A question for Chemists... Not a simple one... Setting a two-shot system for D-76.

[Juan Valdenebro]

And use something like a 9 minute development time for the first roll, and 9.5 minutes for the second.
Or compromise, and use 9.25 minutes for each.

Who knows?
I may end up using 250ml of unused stock + 125ml of once used stock...
Perhaps there's enough fresh developer there to get it done with the same development time... I'll soon know.
I just want to avoid both replenishment and different times for the second use of my gallon.

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

Even when do.
For this to work with unchanged times, you need a source of consistent used developer.
The used developer you end up with after developing one roll won't be the same as the used developer you end up with after developing two rolls.

That's true. Adding x ml per developed roll is my way to get a source of consistent used developer. There must be a way: It's like replenishing for a week with simple D-76, use it for a second time and discard.

 

[MattKing]

How often are you developing film?
I ask, because if you are developing twelve rolls a month, it might make sense to develop two rolls in 600 ml fresh stock (at fresh stock times) at the beginning of the month, and then keep that used 600 ml and use 120ml of that each of the next 5 times you develop two rolls - each time with 480 ml fresh and 120 ml of used.
It is the restraining development byproducts in the used developer that matter the most, not the capacity.

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

How often are you developing film?
I ask, because if you are developing twelve rolls a month, it might make sense to develop two rolls in 600 ml fresh stock (at fresh stock times) at the beginning of the month, and then keep that used 600 ml and use 120ml of that each of the next 5 times you develop two rolls - each time with 480 ml fresh and 120 ml of used.
It is the restraining development byproducts in the used developer that matter the most, not the capacity.

Something like that is what I'm trying to find out... But some other times I need 600ml for a 120 roll... What I need to see is if by adding a good amount of fresh stock to the used stock, time differences are so small as to be irrelevant in practice.
I develop only a few 35mm and 120 rolls every month...

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

One thing I'm sure of, Matt: many, many forum members, like you, know more than I do, so if I'm ever able to do this well, it will be thanks to others' help and opinions.

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

There's another way to ask it:
If i decide to replenish with simple D-76, how long does it take before the system fails? Or before development times change?
And what rate in ml would you use?

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

Am I thinking right?:
250ml of stock solution are recommended for every roll. But a litre can develop 10 rolls adding time for stock reuse, so, doesn't it seem the 250ml are required, more than for development, for stability with higher dilutions?
If someone uses the adding time to reused stock system: do you get the same grain with the last rolls? I feel strange when I think of using the same litre of developer so many times!

 

[Paul Howell]

Cant say with D76/ID11 but with MCM 100 Edwal 12 1 lt. stock 10 rolls, first roll at recommended time then add 20% for next 9 rolls. last roll was as good as the first roll. Unlike D76 MCM 100 and Edwal 12 uses stock for replenishment this is the method I've the most and kept a tank active for over 2 years. I know landscape shooters who used D76 replenished and kept tanks going for years but replacing half of their jug every once and a while. when I use D76 for 120 and sheet film I use it 1:1 and discard. Reason is that with modern film MF and sheet does not need to be developed in a gain reducer developer 1:1 provides more of a acutance development.

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

My perception after using D-76 stock for some weeks for TX, TMY and HP5+ is not that it reduces or dissolves grain at full strength: it's that at 1+1 -the cheaper way of using D-76- it makes grain grow more than it's necessary or optimal. I like stock for overcast (because of better tone) and I like 1+2 for direct sunlight (because of better tone too). But for fast film, stock looks better.
Honestly I think D-76 was designed (or it's just better in present days) for full strength use if we talk about fast film or 35mm film.
MF and LF hide that, making it less relevant.
I prefer the real sharpness and fine detail rendering of D-76 stock.

 

[MattKing]

Am I thinking right?:
250ml of stock solution are recommended for every roll. But a litre can develop 10 rolls adding time for stock reuse, so, doesn't it seem the 250ml are required, more than for development, for stability with higher dilutions?
If someone uses the adding time to reused stock system: do you get the same grain with the last rolls? I feel strange when I think of using the same litre of developer so many times!

It isn't that 250 ml are required for every roll. It is that 250 ml are required for every roll in order to ensure consistency from roll to roll. With D-76, if you use less than 250 ml, you can compensate (mostly) by extending the time.
However, the qualities will be optimized if you do use at least 250 ml per roll. Anything less will result in at least some reduction of quality.
And one of the changes over time will be a change in the appearance of the grain as the development byproducts (restrainers) build up.

There's another way to ask it:
If i decide to replenish with simple D-76, how long does it take before the system fails? Or before development times change?
And what rate in ml would you use?

The problem with using stock D-76 to replenish is that the activity of the stock is one thing, while the restraining effect of the development byproducts is another. Replacing a certain amount of used developer with fresh developer will cause an increase in activity but, unlike with X-Tol or T-Max developers, the decrease in activity that results from developing a roll won't be nicely matched by the sum effect of replacing a quantity of used developer (removal of byproducts) and the addition of fresh developer.
That is why there are/were special versions of D-76 and other developers that were to be used as replenishers.
All that means that your development times won't be consistent, as you proceed.
Of course, the relative change may be small, if you only use a portion of the developer's replenishment capacity - i.e. only re-use it a bit, and then discard it before it runs out.

 

[Bill Burk]

I am wondering about the possibility of using 1+2 instead of stock and instead of replenished stock.

The chief advantage of one shot is consistent developing time. At 1+1 it doesn’t take too long to develop.

At 1+2 or 1+3 your developing times will be longer.

If you have more time than developer, I would recommend doing a more dilute one-shot and work out the time - contrast that gives you the greatest number of rolls per gallon at the longest developing time you can live with.

 

[Bill Burk]

Ah, nvm. Didn't realize OP want to avoid adjusting develop time. Yea, not sure how that would work then...

Juan,

Is it that you don’t want longer developing times, or that you want to keep the same times every time... No matter how long it needs to be?

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

Hi Bill,
I use stock and 1+1 at 20C, and 1+2 at 21C.
For instance, 7, 10 and 13 minutes for TMY (35mm for street @640), or 9, 13, and 20 minutes for HP5+ (Hasselblad without tripod @640).
1+1 and 1+2 look fine in MF. Stock is the best looking option in 35mm for soft light. I avoid direct sunlight with small cameras as I like that at 1+2.
Developer is cheap, and I value my time more than anything.

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

Juan,

Is it that you don’t want longer developing times, or that you want to keep the same times every time... No matter how long it needs to be?

I'd prefer not to add time and not to keep track of that... But if after these tests I find there's no way to use D-76 stock twice without adding time, I'd use fresh stock, just once and discard, but only for overcast in 35mm, so to speak, for street photography: 360ml are enough... I don't develop very much... All this I try to do is because I want to be able to do it easily for MF too, because 600ml for each 120 and discard makes me feel like a fool.

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

If I like 35mm in D-76 stock for overcast at EI640, I bet EI250-320 in D-76 stock for soft light must be superb in MF: I have not tried that with any film...
Of course for 35mm street or for handholding MF the extra f-stop is paramount, but for handheld MF portraiture with wider aperture, I bet it must be close to Perceptol 1+2.

 

[grat]

At least one person on the internet claims that because D76 is such a homogeneous mixture, that you can mix individual batches by measuring developer powder by weight. From a blog entry on developing Harman Direct Positive paper with D76 (plus baking soda):

To make this solution, I measure 27 grams of D-76 powder and mix it into 500 mL of warm water. I usually mix it into about 450 mL in a large beaker and transfer it to a 500 mL amber bottle, then I top off the bottle with warm water. This directly mixes a 1:1 dilution.

from https://diyphotography.home.blog/2019/02/20/using-kodak-d-76-to-develop-ilford-photographic-paper/

So he's basically mixing up a new, one-shot batch of 1:1 D76 every time he develops. I've yet to try this, but it's on my project list. Whether that helps you or not, I have no idea.

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

Hi grat, thank you... Yes, I've read that a few times...
I use distilled water and amber glass bottles, with no air always (I have more than 50 bottles from 1lt. to 50ml, for several developers and fixer, and I use marbles) and my gallon of D-76 is fine for one year, without relevant changes in activity, but in general I use a gallon in two or three months. By the way, I don't know why I prefer D-76 to ID-11, but I do. I feel more confidence.

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

It isn't that 250 ml are required for every roll. It is that 250 ml are required for every roll in order to ensure consistency from roll to roll. With D-76, if you use less than 250 ml, you can compensate (mostly) by extending the time.
However, the qualities will be optimized if you do use at least 250 ml per roll. Anything less will result in at least some reduction of quality.
And one of the changes over time will be a change in the appearance of the grain as the development byproducts (restrainers) build up.

The problem with using stock D-76 to replenish is that the activity of the stock is one thing, while the restraining effect of the development byproducts is another. Replacing a certain amount of used developer with fresh developer will cause an increase in activity but, unlike with X-Tol or T-Max developers, the decrease in activity that results from developing a roll won't be nicely matched by the sum effect of replacing a quantity of used developer (removal of byproducts) and the addition of fresh developer.
That is why there are/were special versions of D-76 and other developers that were to be used as replenishers.
All that means that your development times won't be consistent, as you proceed.
Of course, the relative change may be small, if you only use a portion of the developer's replenishment capacity - i.e. only re-use it a bit, and then discard it before it runs out.

Great post, Matt, thanks.
I had not seen it.

 

[Bill Burk]

Juan I agree it takes less time with stock to reach high enough contrast to make soft light look good on film.

But I think it has more to do with the contrast than the fact it’s stock. You could probably go with 24 to 32 minutes in D-76 1:1 and get the same nice contrast.

Trying and seeing this might help you decide to stick with 1:1 even in soft light, because 18 minutes might be good too, and that’s not too much time.

 

[Rudeofus]

@Juan Valdenebro You seem to be extremely sensitive to even small deviations from perfect developer. You see profound differences between D-76 stock and D-76 1+1, you see strong differences between XTol and D-76. You do not under any circumstances want to use a replenished regime. It has to be D-76 stock, period.

In this case your best solution is to simply put up with the extra cost of using D-76 single shot. Even used this way it will be much cheaper than your film rolls you develop with it, and you do not risk issues from carryover or previous development cycle having an effect on your developer. If you are that critical, then there is no path left but single shot use of whatever developer you prefer - in your case D-76.

 

[Donald Qualls]

• Develop 4 rolls in 1L of fresh, stock D76

• Save the used developer

• Develop next 16 rolls mixing the saved used-once developer with fresh stock at 2:1 ratio and using +30% development time

• Discard the developer.

• Start over

This is still just self-replenishment (for which D-76 isn't suitable, else we'd have been informed of it when Kodak and then Ilford dropped the replenishers for D-76 and ID-11). And again, it's a wastefully high replenishment rate; you get less film (20 rolls) than with 1+1 used one-shot.

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.

This and Old Gregg's method are both more complicated than proper replenishment, as well as requiring keeping track of whether you're using fresh stock or partially used developer.

By the way, I don't know why I prefer D-76 to ID-11, but I do. I feel more confidence.

I'd suggest starting by testing one against the other. Replenishment really is the most likely way to do what you want to do -- that is, have one development time all the time, and always get the same negative condition. Ideally, you'd use a developer starter each time you mix fresh stock solution, to start in a "seasoned" state (there's probably a formula for D-76 starter around somewhere, and the same forumula would work for ID-11 -- once mixed, they're the same). That said, a lot of folks have used D-76 and ID-11 with replenishment since the 1950s without feeling the need for a starter.

The one big down side of replenishment is limited working solution life for traditional low-rate replenishment -- that is, over a long enough working life, the tank solution will build up enough byproducts to start to wander in activity -- you'll get an increase or decrease in contrast, changes in grain, bromide drag, or other problems. This usually happens when you've exceeded the recommended limit of equal amount of replenisher to the volume of the working solution (likely by quite a bit; manufacturer recommendations are generally very conservative, being aimed a commercial processing). The exception to this is high-rate self-replenishment, in developers that can use this method. The only one of those that's easy to get now is Xtol, though at least one of its knock-offs (LegacyPro EcoPro) has been user-tested to support this usage as well -- but with Xtol in self-replenishment, you can literally keep your working solution going forever (if you can avoid "trade concerns" and related product shortages).

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

@Juan Valdenebro You seem to be extremely sensitive to even small deviations from perfect developer. You see profound differences between D-76 stock and D-76 1+1, you see strong differences between XTol and D-76. You do not under any circumstances want to use a replenished regime. It has to be D-76 stock, period.

In this case your best solution is to simply put up with the extra cost of using D-76 single shot. Even used this way it will be much cheaper than your film rolls you develop with it, and you do not risk issues from carryover or previous development cycle having an effect on your developer. If you are that critical, then there is no path left but single shot use of whatever developer you prefer - in your case D-76.

No, I've said I use 1+1 and 1+2 too, and also other developers.
But D-76 stock is what I like for overcast with 35mm ISO400 film.
That, at EI640: at EI200 I prefer Perceptol 1+2.

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

Juan I agree it takes less time with stock to reach high enough contrast to make soft light look good on film.

But I think it has more to do with the contrast than the fact it’s stock. You could probably go with 24 to 32 minutes in D-76 1:1 and get the same nice contrast.

Trying and seeing this might help you decide to stick with 1:1 even in soft light, because 18 minutes might be good too, and that’s not too much time.

Hi Bill,
Yes: I consider it's possible to use 1+1 even for soft light... Indeed, I wrote (here) I do that for MF... It's small format ISO400 what I prefer with stock.
I guess I'll end up using 360ml of stock for the small rolls, one shot and discard, instead of 250ml for 1+1: no big deal in the end, and a very small price for comfort and image quality.
That's easier, faster, and more relaxing than using stock twice.

 

[Rudeofus]

No, I've said I use 1+1 and 1+2 too, and also other developers.
But D-76 stock is what I like for overcast with 35mm ISO400 film.
That, at EI640: at EI200 I prefer Perceptol 1+2.

Regardless of whether your preference for D-76 stock applies to generic shots or just specific lighting situations: if D-76 stock is the absolutely only developer which cuts the deal for you in some situation, then D-76 stock used single shot it ought to be. If D-76 1+1 won't work for you, then D-76 mixed with used D-76 will be even further off, plus a lot more unpredictable, because the first roll may have different levels of exposure, and it may have different combinations of silver halide.

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

100% predictable if you talk about my system.