentrated enough for prints, but the fog thing makes me think to something else...
I know it is more or less possible to attenuate fog on old film by adding benzotriazole to the dev but it is a bit risky (loss of density/contrast ?). What about developing old film in paper dev as you said it is formulated to reduce fog ? I'm thinking of a box of 4x5 Kodak Ektapan I have, long perempted, badly stored by previous owner and heavily fogged...

[Michael R]

You can try adding either Benzotriazole or KBr. The

Thank you everybody for your answers

I understand film dev is not concentrated enough for prints, but the fog thing makes me think to something else...
I know it is more or less possible to attenuate fog on old film by adding benzotriazole to the dev but it is a bit risky (loss of density/contrast ?). What about developing old film in paper dev as you said it is formulated to reduce fog ? I'm thinking of a box of 4x5 Kodak Ektapan I have, long perempted, badly stored by previous owner and heavily fogged...

A standard print developer will tend to develop contrast quickly and you’ll typically sacrifice a little emulsion speed - not the best for film. However there are some developers formulated to work with both film and paper, and they are low-fog. Ilford PQ Universal is a well known example. That’s what I would suggest.

One other clarification - film developers typically have higher concentrations of developing agent(s) than print developers, but print developers are more alkaline than most general purpose film developers, which makes them more active. Print developers are formulated primarily for contrast and low fog, whereas film developers are (usually) formulated to prioritize image structure characteristics and emulsion speed.

[jp]

If you want to experiment... used dirty weak paper developers work fine on film... I've done plenty of Xray film in browning dektol or dektol plus some other used developer.
Xray film can be inspected in red light but it's hard to totally judge till it's been fixed.