Ansco 130

[john_s]

..................... I just replenish when it gets low with another bottle of 2:1 diluted developer. Yes it will get black but gives much better tones as it ages.

mike andersen

I have read that the hydroquinone in this developer does not last nearly as long as the other developing agents. So I wonder if the "better tones" are just the result of the HQ becoming less potent. Which leads one to the AA version without HQ. I have read the Adams books, and Jack's Specs:

http://www.jackspcs.com/chemdesc.htm (glycin description)

http://www.jackspcs.com/pd130a.htm (130 formula, AA version)

Thanks to an APUG member, I am now for the first time the proud owner of 100g of glycin, which came to me via Alaska then Brisbane. It's now in my freezer, awaiting beng made into 130. Given its reputation for keeping better in solution than as a powder, I have a few questions which the experienced members might be able to address:

It would take me a while to use 100g of glycin, so would it be better to make up the whole amount as 130 stock rather than keep some as powder?

Could I make it up double strength to help its keeping?

Did Tom Hoskinson's experiment of using TEA to make up a "solution A" stock work well? (see (there was a url link here which no longer exists))

Should I consider leaving out the hydroquinone or reducing it? (Since AA preferred leaving it out, and others have noted the "improvement" with age)

I use a Nova vertical slot processor in a tiny darkroom, so making up alternative developers for problem negatives is usually avoided. But is it worth considering keeping the HQ separate and adding a bit if required? I understand the the print tone is cooler with HQ, as well as being more contrasty.

I always wondered about the Adams HQ addition. It was mixed with a lot of water and adding enough of this solution to approach standard 130 would add an appreciable amount of water an so would dilute the whole thing, probably not what you want if you need a little more contrast. Wouldn't it be better to have the HQ as a concentrate, perhaps in propylene glycol (in which HQ is very soluble)?

Finally, does anyone know why in the AA version, the sulfite is reduced? I can understand the HQ being eliminated, but why the sulfite?

 

[PhotoJim]

The keeping is already good. My current stock solution was mixed in April 2007 and it's still going strong.

I get 100 grams and mix up 9 litres of stock solution. Use it as fast as you reasonably can, but a year is certainly no problem. Two years, apparently, is not out of the question either. I'm still getting excellent dmax with it.

 

[Murray Kelly]

John,
good idea with the HQ concentrate. Much easier to handle - something like a concentrated KBr or BTA to dribble in to control fog? Yes, I know, not the same thing, but same idea.

Locally I can't locate propylene glycol but the ethylene glycol is everywhere.

As for the sulfite, which is known to 'regenerate' HQ, and does nothing for glycin - so why add it? 'Save the Planet' 50 years on?

Murray

Big SNIP

I always wondered about the Adams HQ addition. It was mixed with a lot of water and adding enough of this solution to approach standard 130 would add an appreciable amount of water an so would dilute the whole thing, probably not what you want if you need a little more contrast. Wouldn't it be better to have the HQ as a concentrate, perhaps in propylene glycol (in which HQ is very soluble)?

Finally, does anyone know why in the AA version, the sulfite is reduced? I can understand the HQ being eliminated, but why the sulfite?

 

[john_s]

Murray, propylene glycol is used in refrigeration systems. I got mine from Actrol in Moorabbin, and I think they have branches everywhere in Australia.

I wonder if sodium sulphite (sulfite) is soluble in propylene glycol?

 

[Alex Hawley]

The keeping is already good. My current stock solution was mixed in April 2007 and it's still going strong.

I just threw out a liter that I mixed two years ago, 1:1. It probably worked OK (it did last month) but it just got too dark to see the print in the tray.

 

[Murray Kelly]

I wonder if sodium sulphite (sulfite) is soluble in propylene glycol?

John, not in my experience.
Murray

 

[titrisol]

Sulfite (Na or K) It is listed as slightly soluble in alcohol
thus it should be almost insoluble in Propylene glycol

 

[removed account4]

I just threw out a liter that I mixed two years ago, 1:1. It probably worked OK (it did last month) but it just got too dark to see the print in the tray.

alex
that would have been PERFECT for
paper negatives and film

 

[eclarke]

I mixed a 5:1 concentrate of 130 in water a couple years ago and it was just fine, kept long enough for me to use it up. I have a nice Corning heated magnetic stirrer which takes everything into solution very well and mixing a normal batch is no big deal so I gave up the concentrate idea. I make 1 gal. of stock at a time and use it 1+3 so it lasts a few weeks. I use a Glycin film developer also and have never had the Glycin go bad on me before using it up...Evan Clarke

 

[dpurdy]

I just threw out a liter that I mixed two years ago, 1:1. It probably worked OK (it did last month) but it just got too dark to see the print in the tray.

You should try the Chinese Amidol for developer. It is so inky dark that you can't see the print at all.

 

[Bob F.]

$77.45 - no customs charges, so £52 all in. Thats the 16 litre kit.

A belated "Thanks" for that info Justin...

 

[VincentM]

As many have stated the stock solution keeps for long but things are different for the working solution (1+1). I usually adjusted this working solution with the necessary to fill 1500ml of liquids and keeping it for ever. But yesterday I found out that I gained truly one dia by working with a new freshly made working solution (1+1) !
So the result between f11 x time in older working solution were equal to f16 x equal time in fresh working solution.

 

[brucemuir]

I have a PFormuly kit with spent Glycin (actually 2 kits someone gave me) both of the packets of glycin are different shades of brown.

Has anyone just used the kit but omitting the glycin?

The formula is very close to dektol but the dektol calls for a bit more metol than comes with the PF 130 kit. I'm speculating this is because of the glycin present in the 130.

Would it still be active enough with the reduced metol?
here are the 2 formulas to compare
PF/Ansco (Ansco/American Agfa) 130 Paper Developer

Water (125 F or 52C)-----------------------------750 ml
Metol*-------------------------------------------2.2 grams
Sodium Sulfite (anhydrous)------------------------50 grams
Hydroquinone-------------------------------------11 grams
Sodium Carbonate (monohydrated)-----------------78 grams
Potassium Bromide---------------------------------5.5 grams
Glycin---------------------------------------------11 grams
Water to make-------------------------------------1.0 liter


Kodak's D72 Formula DEKTOL
750 ml Water
3 g Metol-Elon
45 g Sodium Sulfite Anhydrous
12 g Hydroquinone
80 g Sodium Carbonate 1-Hydrate
2 g Potassium Bromide Anhydrous
Water to make 1 liter

 

[eclarke]

Just add a little Metol...EC

 

[dpurdy]

It will work fine. I once did it accidentally and didn't notice until I had made several prints. Then I only noticed because I saw that my scale (I mix from scratch) was still set for the Bromide.

Now I will sometimes add Glycin to my Dektol type developer just to give it better longevity.
Dennis

 

[Marcus K]

While I'm a longtime user of Ansco 130 for prints I'm curious to try it as a film developer. I'll probably use the 1:5 dilution as described in the first page of this thread. I have one question before I start doing film tests: is it used as a "one shot" developer or can you use it many times over? Thanks!

 

[removed account4]

While I'm a longtime user of Ansco 130 for prints I'm curious to try it as a film developer. I'll probably use the 1:5 dilution as described in the first page of this thread. I have one question before I start doing film tests: is it used as a "one shot" developer or can you use it many times over? Thanks!

hi marcus

i use it 1 shot ...

have fun!
john

 

[Gerald C Koch]

Translation: "Brenzcatechin" is German for "Pyrocatechin". Just in case it confuses someone else as much as it did me the first time I bought my chemical suplies from Germany...

The name pyrocatechin appears in older literature, however the accepted chemical name is now catechol. This name has the advantage of preventing it from being confused with pyrogallol.

 

[clayne]

Just mixed up some 130 tonight, Adams version. I generally prefer Selectol and feel Dektol gives my prints too much contrast - so I opted for the non-HQ version. I noticed little difference between 1+0 and 1+3 dilutions and found I could alter contrast through agitation more effectively. Either way, the results are great.

All prints were Emaks K-888 #2, everything toned in Selenium 1+20. Tones to a very subtle brown-black after around 2 minutes, which is what I prefer. For now I'll probably stick with using 1+3 but may experiment with higher dilutions to see if there is any difference. However, I just won't use 1+6, etc. regularly if they take 5 minutes to develop a single print. One thing I do prefer though is that prints coming out of the developer have slightly lower contrast because I always use selenium toner. For that reason I find Dektol sometimes harder to work with.

Looking forward to the longevity and re-use ability with the qualities of Selectol Soft that I like (good separation, relaxed contrast). I have plenty of chemicals on-hand and have toyed with mixing up some kind of Agfa 120 variant of it using glycin and potassium carbonate, but I'll probably get used to using the AA 130 for a while first.

 

[brian steinberger]

I've been using 130 1:1 and re-using the stock solution for months, and it's working great, much easier than mixing up developer and throwing it out after each session. I'm curious as to how to tell when the solution is exhausting. Will the blacks just get weak? Would it be better to keep track of the number of prints I run through it? PF states 50 8x10 prints per liter, is this optimistic?

 

[jglass]

I'm also interested in answers to brian s's question and would also like to know if 130 lasts as long at dilution 1:1 or 1:3 as LPD, which seems virtually immortal to me at this point! But please talk about how you judge or test for activity in a paper developer.

 

[brian steinberger]

Jeff, LPD is the other paper developer I use as well. I've been liking what 130 has been giving me over the past year and want to stick with. I've been using the same 1:1 working solution since last November but tonight noticed that the prints went slightly reddish in the selenium. Everything was done as I normally do, Oriental VC FB, 2min, selenium toner is fresh. I have heard that as developers are re-used and re-used they get to be warmer and warmer due to bromide build-up I believe. I'm thinking that is why my prints went reddish in the selenium. This is not the look I go for with the Oriental and 130 combo. With fresh developer the prints go to a beautiful charcoal, almost perfect neutral, slightly cold tone. I'm planning to mix up a new working solution and even add some benzotriazole to it to make it even colder.

 

[andy-b-photo]

I've been reading through this thread and I just wanted to clarify a few things since I am going to order some 130 from Formulary. I've been using up the last of my Harmon Cold Tone (sob) and can't deal with Edwal Ultra Black having a shelf life of a few microseconds after the bottle is opened (well, maybe a bit longer). So I think I will give the old Ansco formula a try (ugh, I'm old enough to remember Ansco film). I use Ilford Warm Tone and Adox MCC 110 as warmer / colder papers and have like the results in the Harmon CT.

In the thread I see some variation in the working solution. Formulary says 1:1, but some seem to be using it at 1:2 and 1:3. Any suggestions, comments, what changes?

I see that some of you are keeping your working solution. I assume that you bottle it up, but has anyone left it in a tray? If you are saving the working solution, how long will it last and are you counting prints or just looking for signs of exhaustion?

Any other ideas?

Thanks

Andy

 

[Rafal Lukawiecki]

I count prints and mark off on a label stuck to a 3l plastic bottle. It usually has about 2.5l of working solution. I kept it up to 4 weeks and it seemed to work well enough. It was 1:1 from stock, which is the only dilution I used. I think I like this developer a lot at the moment.

 

[brian steinberger]

Andy, I'm mixing up 2L of working solution 1:1 and have been using it for 3 months now, no signs of exhaustion, though it is nearing the end, I keep track of prints run through it. If you're a fan of Ilford Coldtone developer, maybe you want to try omitting the bromide and substituting benzotriazole. This is what I plan to do with the next batch of PF130 I mix up. I'm happy with it now, but if I could get cooler tones from it that'd be better. I'm printing on Ilford MGWT and Oriental fiber papers.