>>2850428

use a pic related to your post, you fucking useless shit.

>>2850429
It wouldnt make a difference because people who dont know what caffenol is wont contribute anything helpful

It stains the negatives, is more expensive than some normal developers, might have unreliable results with new coffee batches and has a bad, time-consuming workflow - you have to prepare it fresh each time and use it immidieately.

Other than the above it's a cool way to develop photos with everyday ingredients in a pinch. Used it several times, it was fun and worked but [see paragraph 1].

The delta STD (who makes these names) recipie was a slow (13-15min for most films) fine grain developer. Stained negs brown a bit, even with ridiculously excessive rinsing.

>>2850474
So you think i could just fix the staining after scanning it and putting it in lightroom?

>>2850428
there's a developer that's in the same family as caffenol called pyro. I used it for years when I was prepping for art school. the beauty of it is that it's very easy to temp so it's *mL of A and B for 30 parts of water*, the negative itself is almost see-through like some festival qt 3.14s dress making it easy for printing in the darkroom and scanning

http://www.pyrocat-hd.com/

>>2850983
Ofcourse. I did. You just won't get pure blacks and it's an additional bother to fuss over.

I switched to homemade rodinal (tylenol) - based on paracetamol (from painkillers) - the developer keeps extremely well/long and is way simpler to handle than caffenol. Really easy to make at home, as much as caffenol.

>>2851014
Thanks anon i will take your advice