Diafine Film Developer

Diafine may be the ultimate "no hassle" film developer. Why you ask? Well, if you're used to using XTOL, D76, etc., then try this on for size:

  1. You can use any temperature between 70 and 85 degrees to develop your film, with no change in results.

  2. Time doesn't really matter, provided you develop for at least 3 minutes in each solution.

  3. You can re-use the developer, and it lasts a ridiculously long time.

  4. It's a compensating developer, meaning you'll get great shadow detail with pretty much no chance of blown hightlights.

  5. It gives almost a one stop push to most B&W films, without the associated increase in grain and contrast typically associated with pushing a film.

Sound good? I thought so too, so I gave it a try. Here's how it works:

On the box, there's a list of films that have been tested with Diafine. I stick solely with Kodak TMX and Tri-X. TMX for most any daylight work, and Tri-X when I need a lot of speed. The reason being, when developed in Diafine, Tri-X receives a two stop bump in EI, meaning you shoot it at ISO 1600. Pretty neat. The results are pleasing, very much akin to Tri-X shot at ISO 400 and developed in D76. My results with TMX shot at ISO 200 (the box recommends ISO 160... try varying your EI to find what works best for you) have been nothing short of astounding. Rich blacks, a wide range of tones, little grain. Of course, the look is subjective... I've talked to several photographers who've tried it and not liked the somewhat muted whites that Diafine produces. Give a try for yourself and see what you think. I've also shot Delta 400 (which receives no speed increase) and had good results. I plan to try Pan F+ at some point in the future.

Expose some film at the EI's recommeded on the box. Load your film developing tank, and get ready for the easiest development process you've ever experienced:

  1. Pour solution A in tank for 3 minutes. Agitate VERY lightly for 5 seconds every minute (for me, this means two slow inversions).

  2. After 3 minutes, pour solution A back in its bottle. Don't rinse the tank.

  3. Pour solution B into the tank for 3 minutes. Agitate the same as for solution A.

  4. Pour solution B back into its bottle after 3 minutes.

  5. Rinse in water for 30 seconds. Don't use an acid stop bath.

  6. Fix and wash as usual.

You're done! Pretty easy, eh? My XTOL and D76 have literally been dumped down the drain. Diafine is the only developer I use now. There's also the added bonus of knowing that if the negatives are too dense or too thin, your exposures are to blame, not your developing.

Film Tests:

I've tested the following films with Diafine. My results are completely subjective, so take them with a grain of salt.

  1. Tri-X@1600: a true ISO 1600 film in Diafine, though some people like to shoot it at 1200. I've had great results at 1600 on 35mm film. Fantastic tone, tight grain very similar to Tri-X@400 in D76. My standard for low light photography. I've recently started using this film in 120, and the true speed seems to be about ISO 1000 for me.

  2. Kodak TMY@500: this film in Diafine is very similar to the results from developing in D76. I'm not fond of the look, as the grain seems excessive and results fluctuate wildly depending on the lighting conditions. I've never had any luck with TMY though, so maybe you'll do better than I have.

  3. Kodak TMX@160: Very tight grain, fantastic tone, and a nice speed increase make this the film I keep in my camera most of the time. In 120 rollfilm, I'm actually shooting this film at 200.

  4. Ilford Delta 400@400: Acufine lists Delta 400 on their box as working with Diafine, and it does work. But it's horribly grainy and very contrasty, the two things that Delta 400 in XTOL aren't. If you love Delta 400, don't torture it by developing it in Diafine.

  5. Ilford XP2 Super@200: yes, a C41 process film that you can instead develop in Diafine. I don't recommend it though. It does horrible things to skin tones, and the grain is horrible. Not so much excessive, just not very pretty.

  6. Ilford Pan F+@80: very nice. Zero grain. Definitely worth trying if you don't mind that it's so slow. I prefer TMX.

  7. Fuji Neopan 400@800: not bad, but nothing special. I like Tri-X a whole lot more. More problematic is the fact that highlights seem to blow out, something I've not observed in any other film developed in Diafine.

  8. Fuji Neopan 1600@2400: don't bother. Tri-X is infinitely better.

Diafine Downfalls:

Diafine sounds pretty good, right? Well, it is, but there are a few things to be aware of that have likely kept this developer from being commonly adopted. Because Diafine has a set development time, and films need to be shot at specific EI's, you can't do N+ or N- development with it. In other words, there's no way to modify the contrast of a scene through development the way you can with normal developers. Diafine tends to produce flat results in flat lighting (highlights will be more gray than white, and in general contrast will be low), but very nice results in contrasty lighting. For those reasons, I'm now using Diafine for very specific situations. For example, it's great if you're shooting at night. Night scenes are very contrasty, and Diafine does a great job of controlling the highlights. I also use Diafine in my Holga. Because of the lack of exposure control with the Holga, Diafine assures me good, printable negatives without burned out highlights. Again, for the same reasons, I use Diafine to develop film I've shot in very harsh lighting (i.e. mid-day sun).

To conclude, Diafine has very significant benefits if you use it under the right conditions. Give some a try, and see where it will work best for you.

Want to read some of my other Equipment Reviews?