ADOX D-76 introduced

ozphoto · Jul 5, 2023

Great to hear my two go-to developers are now available from @ADOX Fotoimpex !!
Now if stores here in Australia, will just stock it, my processing world will be complete.

Keith Tapscott. · Jul 5, 2023

What is the non-toxic biodegradable buffer mentioned?

ADOX Fotoimpex · Jul 5, 2023

Keith Tapscott. said:
What is the non-toxic biodegradable buffer mentioned?

Exactly this. A new buffer which is biodegradable and non toxic. Already in use in XT-3 since over a year.

Keith Tapscott. · Jul 5, 2023

ADOX Fotoimpex said:
Exactly this. A new buffer which is biodegradable and non toxic. Already in use in XT-3 since over a year.

Thank you, but why not just make D23 instead along with a borate free replenisher?

Lachlan Young · Jul 5, 2023

Keith Tapscott. said:
Thank you, but why not just make D23 instead along with a borate free replenisher?

Because D-76 is a de-facto industry standard and D-23 isn't. As a matter of fact, Henn (who invented D-23) was pretty clear (in the articles disclosing D-23/ D-25 and introducing Microdol) that D-23 was invented to equal various supposedly 'ultra-fine-grain' developers of the era which either used needlessly toxic ingredients and/ or had auras whipped up by the photographic press of the day - with Microdol intended to outperform D-23.

Keith Tapscott. · Jul 6, 2023

Lachlan Young said:
Because D-76 is a de-facto industry standard and D-23 isn't.

True, although Henn designed D23 as an alternative to D76 and it's free from borates and hydroquinone apart from the DK25R replenisher which uses Kodalk.

The thing that worries me is how reliable is this borate-free buffer? Also if borates are banned by the EU in the near future, it will affect many popular developers such as D76, Xtol, ID11 and DDX to name a few.

halfaman · Jul 6, 2023

Keith Tapscott. said:
The thing that worries me is how reliable is this borate-free buffer? Also if borates are banned by the EU in the near future, it will affect many popular developers such as D76, Xtol, ID11 and DDX to name a few.

So you think Adox would sell unreliable products... not a vey kind thought

In the formula Borax is a buffer, really nothing very fancy there. Call me naive but I am sure that almost 100 years after D-76 invention modern chemistry can do something about borax...

koraks · Jul 6, 2023

Keith Tapscott. said:
how reliable is this borate-free buffer?

Why would you assume it's less reliable than a borate buffer - which isn't that reliable to begin with, given the pH drift problems associated with D76!
There are countless buffers out there. Most of them are rock solid stable. They're buffers, after all.

Keith Tapscott. said:
Also if borates are banned by the EU in the near future, it will affect many popular developers such as D76, Xtol, ID11 and DDX to name a few.

It's not a given that the ban on borates will be complete. There may be allowances for certain products remaining in the market that contain borates if no alternative is feasible for the application. I doubt that will cover the developers you mention, but it's a possibility. Btw, I wouldn't consider it such a great loss if these developers would have to be replaced with something similar-acting, using slightly different chemistry.

Keith Tapscott. said:
why not just make D23

Why didn't we just keep using rodinal? The argument always ends there. Because D23 isn't D76, and some people want D76. Because you can't sell D23 as D76 because people will notice. Etc. Why sell rice in the stores if they already have flour - either will feed people just fine. The world just doesn't work that way.

Keith Tapscott. · Jul 6, 2023

halfaman said:
So you think Adox would sell unreliable products... not a vey kind thought

I certainly didn't mean to be unkind to Adox or any other manufacturers of photo chemistry. If their buffer is as good as or even better the Kodak and Ilford products, then that is a good thing.

I have been a regular user of D76 for decades, so I might give the Adox product a try. You never know, I may even prefer it.

pentaxuser · Jul 6, 2023

Isn't one of the reasons why D23 and D76 are different is that with D23 being solely metol it loses some speed compared with D76? John Finch in his video on making D23 gave an answer of sorts in reply to a comment but it wasn't clear to me if in terms of speed D23 was closer to Perceptol than to say ID11 or D76

Please note the "?". This is just a question on which I hope for an answer. It is not a challenge to anyone in any shape or form.

Thanks

pentaxuser

Lachlan Young · Jul 6, 2023

Keith Tapscott. said:
True, although Henn designed D23 as an alternative to D76

That does not seem to have been anything other than a side-effect - D-23 was a step towards resolving the problems with DK-20 en route to D-25 & then Microdol by travelling past D-76. Henn describes D-23 as having properties as 'not unlike' D-76, but is quite carefully vague as to how close their absolute equivalency is, though he does praise D-23's highlight separation. And at the end of the day, Microdol was designed for replenishment & to be 'better' than the above.

FotoD · Jul 8, 2023

mshchem said:
Huge advantage is the Captura technology. The speed of dissolution is amazing. No dust in your space.

+1

Works great with XT-3. And with Captura in Adox D-76 you don't have to breathe in hydroquinone any more. Thanks Adox.

Ernst-Jan · Jul 23, 2023

Looking at adox.de I noticed D76 is not mentioned on your product overview. Usually times for ID-11 and Kodak D76 are the same, but Adox CHS100 they aren't. Which time should we follow?

Would it also be possible to give times for 1+3?

koraks · Jul 31, 2023

Tsubasa said:
I was wondering if Adox has the right to use the "D76" trademark from Kodak

Yes. At least in the EU, the "D-76" trade mark is registered to....Mirko Böddecker.

In the US it's registered to ADOX, so boils down to the same thing.

I did not check other countries.

Ernst-Jan · Jul 31, 2023

koraks said:
Yes. At least in the EU, the "D-76" trade mark is registered to....Mirko Böddecker.

View attachment 345292

In the US it's registered to ADOX, so boils down to the same thing.

I did not check other countries.

he asked about D76 and not D-76

koraks · Jul 31, 2023

LOL
Touché

mshchem · Jul 31, 2023

Dee Seventy Six is my new favorite

earthcreed · Aug 2, 2023

Any suggestions on where to find this in North East Texas, USA? Somewhere between Dallas, TX and Shreveport, LA (inclusive).

mshchem · Aug 2, 2023

Don't worry about borates. EU is maybe a bit overly cautious, an effort to keep the earth healthy (GOOD CALL). Home use of these developers have no real impact. MHOFWIW

Donald Qualls · Aug 3, 2023

mshchem said:
Home use of these developers have no real impact.

This is why Federal standards on photo lab effluents contain an exception for home processing. Unless you're a professional shooting film at 1990s volume and processing it all at home, your chemicals down the drain aren't a significant hazard. Still better not, but not a reason not to process if you don't have a better way to dispose of the used chemistry (with a few exceptions like dichromate reversal bleach).

koraks · Aug 3, 2023

Donald Qualls said:
dichromate reversal bleach

The highly toxic chromium-VI in this can be reduced with e.g. bisulfite or ascorbic acid to chromium-III, which is far less dangerous to the point of not being a concern in typical quantities used in this application.

Donald Qualls · Aug 3, 2023

koraks said:
The highly toxic chromium-VI in this can be reduced with e.g. bisulfite or ascorbic acid to chromium-III, which is far less dangerous to the point of not being a concern in typical quantities used in this application.

Correct -- when I've done reversal I've poured the clearing bath (sodium sulfite solution) and bleach (sulfuric acid and potassium dichromate) together; the solution changes from orange to green, and loss of the muddy brown of both colors present signals the conversion has completed. Still not the best thing to put down a drain, but much better than the unaltered dichromate solution.

bluechromis · Aug 28, 2023

I remember the P.E. saying that, at one time, Kodak was getting flak because the borax effluent from photo-processing was killing orange groves in Florida. This may have little relevance to today and small-scale processing but does show that borates can cause environmental concerns.

Donald Qualls · Aug 29, 2023

bluechromis said:
does show that borates can cause environmental concerns.

Of course, it mainly shows how irresponsible management of process waste can multiply the environmental effects of just about anything.

What was untreated wastewater doing in orange groves to begin with?

ADOX D-76 introduced

ozphoto

Keith Tapscott.

ADOX Fotoimpex

Partner

Keith Tapscott.

Lachlan Young

Keith Tapscott.

halfaman

koraks

Moderator

Keith Tapscott.

pentaxuser

Lachlan Young

FotoD

Ernst-Jan

koraks

Moderator

Ernst-Jan

koraks

Moderator

mshchem

earthcreed

mshchem

Donald Qualls

koraks

Moderator

Donald Qualls

bluechromis

Donald Qualls

ADOX D-76 introduced

Partner

Moderator

Moderator

Moderator

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency