All one needs to know about XTOL versus other developers

John Wiegerink · Mar 2, 2017

Trask said:
For those who replenish, what are you using as replenisher -- a separate batch of Xtol? If so, how can you be sure that the replenisher hasn't gone bad? I ask, trying to figure out how one can keep an Xtol replenishment system going long-term if the developer may suddenly die and the replenisher may suddenly die.

My working solution is kept "topped off" in a brown gallon glass jug. My replenisher is just plain stock Xtol kept in a mylar wine bladder with no air reaching it. If I am in doubt as to whether or not the stock Xtol, also called the replenisher, is any good I'll do a clip test. I'm really not worried about my stock replenisher in a mylar wine bladder.

Gerald C Koch · Mar 2, 2017

APUGuser19 said:
I know nothing about xtol. I f it does go bad, does it at least start to turn brown to clue you in?

No, that's the bad part, it doesn't change color to warn you. In contrast hydroquinone, being a phenol when oxidized turns to humic acid. Humic acid is a generic term for large polyphenol condensates formed of many benzene rings. Think of molecules that look a bit like chicken wire. These humic acid are what creates the familiar brown color and foul smell in a developer left for a day or so in the tray.

Andrew O'Neill · Mar 2, 2017

Sirius Glass said:
Very different animals.

Well aware. I use them both. For years.

RalphLambrecht · Mar 3, 2017

Ian Grant said:
I actually agree with Kodak - having used all those developers except Duraflo RT with various films over the years, Xtol is very definitely Kodak's best film developer.

Ian

Ian,which is the closest published formulas a substitute for Xtol?

Gerald C Koch · Mar 3, 2017

The Xtol formula has appeared in at least one magazine. Here is the Covingtom Innovations Xtol site which should answer all questions as to the formula.

http://www.covingtoninnovations.com/xtol/

haziz · Mar 3, 2017

Great developer. I use it 1:1.

I will do my own testing, but what EI are you using for new Tmax 400 (TMY2) in Xtol or Xtol 1:1?

miha · Mar 3, 2017

Jim Noel said:
Yes it was airtight in glass bottles. I think the stuff is pure junk when compared with any of the other 6 developers I keep on hand at all times.

Late Lynn Jones would certainly agree.

kossi008 · Mar 3, 2017

Well, it's not junk to me, but the sharpness claim in that marketing table does not match with my experiences.

Ian Grant · Mar 3, 2017

kossi008 said:
Well, it's not junk to me, but the sharpness claim in that marketing table does not match with my experiences.

It's relative I found Xtol sharper with T grain (and similar) films than D76/ID-11 however a lot depends on how you use developers, dilute or replenished. My experience of Xtol replenished is superb sharpness and very fine grain along with excellent tonality with Tmax 100 or the original APX100, it's on a par with Rodinal, Really what I'm saying is it's the film,developer and technique combined that gets the best results.

RalphLambrecht said:
Ian,which is the closest published formulas a substitute for Xtol?

Paul Lewis's Mytol is an alternative to Xtol, I've not tried it,

APUGuser19 said:
Probably actually a very good developer, for people who are likely to use it regularly.

While I used replenished Xtol from its release here in the UK it wasn't my main film developer so I wasn't using it as regularly as Rodinal, but it kept so well that I never had problems. I mainly used it for processing 120 Tmax 400 with some 35mm Tmax 100/400 or APX 100 as well as sheet film, If you split a 5 litre pack into 2.5 litres of working stock and use the rest to replenish it's very economical will alst about a year and is practical with moderate throughput.

Ian

pentaxuser · Mar 3, 2017

Jim Noel said:
Yes it was airtight in glass bottles. I think the stuff is pure junk when compared with any of the other 6 developers I keep on hand at all times.

Just so we can be sure, Jim, this was not one of the notorious 1L packets?

In answer to another poster's question about colour change, my experience has been slightly different to Matt's. In my case it had turned to a pale straw colour so I could see it, although I accept that many users might not give this small change of colour any attention. The mind thinks it has always been this colour whereas in fact it is truly colourless when new.

pentaxuser

David Lyga · Mar 3, 2017

Old-N-Feeble said:
Shhh... don't tell David.

Well, I have actually come to use this developer, but I am a person who trusts next to nothing and I do a tiny clip test with EACH film development. I am that paranoid. It is easy to do and tells you right then and there if the developer is up to snuff. What really riled me was the lack of 'brown' with this XTOL when it has expired. - David Lyga

bvy · Mar 3, 2017

David Lyga said:
Well, I have actually come to use this developer, but I am a person who trusts next to nothing and I do a tiny clip test with EACH film development. I am that paranoid.

That's not paranoia. That's just smart.

LAG · Mar 3, 2017

Excuse me

I have used all those developers from that OP chart, all with different dilutions, all with different films. Currently I only work with one of them and, "for my needs", is not Xtol. I do not have - and do not believe in - a single reason to say that one of them is the best, nor do I have any other reason not to use any other when I need other needs. YMMV of course!

David Lyga said:
... I do a tiny clip test with EACH film...

Me too, and always!

Regards!

dasBlute · Mar 3, 2017

No one ever says, "That HCB dude, great shots, but if only he'd used [blah, or blah]
developer, *then* that'd be something..." same with Ansel, Kertesz, Bernhard, etc., pick your favorite.

No one *cares* what developer they used. No one even knows, except maybe from their notes,
certainly not from the prints.

Use XTOL, or not. Like *any* developer there are methods to be followed. Never had any problems in hundreds of sheets of 4x5, 5x7, and 8x10. I love it.

If you've got time to clip a corner from every roll of film, you're not shooting enough

Sirius Glass · Mar 3, 2017

haziz said:
Great developer. I use it 1:1.

I will do my own testing, but what EI are you using for new Tmax 400 (TMY2) in Xtol or Xtol 1:1?

Box Speed, unless you have a really good reason. There is supposed to be a slight speed increase, but I never found it to me noticeable. If one wants to change the film speed, the first thing they need to do is to learn not to take light readings which include large amounts of sky; that will eliminate approximately 215% of the reasons to change the EI from Box Speed.

horacekenneth · Mar 3, 2017

John Wiegerink said:
One man's junk is another man's treasure! I'd probably feel the exact same way if I had been burnt by dead Xtol, but knock on wood, it hasn't happened yet.

I'm using EcoPro, which I believe is the same as Xtol, is that correct? I have 1.5 gallons of it in a 5 gallon jug with a floating lid. Any thoughts as to whether that is sealed enough for 6 months of one shot developing?

RattyMouse · Mar 3, 2017

David Brown said:
Yes, I think that's exactly when this chart was developed, and for marketing purposes.

Of course XTOL "tests" better. Marketing needed a way to sell the new developer so this chart was created. Every industry does stuff like this.

John Wiegerink · Mar 3, 2017

horacekenneth said:
I'm using EcoPro, which I believe is the same as Xtol, is that correct? I have 1.5 gallons of it in a 5 gallon jug with a floating lid. Any thoughts as to whether that is sealed enough for 6 months of one shot developing?

It's better than no seal at all. but I worry about the exposure to air/oxidation every time you open and use it. That's why the collapsible mylar wine bags were so popular. With the Mylar bag no air ever got to the developer once you put it in the bag.

John Wiegerink · Mar 3, 2017

RattyMouse said:
Of course XTOL "tests" better. Marketing needed a way to sell the new developer so this chart was created. Every industry does stuff like this.

Yes, that chart just so happens to come from Kodak. I won't say it's the sharpest or the smallest grained or the fastest speed producing developer, but it's one of the best I have used and replenished makes all the difference to me. You use what tickles your fancy and I'll........................well, you get the drift!

Patrick Robert James · Mar 3, 2017

I am not a user of XTol. To me it is a plain vanilla developer, which is good if that is what you want, and combine that with the fact that it tends to die a quick and painful death.... I don't use D76 either. Personally, I prefer developers that add a little something to images. This of course is only subtle in many ways, but they are there. My personal if-I-had-to-use-only-one would be Rodinal, but others are Pyrocat-P, Edwal 12, Crawley's FX-1.... Each is different in their own way. Saying that any particular one is "best" is a canard.

john_s · Mar 3, 2017

Ian Grant said:
........., Really what I'm saying is it's the film,developer and technique combined that gets the best results.

......................
Ian

I found my results gradually improving over many years even without changing anything, except gradual tweaking of dev time, more gentle agitation, and understanding exposure (more=better mostly).

john_s · Mar 3, 2017

RattyMouse said:
Of course XTOL "tests" better. Marketing needed a way to sell the new developer so this chart was created. Every industry does stuff like this.

Remember the graphs extolling the virtues of of better cassette tapes: there was always a lowly "standard" tape and a lofty "new, improved" tape, showing all those extra dB.

dasBlute · Mar 3, 2017

Patrick Robert James said:
the fact that it tends to die a quick and painful death

this is apocryphal, statistically false, hooey

horacekenneth · Mar 3, 2017

John Wiegerink said:
It's better than no seal at all. but I worry about the exposure to air/oxidation every time you open and use it. That's why the collapsible mylar wine bags were so popular. With the Mylar bag no air ever got to the developer once you put it in the bag.

Do they sell those for chemicals or are they literally just repurposed wine bags?

With the tank I get the chemicals from a spout, so no new air introduced, but the floating lid isn't a perfect seal and there's 3.5 gallons worth of air floating above my 1.5 gallons of ecopro in that 5 gallon tank (the tank has a lid in addition to the floating one).

Sirius Glass · Mar 3, 2017

RattyMouse said:
Of course XTOL "tests" better. Marketing needed a way to sell the new developer so this chart was created. Every industry does stuff like this.

The tests were done scientifically, not with the alternative facts used by marketing and certain politicians.

All one needs to know about XTOL versus other developers

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency