Ansco 130 user experience, questions, comments, appreciation...

chuckroast · Aug 2, 2025

Don_ih said:
Forever.

Incidentally, Ansco 130 will develop your paper even if the glycin is dead when you mix it. It is essentially dektol with glycin and more bromide added.

I've added glycin to homemade dektol lots of times. It makes it last longer. And it makes the development slow down at the normal "done" point but actually keep going in the midtones without just fogging the paper. So, you can leave the paper in for 3 or 4 extra minutes and see some difference that might be an improvement.

In what proportion have you added glycin to dektol?

john_s · Aug 2, 2025

chuckroast said:
Does anyone know what the reasonably expected Benzotriazole stock shelf life might be? I have some ancient Zone VI bottles here that are likely 25+ years on the shelf.

Benzotriazole is a permanent addition to recirculating water boiler systems (as an anticorrosive) so I think it is quite a durable compound!

chuckroast · Aug 2, 2025

john_s said:
Benzotriazole is a permanent addition to recirculating water boiler systems (as an anticorrosive) so I think it is quite a durable compound!

But that is a closed system with very little air in it.

I wonder if there is a way to test my old bottles.

Patrick Robert James · Aug 2, 2025

GregY said:
PRJ... i didn't quite understand the last sentence. What connection are you making between Ansco/PF 130 and Edwal? Thank you.

The Edwal film developers (Edwal 10,12) use Glycin but since I don't use those anymore I stopped buying Glycin so I don't use 130 anymore either.

GregY · Aug 2, 2025

Patrick Robert James said:
The Edwal film developers (Edwal 10,12) use Glycin but since I don't use those anymore I stopped buying Glycin so I don't use 130 anymore either.

Thank you PRJ

Don_ih · Aug 3, 2025

chuckroast said:
In what proportion have you added glycin to dektol?

Somewhere around a spoonful to a litre of stock. I don't think I ever weighed it.

Test your benzo by adding some to working-strength paper developer and see if it does what it should.

DREW WILEY · Aug 3, 2025

I always mix just enough for the next session, and at that point, dilute it 1:3 for use. Dektol and 130 deliver different image tones. I gave up on Dektol decades ago. Benzo will cool either developer, at least at first glance. But if you want to use gold toner to cool the print afterwards, you actually want the more finely divided and hence warmer silver dev which KBr delivers. If you do want to experiment with Benz, use only 1/10 the gram wt as KBr.

ags2mikon · Aug 3, 2025

@DREW WILEY, So instead of 5.5g of KBr use .55g of benzo?

chuckroast · Aug 4, 2025

craigclu said:
Some years back, I started substituting 15ml of 1% Benzotriazole (in alcohol) for the bromide and with my gear and materials, I was getting nicer blacks. Discussions of this back then had me try it and found that I preferred the results. Ilford WT showed the most dramatic difference with velvety blacks.

When you say "in alcohol" are you mixing the benzo in just alcohol or just using it to dissolve the benzo and then coming up to full volume with distilled water?

chuckroast · Aug 4, 2025

DREW WILEY said:
I always mix just enough for the next session, and at that point, dilute it 1:3 for use. Dektol and 130 deliver different image tones. I gave up on Dektol decades ago. Benzo will cool either developer, at least at first glance. But if you want to use gold toner to cool the print afterwards, you actually want the more finely divided and hence warmer silver dev which KBr delivers. If you do want to experiment with Benz, use only 1/10 the gram wt as KBr.

So you are recommending 0.55g/l of benzo in lieu of KBr.

In #16, @craigclu is recommending 15ml of 1% benzo solution, which works out to be 0.15g/l.

Could either of you comment on how this almost 4x difference might work out in practice?

DREW WILEY · Aug 4, 2025

Benz is a much stronger restrainer per gram wt than KBr.

My own Kbr quanitity for 130 is 4 g / liter; therefore substitute Benz would be 0.4 g/ L. That has the same effect in terms of restraining highlights and other printing characteristics. You can fine tune it according to your own needs, or even experiment by combining limited amounts of the two if you wish.

Another cold tone tweak to 130 is to double the hydroquinone. AA sometimes did that. I prefer the original formula, and rely on post-toning using gold chloride to cool the image on appropriate papers.

ags2mikon · Aug 4, 2025

Thank you @DREW WILEY.

Alex Benjamin · Aug 4, 2025

DREW WILEY said:
AA sometimes did that.

He also seems to have left out the hydroquinone all together. From Unblinking Eye:

Don_ih · Aug 4, 2025

I'd say that produces less contrast and a warmer print. That shouldn't be able to print 5 sheets of 8x10. I do believe that recipe is wrong.

Alex Benjamin · Aug 4, 2025

Don_ih said:
I'd say that produces less contrast and a warmer print. That shouldn't be able to print 5 sheets of 8x10. I do believe that recipe is wrong.

Here's what he says in The Print (Appendix 1):

My personal variation on this formula was as follows: omit the hydroquinone and the bromide, and reduce the sulfite to 35 grams per liter. Then add bromide only as needed to prevent fog. This was strickly a personal adjustement, but it gave a beautiful print color. If its contrast was found to be too low, I added as required the following hydroquinone solution (which does, however, cause a cooling of the image):

Water (52ºC): 750ml
Sodium sulfite (desic.): 25g
Hydroquinone: 10g
Water to make: 1 L

Don_ih · Aug 4, 2025

Alex Benjamin said:
Here's what he says

That's fine. But he was likely using higher contrast papers and that developer would probably be dead in no time. It would also be pointless to try that with any currently made papers - if you wanted realistic results from your contrast filters.

DREW WILEY · Aug 4, 2025

A bit of clarification - AA generally hated warm low-contrast prints when it came to his own work. The notable exception was very large prints which didn't hold together well when printed cold and contrasty. Some of his most famous images were based on negs far more grainy and less sharp than what is typical today. If the original was on 8x10 film, anything bigger than a 20x24 inch print size could be dicey, with a few exceptions. Therefore, instead of printing them dramatic in his stereotypical style, he printed them soft, warmish, and poetic instead, and on matte paper. Viewers tend to back away from these to take it all in, since up close they're rather fuzzy.

Or rather, he mainly had them printed that way under his own supervision. Despite all the folklore, his own darkroom wasn't very well equipped for that kind of work compared to commercial labs. I once had a lot of opportunity to see the largest exhibition ever assembled of his bigger prints - well, more than see them; but that's a different story.

He seems to have experimented with different developers. But his standby was ordinary Dektol, supplemented by Selectol Soft, which can trend a little warm with certain papers. I've always been a little disappointed in the slightly greenish-black tinge Dektol lent to his images.
In later years, his primary paper was FB glossy Ilfobrom Galerie Graded. Nowadays, any oversized cold tone image is likely to be a "remastered" digitally sharpened commercial inkjet authorized by his Trust, offered for sale at a pittance compared to what a fuzzy vintage version would sell for.

john_s · Aug 4, 2025

Alex Benjamin said:
Here's what he says in The Print (Appendix 1):

I always wondered about whether that was correct because to add, for example, the amount of hydroquinone to make the developer the same as the classic formula, another Litre of water would have to be added, making the dilution much greater (and it would still be half strength). If I were doing something like adding HQ during a session, I would use a concentrated solution of it to avoid excessive dilution. These days one could make a concentrated solution of HQ in propylene glycol.

chuckroast · Aug 13, 2025

I am much enjoying the Ansco 130 experience, but I still have a lot of Dektol on hand. So, if I may, some followup questions.

Since Dektol is pretty close to Ansco 130 sans glycin:

If I mix Dektol 1:1 to approximate working strength Ansco 130, how much glycin would I add to get it as close to Ansco 130 as possible? Is it just 11g glycin/l of Dektol stock or, equivalently, 5.5g/l of 1:1 working strength developer?
If, I do this, will Dektol now exhibit the much longer tray and storage life, and capacity of Ansco 130?

DREW WILEY · Aug 13, 2025

I don't think you'll be able to replicate the final subtle image color of 130. And why would you insist on 1:1 dilution?
And I don't think this will have any relation to tray life, which seems to be about the same either way. But you can always experiment to find out for yourself.

Don_ih · Aug 13, 2025

@chuckroast as you can see, Ansco 130 has a lot more bromide. It's usual dilution is 1:1 - D72 is usually 1:2 or so. But adding glycin to your Dektol will make it quite a bit like Ansco 130 - especially if you can also boost the bromide. I've added glycin to D72 lots of times and you can use the developer until it looks like coffee (it slows down, though).

Dektol already lasts a long time in storage so I don't know what glycin does for it there.

chuckroast · Aug 13, 2025

Don_ih said:
View attachment 405212 View attachment 405213

@chuckroast as you can see, Ansco 130 has a lot more bromide. It's usual dilution is 1:1 - D72 is usually 1:2 or so. But adding glycin to your Dektol will make it quite a bit like Ansco 130 - especially if you can also boost the bromide. I've added glycin to D72 lots of times and you can use the developer until it looks like coffee (it slows down, though).

Dektol already lasts a long time in storage so I don't know what glycin does for it there.

According to everything I have read, among the other things glycin brings to the table is the very long tray life and storage lifetime of Ansco 130. I have not found this to be true for Dektol working strength developer which seems to oxidize fairly quickly. Dektol stock keeps well if you store it without air in the container, though.

I guess the question if if I top off the bromide and add the glycin in the amount suggested to Dektol will I get Ansco 130 more-or-less. My interest is in using up my remaining Dektol (I have a lot) but getting 130 outcomes...

DREW WILEY · Aug 13, 2025

No. You'll probably get some hybrid effect which you'll regret for wasting both Dektol and glycin. If you want longer tray life, you could experiment with a little citric acid, which will the reduce oxidation rate. But then your development times might get impacted, and become longer.

I routinely dilute 130 1:3, and don't get the 1:1 mantra at all. But everyone is free to experiment. No need for a phD in Chemistry; alchemy works fine. Tweak as you wish, and see what comes out. Forget molecular moles and try stirring in a live lawn mole instead.

chuckroast · Aug 13, 2025

DREW WILEY said:
No. You'll probably get some hybrid effect which you'll regret for wasting both Dektol and glycin. If you want longer tray life, you could experiment with a little citric acid, which will the reduce oxidation rate. But then your development times might get impacted, and become longer.

I routinely dilute 130 1:3, and don't get the 1:1 mantra at all. But everyone is free to experiment. No need for a phD in Chemistry; alchemy works fine. Tweak as you wish, and see what comes out. Forget molecular moles and try stirring in a live lawn mole instead.

I find that the lawn moles object to being immersed. YMMV

Don_ih · Aug 13, 2025

chuckroast said:
if I top off the bromide and add the glycin in the amount suggested to Dektol will I get Ansco 130 more-or-less.

Yes.

The point of 1;1 with A130 is the bromide dilution. A greater dilution and you'll have nothing different from Dektol.

Ansco 130 user experience, questions, comments, appreciation...

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency