Hello, Paul.Cant say how much new stock must be added, if I were doing it (likely all wrong) I would just 10 to 20 % additional time for the second roll then discard. I assume you are planning on using just enough D76 to cover a roll, maybe add enough new D76 to make up for any loss of chemistry that might cling to the film and reel and sides of tank, adjust time then see what happens.
You are trying to replenish a film developer with itself, and AFAIK there's only XTol to do this right.
I do not think your idea falls under "replenishment", because you are always using a mix of fresh + one-time used.
This is where a "brain hurts" problem may come in - doesn't each iteration change the activity of the previously used developer?[EDIT] Actually I just realized that for his proposal to work, he has no choice but to mix fresh + used-once developer at 1:1 ratio and use +50% development time. Otherwise he won't have enough once-used developer left for subsequent runs. Also, I am starting to think it's a neat idea, because it offers an interesting combination of economy, quality and predictability.
Hi Rudeofus,You are trying to replenish a film developer with itself, and AFAIK there's only XTol to do this right. Would a switch from D-76 to XTol be an option?
Regarding the tank: I know of no tank system to use 300ml for 120 type film rolls. However, you can put two 120 type film rolls on a regular spindle.
Hi Donald,But this is replenishment, with a (wastefully?) high replenishment rate. The OP would be ahead to just reuse the once-used solution for a second roll with 10% longer time (and continue to do so adding another 10% per reuse).
Another option is to follow Ilford's method of making ID-11 replenisher (now that they've discontinued the actual stuff): they just mix the ID-11 A packets to double strength with only a single B packet, and use the resulting solution to replenish ID-11 stock solution. If you have access to ID-11, this would save money over either reusing stock or 1+1 (replenisher costs twice as much per liter as developer, but you use less than half as much of it). Like other low-rate replenishment systems, the recommendation is to discard the working solution and start over once you've used a volume of replenisher equal to the original working solution. They don't give an optimal replenishment rate (recommend using "process control" to set the rate), however, and you can't do this with D-76 because it's a single packet.
As I recall, a major issue for the OP is very limited local availability of either photo chemicals or raw chemicals that can be used, complicated by his fixed-speed shooting method.
Yes, what I want to do is to alternate as you say... I think -soon I'll check that- if I add a good amount of unused stock, to the just once used stock, I may be able to use the same development time.@MattKing and @Donald Qualls oops, you guys are right. I just realized that it's impossible to have a steady supply of "used-only-once" developer, therefore Juan's approach cannot be implemented, unless he's willing to alternate between 100% stock and stock:used-only-once batches, which he seems unwilling to do because it would mean using different development times.
Your problem is that if you use a mixture of used and new, after development you will be left with used developer that is more "used" than the used developer that you added at first.Yes, what I want to do is to alternate as you say... I think -soon I'll check that- if I add a good amount of unused stock, to the just once used stock, I may be able to use the same development time.
Hi Matt,Your problem is that if you use a mixture of used and new, after development you will be left with used developer that is more "used" than the used developer that you added at first.
But that requires two different development times, which you are trying to avoid.
And use something like a 9 minute development time for the first roll, and 9.5 minutes for the second.I feel like everyone is over thinking this problem. OP can use his developer, then fill the used developer into his empty bottle. For the next stage he can just decant 50% of the used developer and mix in with 50% of his stock solution. After developing with this, then just discard the whole thing. The cycle then repeats where he can pour in the full stock developer and after developing the film, store it in the bottle, and then decant 50% and add 50% of stock buffer for the next development.
True if I don't add unused stock...But that requires two different development times, which you are trying to avoid.
Very easy...I feel like everyone is over thinking this problem. OP can use his developer, then fill the used developer into his empty bottle. For the next stage he can just decant 50% of the used developer and mix in with 50% of his stock solution. After developing with this, then just discard the whole thing. The cycle then repeats where he can pour in the full stock developer and after developing the film, store it in the bottle, and then decant 50% and add 50% of stock buffer for the next development.
Basically this will save him 1/2 of required volume for each (or every other?) processing but you must keep track of the number of times you are doing this. I don't know, this just sounds like unnecessary stress but if it can save money/resources then OP can test it.
Even when do.True if I don't add unused stock...
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?