Anyone Try Eco-Pro chemicals?

[KidA]

Just wondering if anyone has tried any or all of these products. Film developer says its supposed to mimic Xtol...and with less washing time and harmful stuff...

http://www.freestylephoto.biz/category/11-Chemicals?mfg[]=228&q=eco pro

 

[BMbikerider]

What stuf. There does not appear to be anything shown

 

[KidA]

http://www.freestylephoto.biz/category/11-Chemicals?mfg[]=228&q=eco pro

Well this might help you! Sorry, it's Monday morning...

 

[Cholentpot]

http://www.freestylephoto.biz/category/11-Chemicals?mfg[]=228&q=eco pro

Well this might help you! Sorry, it's Monday morning...

I use their Tmax stuff, seems to work exactly the same as regular Tmax Dev.

 

[Rick A]

I use the citric acid stop, and the Neutral fix. Love them both especially the fixer.

 

[KidA]

I use their Tmax stuff, seems to work exactly the same as regular Tmax Dev.

Ahhh interesting... good to know. I think I will have to try these out.

 

[bdial]

It's interesting that the description says that "Xtol is an exceptional film developer originally formulated by Kodak to meet the highest environmental and photographic standards. Full film speed, a long tonal range and exceptionally fine grain make this the best ascorbic acid film developer ever created." It seems as though they might find it difficult to improve on that.

 

[Cholentpot]

Ahhh interesting... good to know. I think I will have to try these out.

Only difference I know of is Kodak Tmax Dev has no H20 in it, it seems the legacy pro does.

 

[KidA]

nly difference I know of is Kodak Tmax Dev has no H20 in it, it seems the legacy pro does.

As in the difference between powder and liquid concentrates?

 

[Cholentpot]

As in the difference between powder and liquid concentrates?

As in, Kodak has liquid without water in it. The LegacyPro has liquid but it contains water. I've heard this gives it a shorter shelf life.

 

[Neal]

Dear KidA,

I have used the paper developer and fixer. Both appear to work without issue. This is probably just seeing what I want to see but higher concentrations of the paper developer appear to look a bit colder.

Good luck,

Neal Wydra

 

[bsdunek]

The first time I tried LegecyPro paper developer, it turned brown and wouldn't work. I contacted Freestyle and they had it replaced quickly. The replacement worked fine. I haven't bought any more LegecyPro developers - a little gun shy I guess. I am using their stop and it if fine.
Interestingly, LegecyPro chemicals are made, or at least come from, very near me in Dexter, Michigan. It's the old Unicolor facility that made photo supplies in the 70's and 80's.

 

[dpurdy]

I have used the developer that is supposed to be similar to Xtol. I found that my Xtol times were the same as the Legacy pro development times, however it seemed to me that the Legacy pro stock solution died more quickly.

 

[KidA]

I have used the developer that is supposed to be similar to Xtol. I found that my Xtol times were the same as the Legacy pro development times, however it seemed to me that the Legacy pro stock solution died more quickly.

How much sooner we talking? Also, how were results compared to Xtol?

 

[Gerald C Koch]

Only difference I know of is Kodak Tmax Dev has no H20 in it, it seems the legacy pro does.

You are confusing the Tmax developer which does contain water with HC-110 which does not. HC-110 is the only developer made without water.

http://www.freestylephoto.biz/pdf/msds/kodak/TMAX_Developer.pdf

 

[dpurdy]

How much sooner we talking? Also, how were results compared to Xtol?

It would be really difficult to see any difference between the two. Mixed fresh I use it (I still have a couple of bags) exactly as I do Xtol. I don't dump the developer when I am done, I either replenish with fresh solution as I go or I use the extended time system. My experience with Xtol in a 5 liter tank with a tight fitting floating lid is that it lasts some months, definitely to the end of the limit of extended time. When I tried that with Legacy Pro and went a month without using it, I found it had turned yellowish and it underdeveloped some sheet film so I dumped it.
Sorry my observations aren't very scientific.

 

[Alan9940]

I have used the L110 (HC110 replacement) film developer and found the results exactly the same as HC110. However, shelf life isn't nearly as long as HC110.

 

[Gerald C Koch]

I have used the L110 (HC110 replacement) film developer and found the results exactly the same as HC110. However, shelf life isn't nearly as long as HC110.

It's because of the water in the Legacy product. Water is necessary for oxidation; no water no oxidation. Hence the proverbial long life of HC-110.

 

[Cholentpot]

You are confusing the Tmax developer which does contain water with HC-110 which does not. HC-110 is the only developer made without water.

http://www.freestylephoto.biz/pdf/msds/kodak/TMAX_Developer.pdf

Thanks for straightening that out for me.

 

[Gerald C Koch]

I have used the L110 (HC110 replacement) film developer and found the results exactly the same as HC110. However, shelf life isn't nearly as long as HC110.

If you compare the MSDS for the two developers you will see that their formulas are very different.

Thanks for straightening that out for me.

There is some useful information tucked away in MSDS forms. Although sometimes a bit of digging is required. All in all a valuable resource for any APUGer.

 

[Alan9940]

If you compare the MSDS for the two developers you will see that their formulas are very different.

Yes, I know they are very different. I meant only that, for me, development time was the same (for Tri-X which is my main film with this developer) and results were the same.

 

[KidA]

Thanks for all the responses everyone.

 

[MattKing]

The products appear to work well for people, and they seem to serve as reasonable substitutes for many of the products they emulate. They do not, however, give exactly the same results.

I've been told that the educational markets like them because of low toxicity, including no metol. I've also been told that the paper developers don't give the same deep blacks as some of the metol laden alternatives. As you may have noted, observations like that have a subjective component to them.

If they are being made in North America, that ads an option that is a plus for me, because sourcing almost all chemicals from Germany (Kodak and Ilford) leaves one vulnerable to a whole bunch of factors entirely outside my control.

One minor complaint though - what is it with the thread title?

I use thread titles to help me decide on my APUG reading choices. It really helps if the titles give me a hint about the subject of the thread - something like "Anyone Try LegacyPro EcoPro Chemicals?"

I'll ask the moderators to update the title.

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

Thanks, Matt. Title updated.

Please use a descriptive title folks!

 

[Ian Grant]

Only from memory but I think they are made by the same people that made Unicolor chemistry and they are ex Eastman Kodak possibly photo-chemists which is why they know what they are doing.

I rember PE (Ron Mowray) commenting about some chemistry from a UK company stating they couldn't be using the right chemicals in a colour developer, but they were as 2 directors involved in making the chemistry were ex Kodak (Harrow) employees.

Ian