Agfa 8, a Glycin based film developer

I recently received for evaluation from Bryant Laboratory, several grams of N-(4-Hydroxyphenyl)glycine: (C8H9NO3 : F.W. 167.16) CAS # 122-87-2. Task: Verify if it is indeed the developing reagent Glycin.

I completed the first tests of the N-(4-Hydroxyphenyl)glycine Sunday. It worked very well in the Agfa 8 film developer formulation. My conclusion is that it is the "Real Stuff."

Agfa 8

Deionized Water @ 125 Deg F 750ml
Sodium Sulfite 12.5 grams
Glycin 2.0 grams
Potassium Carbonate 25 grams
Deionized Water to 1000ml


I exposed landscape subjects on 3 rolls of Kodak 400 TMY 120 roll film at EI 400 (bracketed exposures).

I developed the 3 rolls in small tanks at 71 Deg. F with minimal agitation (2 gentle torus inversions every minute). A deionized water rinse was given after development, followed by fixing in an alkaline non-hardening fixer.

I developed one roll in Agfa 8 for 11 minutes at 71 Deg. F.

The film developed cleanly, with excellent uniformity and showed very good tonal separation with fine grain and high image sharpness. I scanned the film at 4800dpi (optical) and made some 8x8 proofs. I also made 20X proofs of small sections of the negs. Grain was not evident at 20X.

I developed the 2 additional (duplicate) rolls of 400 TMY 120 (all 3 rolls - same emulsion #). I developed one roll in Pyrocat-HD (2:2:100). I developed the other roll in Pat Gainer's Phenidone/Vitamin C/Triethanolamine Developer (P-C-Tea).

Conclusions: Agfa 8 is a compensating developer. The results with Agfa 8/TMY compared favorably with the Pyrocat-HD/TMY and Gainer P-C-Tea/TMY results.

I used the Agfa 8 undiluted (I suspect that undiluted or at 1:1 or greater dilutions it would be a good Stand or Semi-Stand Developer).

The developer color was unchanged after 1 roll - so I saved it. I will test it periodically to assess its effective working life.

The Agfa 8/TMY combo performed so well that I will do additional testing to fine tune the exposure/development procedure. I will try it next on LF sheet film.

Tomorrow, I will use the remaining reagent to mix a stock solution of Ansco 130.

I'd be interested to see a side-by-side comparison of AGFA 8 and Ansco 130. While I haven't done it, 130 can be used as a rather favorable film developer from what I understand.

Well, why not? If I leave the bromide out (which I was going to do anyway) I could dilute it 3 or 4 parts water to 1 part Ansco 130 and try it with film.

By the same token, I had planned to try Pat Gainer's P-C-Tea as a paper developer - diluted 15 parts water to 1 part P-C-Tea instead of 50 to 1.

tom

if you use ansco 130 for film
dilute about 1:5 - you should be okay.
( i've been using it for sheet film for a while )

if you can get your hands on gaf universal developer ...
that is the nicest film developer i have ever gotten my hands on ...

Thanks, jnanian

My 1977 Photo Lab Index lists GAF (Ansco) 130 as "Universal Paper Developer." Earlier sources listed Ansco 130 as "Universal Developer" and recommended it for both paper and film development. As a film developer, dilutions of 1:5 and 1:4 were both mentioned.

GAF 130 (1977 Photo Lab Index)

Water (125 F) 750ml
Metol 2.2 grams
Sodium Sulfite 50 grams
Hydroquinone 11 grams
Sodium Carbonate 78 grams
Potassium Bromide 5.5 grams
Glycin 11 grams
Water to make 1000ml

You say you bracketed the shots. What effective film speed did this developer seem to give you?

Thanks!

The best negs on the Agfa 8 test roll were shot at EI 200. However, the development time was a WAG. I need to do some additional testing and densitometry.

Tom Hoskinson said:

I recently received for evaluation from Bryant Laboratory, several grams of N-(4-Hydroxyphenyl)glycine: (C8H9NO3 : F.W. 167.16) CAS # 122-87-2.

Click to expand...

-------------------------------------

Are you saying the Bryant Lab product is a direct replacement for glycin in photo chemistry?

hi tom

wow, your PLI states that it was for both ...!
i have a PLI from the 40s and it only states it as a paper developer
and mentions ansco 125 for film.

depending on the age of the developer, i have used dilutions from anywhere from 1:4 - 1:10 or so. i develop by inspection, so, it makes things a little easier.

i hope juan is reading this - maybe the mystery of "gaf universal developer" has been solved! <g>

good luck with your tests tom

- john

Tom Hoskinson said:

Thanks, jnanian

My 1977 Photo Lab Index lists GAF (Ansco) 130 as "Universal Paper Developer." Earlier sources listed Ansco 130 as "Universal Developer" and recommended it for both paper and film development. As a film developer, dilutions of 1:5 and 1:4 were both mentioned.

GAF 130 (1977 Photo Lab Index)

Water (125 F) 750ml
Metol 2.2 grams
Sodium Sulfite 50 grams
Hydroquinone 11 grams
Sodium Carbonate 78 grams
Potassium Bromide 5.5 grams
Glycin 11 grams
Water to make 1000ml

Click to expand...

Bruce,
I am saying that the Bryant Lab product is described (by Bryant's supplier) with the same molecular formula and molecular weight of photographic Glycin. In my tests, it behaved exactly like photographic Glycin when compounded into Agfa 8 film developer and used to develop film. In my opinion, it is photographic Glycin.

I used Agfa 8 as a test vehicle because it is a simple, single reducing reagent film developer - nothing else in the recipe is a reducing agent.

The reason for perfoming practical confirmatory testing with film, is that there is an enormous amount of conflicting information in various publications and on the internet about Glycin.

A Google search on Glycin will inevitably turn up a lot of hits on Glycin and Glycine - there are several compounds with these names and similar names, but with different molecular formulas. The principal one that shows up has medical/biochemical applications and is useless as a photographic developing reagent.

Tom,
The question of what GAF "Universal Developer" was has been kicked around on various forums - all without a definite answer.

Like jnanian, I used "Universal Developer" in the late 60s, using one dilution for paper and another for film. Somewhere I got the idea it was Ansco 130, but I have not been able to find a confirmation. All of my Agfa/Ansco/GAF literature lists 130 only as Universal Paper Developer. If you've got a reference saying "Universal Developer" was Ansco 130, I'd appreciate knowing what it is.
Thanks,
juan

Juan,

When I checked out the earlier sources:
"Earlier sources listed Ansco 130 as "Universal Developer" and recommended it for both paper and film development."

They turned out to be references to jnanian, yourself and a few others - I found no definitive literature citations equating Agfa-Ansco/GAF 130 with Agfa-Ansco/GAF Universal Developer.

German Agfa 130 is a Metol-Hydroquinone paper developer.

Agfa 122 is a paper developer similar, but not identical to Ansco/GAF 130 (Metol-Hydroquinone-Glycin).

German Agfa 8 and Agfa 72 are Glycin + alkali film developers.

See: http://translate.google.com/transla...h?q=agfa+130&start=30&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&sa=N

To clarify my last post, Agfa 122 is a Hydroquinone/Glycin paper developer, it does not contain Metol.

Gevaert 261 is a Hydroquinone/Glycin paper developer very similar to Agfa 122.

Tom, How does Bryant Lab's pricing on Glycin compare to Photographers Formulary? I had thought that Formulary was the only current supplier of Glycin today. It is nice to know that an alternative exists. I have been intrigued by Glycin based developers for some time but haven't taken the time to explore them. What characteristics would you attribute to them, considering your limited experience at this time? If you have used Michael Smith's Amidol formula and have the opportunity to try 130, I would appreciate your thoughts on the comparative merits of these two developers. Thanks for your work on this.

Don, I have tried Photographer's Formulary 130 Paper Developer with AZO - although nice enough, I prefer catechol paper dev with AZO hands down. I am interested how well a glycin neg dev works with Efke PL100 for printing on AZO.

Don and Francesco,

Mark (Byrant Labs) is working with his supplier to get a price that is competitive with PF. The first step was to establish if the compound was really photographic Glycin.

I will be exploring and comparing print developers (with Azo & Forte paper) over the next few weeks. I plan to compare Amidol, Ansco 130, PPPD and an Ascorbic Acid print developer for starters. The films will be Efke 100, J&C 400 and TMY 400. My baseline film developer is Pyrocat-HD.

I have done some film development testing on TMY with Agfa 8 and will do some more, both with Agfa 8 and with Ansco 130 (starting with a 1:10 dilution of the stock solution).

Initial results with the Agfa 8/Kodak TMY were encouraging - excellent acutance with minimum grain and good midtone separation at an EFS of 200. Shadow detail was ok - but not as good as I would like. Whether there will be sufficient density for Azo contact printing is another question - more testing is needed.

Francesco, on my "to do list" is substituting catechol for the hydroquinone in Ansco 130. A second "to do" is to add a smidgen of phenidone to the recipe.

Another avenue to explore is split development. I am mixing some Ansco 120 for this purpose.

By the way, I am about to become the proud father of a new Wehman 8x10 Field Camera (with 4x5, 5x7 and 8x10 backs). The blessed event should occur either Friday or Monday.

Tom, grazzie for your forthcoming research - especially on Ansco 130 with catechol but for me more importantly on split dev - especially in relation to AZO.