why not use D76?sounds very similar.Does anyone have the recipe for original Aculux? I always loved this dev. Failing that, something that is virtually identical - fine grain, gentle highlights, huge tonality.
Thanks
It is YEARS since I heard mention of this developer, let alone used it. However it is not the same as ID11/D76. It was an accutance developer, giving apparent enhanced sharpness although not in the same league as Rodinal. D76/ID11 is a normal fine grain developer - and has been claimed to be the Industry Standard. No such claims have been made for Aculux
No Aculux (FX-24) wasn't one of Crawley/Paterson's "Acutance" developers they were Acutol and Acutol S. Aculux was a concentrated liquid developer which was designed to give similar results to D76/ID-11, no formula was ever published.
Ian
This below is a section out of the Paterson website that would suggest otherwise as to the origin!
Yes, Ian is completely correct, I have used Aculux, which was the general film developer from Patterson, and the Acutol, never used Acutol S, Aculux was re formulated slightly over the years to suit people who wanted to develop negatives suitable for both wet printing and scanning, IIRC there was Aculux, and Aculux 2, the nearest to it I have found was ID11/D76 possibly Xtol but I have never used it so I wouldn't know, as for acutance developers, I always prefered Rodinal,I'll re-iterate, Aculux (FX24) wasn't one of Crawley's Acutance developers, the only Crawley Acutance developers sold by Paterson were Acutol and Acutol S (FX15, it's that simple
Crawley devised other developers for Paterson such as Acuspeed (speed enhancing like Microphen), Aculux, (normal fine grain developer) the ACU doesn't stand for Acutance, it just comes from the name of Paterson's first developer which was Acutol (made for them by Ilford), the ACU also gets used for Acustop and Acufix.
Crawley's FX18 would be the best equivalent on terms of his published formulae for Aculux, personally I'd recommend Xtol as a better option.
Ian
Ian is correct I have all the Crawley formulas that appeared in the BJ and there is no mention of a FX-24. I would suggest trying Maxim M Muir's High Acutence version of D-76. Also give the acutence version of DK-50 a try. Use the formula below FS.
DK-50a
Distilled water ………………………………………………… 800 ml
Metol ……………………………………………………………………………………… 0.5 g
Sodium sulfite (anhy) …………………………………………… 6.0 g
Hydroquinone …………………………………………………………………… 0.5 g
Kodak Balanced Alkali …………………………………………… 10.0 g
Potassium bromide ……………………………………………………… 0.01 g
Distilled water to make ……………………………………… 1.0 l
I'll re-iterate, Aculux (FX24) wasn't one of Crawley's Acutance developers, the only Crawley Acutance developers sold by Paterson were Acutol and Acutol S (FX15, it's that simple
Crawley devised other developers for Paterson such as Acuspeed (speed enhancing like Microphen), Aculux, (normal fine grain developer) the ACU doesn't stand for Acutance, it just comes from the name of Paterson's first developer which was Acutol (made for them by Ilford), the ACU also gets used for Acustop and Acufix.
Crawley's FX18 would be the best equivalent on terms of his published formulae for Aculux, personally I'd recommend Xtol as a better option.
Ian
AFAICT Ian didn't claim that Aculux was not made by Crawley, he claimed that Aculux was not intended and/or advertised as acutance developer.So you are claiming that the Paterson website statement is a complete lie? I don't thinks so!
So you are claiming that the Paterson website statement is a complete lie? I don't thinks so!
I believe Aculux was often used diluted 1+9 where it gives times often similar to D-76 1+1, and fine grain.
The Aculux concentrate might have been based on use of the very soluble potassium sulfite to give fine grain.
I don't know of any other developer based on concentrated potassium sulfite.
If you search for potassium sulfite 45 it is widely available as a solution containing 450 g per liter, but only in industrial quantities so not for homebrew purposes.
Aculux was said to provide good film speed so it might contain phenidone. A quick unchecked search gives the solubility of hydroquinone as 59g per liter and phenidone as 20g per liter.
So far it appears Aculux could have been a PQ + potassium sulfite concentrate?
There's a good chance, that HQ is much more soluble in alkaline environment.A quick unchecked search gives the solubility of hydroquinone as 59g per liter and phenidone as 20g per liter.
I don't think its a practical homebrew if the ingredients are all concentrates of potassium sulfite , hydroquinone and phenidone.
Making it would be an exercise in small scale industrial chemistry, rather hazardous.
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?