Are ID-11 and D76 identical?

Double S

A
Double S

  • 5
  • 1
  • 41
Outside View

A
Outside View

  • 2
  • 3
  • 48
Plant

D
Plant

  • 2
  • 0
  • 70
Sonatas XII-36 (Homes)

A
Sonatas XII-36 (Homes)

  • 0
  • 1
  • 71
Mini Rose

D
Mini Rose

  • 1
  • 3
  • 102

Recent Classifieds

Forum statistics

Threads
199,484
Messages
2,792,301
Members
99,921
Latest member
Hozu
Recent bookmarks
0

Max Power

Member
Joined
Sep 7, 2004
Messages
598
Location
Aylmer, QC
Format
Multi Format
I did a search and didn't come up with anything, so here's my question:

Although I'm dedicated to Ilford, it looks like it will be a few weeks yet until my local supplier gets his stocks of all things Ilford back up. My favourite developer for Delta-400 is ID-11 (I unfortunately cannot get DD-X). My supply of ID-11 is about depleted, but my local supplier has D76 in huge quantities.

Are ID-11 and D76 identical? Will D76 give me virtually the same results as ID-11 without too much experimentation and messing around?

Just looking for a short term solution here.

Cheers,
Kent
 
Joined
Jan 17, 2005
Messages
1,355
Location
Downers Grov
Sure, functionally the same. Just mix and store in small one time use bottles. Never let air get to it in a half full bottle.

check Ilford`s site for times. They are slightly different than Id11 in some cases.
 

titrisol

Subscriber
Joined
Aug 2, 2004
Messages
2,073
Location
UIO/ RDU / RTM/ POZ / GRU
Format
Multi Format
YES, they are functionally identical.

Max Power said:
I did a search and didn't come up with anything, so here's my question:

Although I'm dedicated to Ilford, it looks like it will be a few weeks yet until my local supplier gets his stocks of all things Ilford back up. My favourite developer for Delta-400 is ID-11 (I unfortunately cannot get DD-X). My supply of ID-11 is about depleted, but my local supplier has D76 in huge quantities.

Are ID-11 and D76 identical? Will D76 give me virtually the same results as ID-11 without too much experimentation and messing around?

Just looking for a short term solution here.

Cheers,
Kent

As per published recipes are identical:
Ilford ID-11 Fine Grain Film Developer
Source : Ilford Tech. Info. Book Vol. 3 (P70.5)
Metol 2.00 g
Sodium Sulphite (anhydrous) 100.00 g
Hydroquinone 5.00 g
Borax 2.00 g
Water to 1 litre

KODAK D76
Fine grain negative deceloper
Source: kodak Elementary photographuc Chemistry 1934, p49
Water (@52ºC) 750.0 cc
Metol 2.0 g
Sodium Sulphite Anhydrous 100.0 g
Hydroquinone 5.0 g
Borax (decahydrate) 2.0 g
Water to 1 litre
 
OP
OP
Max Power

Max Power

Member
Joined
Sep 7, 2004
Messages
598
Location
Aylmer, QC
Format
Multi Format
Titrisol and Ronald,
Thanks very much, I appreciate it.

Just a casual question, though...Why would dev times be different for what is ostensibly exactly the same formula?

Kent
 
Joined
Jan 24, 2005
Messages
279
Format
Multi Format
dev times are the same.

The only difference I believe there is between the two is that Ilford has not found a way to ship the powder (without caking?) in 1 single packet. Whereas Kodak seems to have that down in their d76 formula, Ilfords ID-11 comes in an 'a b' 2pouch combination, Kodak is only 1.
 

titrisol

Subscriber
Joined
Aug 2, 2004
Messages
2,073
Location
UIO/ RDU / RTM/ POZ / GRU
Format
Multi Format
I have always thought times were the same.

I haven;t used D76 in years but used it (in kodak or clone reincarnatios) a lot in the late 80s, early 90s.

Max Power said:
Titrisol and Ronald,
Thanks very much, I appreciate it.

Just a casual question, though...Why would dev times be different for what is ostensibly exactly the same formula?

Kent
 

fschifano

Member
Joined
May 12, 2003
Messages
3,196
Location
Valley Strea
Format
Multi Format
Max Power said:
Titrisol and Ronald,
Thanks very much, I appreciate it.

Just a casual question, though...Why would dev times be different for what is ostensibly exactly the same formula?

Kent

Simply because the development times are not published as absolute values. They are only suggested departure points. Fine tuning is up to you.
 

GeorgesGiralt

Member
Joined
Sep 16, 2004
Messages
523
Location
Toulouse, Fr
Format
Large Format
Max Power said:
Titrisol and Ronald,
Thanks very much, I appreciate it.

Just a casual question, though...Why would dev times be different for what is ostensibly exactly the same formula?

Kent
Well, look at the agitation Ilford and Kodak recomend. They are different, so this may give slightly different times.
Also, the published formulas are a bit old. So they may have changed since that time, and they may not be exactly identical now. (they may have add some Calgon, or stuff like that, or changed some things to reduce costs.)
But you won't be far from home using D76 with the same agitation sheme and dilution you use with ID11.
Have a nice day !
 
OP
OP
Max Power

Max Power

Member
Joined
Sep 7, 2004
Messages
598
Location
Aylmer, QC
Format
Multi Format
Actually, I just checked the dev times on the Ilford pdf chart and the times are in fact the same across the board.

Kent
 

Lee Shively

Member
Joined
Apr 4, 2004
Messages
1,324
Location
Louisiana, U
Format
Multi Format
I've used D76 with HP5+ and PanF+ for the last 3-4 years. I do not use the times Ilford recommends currently. I'm using the same information sheet I used back in the 1970's for my processing times. Both ID-11 and D76 have the same times listed on that information sheet. According to my own personal processing procedure, Ilford's current development times produce a negative that is too dense for my tastes.
 

KenR

Member
Joined
Jan 4, 2005
Messages
117
Format
Large Format
ID11 & D76

Anchell in the Darkroom Cookbook and the Film Developing Cookbook said that D76 may contain other ingredients to preserve freshness etc. He advised making your own from one of the many D76 formulas pushed both in his and other books and journals. I have been using the "spoon" method of making a more buffered version with more borax and some boric acid for many years. It takes only a bit longer than the prepacked stuff and I no longer worry about opening a package and finding old useless powder in the envelope.
 

Jon Shiu

Subscriber
Joined
Dec 2, 2003
Messages
3,293
Location
Mendocino, California
Format
Plastic Cameras
Max Power said:
Actually, I just checked the dev times on the Ilford pdf chart and the times are in fact the same across the board.

Kent

the chart inside the Pan F box says 6:30 for both D76 and ID11 at 1+0 dilution; but surprisingly, the time for 1+1 dilution are 8:30 for ID11 and 10:30 for D76.
I wonder why the dilution causes such a different time?

Jon
 

blackmelas

Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2004
Messages
374
Location
Greece
Format
35mm RF
I have the same problem. Stores in Athens have all run out of ID-11, WTFB etc. and it is unknown when they will start to restock Ilford. Hopefully soon...

(oops didn't read the last page. Ken R beat me to it) I read somewhere in the Darkroom Cookbook that the one packet D-76 is slightly different (Kodak has to add chemicals to keep the metol stable in a single packet) than the old two packet D-76 that was the same as ID-11. But I did buy the one packet D-76 and plan to try my ID-11 times and adjust from there. I'm not sure when I'll develop next to test this but I'll post something if I do.
James
 
OP
OP
Max Power

Max Power

Member
Joined
Sep 7, 2004
Messages
598
Location
Aylmer, QC
Format
Multi Format
blackmelas said:
I have the same problem. Stores in Athens have all run out of ID-11, WTFB etc. and it is unknown when they will start to restock Ilford. Hopefully soon...

(oops didn't read the last page. Ken R beat me to it) I read somewhere in the Darkroom Cookbook that the one packet D-76 is slightly different (Kodak has to add chemicals to keep the metol stable in a single packet) than the old two packet D-76 that was the same as ID-11. But I did buy the one packet D-76 and plan to try my ID-11 times and adjust from there. I'm not sure when I'll develop next to test this but I'll post something if I do.
James

James,
That would be helpful, if only for future reference.

Cheers,
Kent
 

Monophoto

Member
Joined
Aug 27, 2004
Messages
1,689
Location
Saratoga Spr
Format
Multi Format
When ID11 was introduced in the 1970's, there was a review in Popular Photography in which it was stated that its formulation was identical to D76 except for the addition of a sequestering agent to prevent redeposition of metallic silver on the processed film. The article didn't identify what that additional ingredient was, but the author (Bob Schwalberg) jokingly referred to it as "a pinch of nutmeg".

I don't argue at all with Tritisol's research that shows that the formulations today are the same. What this illustrates is that manusfacturer's freely modify the design of their products while maintaining the same functional description. We, as consumers, have no way of knowing when those changes take place, or whether they are driven by performance, cost or environmental concerns. But they happen, and over time they often result in subtle changes in the way the products work.

The other message here is that Popular Photography used to contain articles that addressed interesting technical issues in photography as well as portfolios and articles on creativity. The change from that to a crass vehicie for shilling products wasn't so subtle. It came about at the time of the collapse of the other major photo magazine of the 1970's, Modern Photography. When Modern failed, the publisher of Popular replaced his editorial staff with the same people who led the demise of Modern. Within three months, Popular was a different magazine.
 

Nick Zentena

Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2004
Messages
4,666
Location
Italia
Format
Multi Format
All I'm going to say is D76-H and forget what the big boys are nice enough to supply.
 

Tom Hoskinson

Member
Joined
Mar 7, 2004
Messages
3,867
Location
Southern Cal
Format
Multi Format
Monophoto said:
When ID11 was introduced in the 1970's, there was a review in Popular Photography in which it was stated that its formulation was identical to D76 except for the addition of a sequestering agent to prevent redeposition of metallic silver on the processed film. The article didn't identify what that additional ingredient was, but the author (Bob Schwalberg) jokingly referred to it as "a pinch of nutmeg".

I don't argue at all with Tritisol's research that shows that the formulations today are the same. What this illustrates is that manusfacturer's freely modify the design of their products while maintaining the same functional description. We, as consumers, have no way of knowing when those changes take place, or whether they are driven by performance, cost or environmental concerns. But they happen, and over time they often result in subtle changes in the way the products work.

The other message here is that Popular Photography used to contain articles that addressed interesting technical issues in photography as well as portfolios and articles on creativity. The change from that to a crass vehicie for shilling products wasn't so subtle. It came about at the time of the collapse of the other major photo magazine of the 1970's, Modern Photography. When Modern failed, the publisher of Popular replaced his editorial staff with the same people who led the demise of Modern. Within three months, Popular was a different magazine.

...identical to D76 except for the addition of a sequestering agent to prevent redeposition of metallic silver on the processed film.

Ahh yes! Pixie dust. Can't see it in a mass spectrometer, but trust me, it's there.
 

Tom Hoskinson

Member
Joined
Mar 7, 2004
Messages
3,867
Location
Southern Cal
Format
Multi Format
fotophox said:
The Frugal Photographer site suggests ID-68, which is *functionally* identical to D76, except it is less prone to alkaline hydrolysis.

http://www.frugalphotographer.com/formulary.htm

(Scroll to the bottom or hit your 'end' key.)

In Ilford's ID-68, phenidone is used instead of metol and the borax is buffered with boric acid.

The borax buffered with boric acid approach was suggested in a parallel APUG thread.
 

John C Murphy

Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2005
Messages
6
Format
Large Format
ID-11 and D-76 not the same in my hands

You know, this is something that has always puzzled me. I always read that ID-11 and D-76 are the same, but I've been using both developers for a while and can say with certainty that they produce slightly different results. The ID-11 gives more contrast (darker blacks) than the D-76 when you use a higher development temperature than the standard 68F/20C.
 
Joined
Jan 17, 2005
Messages
1,355
Location
Downers Grov
Tried out Fp4 + for the first time a few weeks ago. ID 11 was 8.5 and D76 was 8.0. That is slightly different in my book.

I had D76 so I went with the 8.0 and it was perfect for focomat 1c.
 

Ian Grant

Subscriber
Joined
Aug 2, 2004
Messages
23,284
Location
West Midland
Format
Multi Format
Monophoto said:
When ID11 was introduced in the 1970's,

That should read sometime in the 1930's :smile:
Its as old as D76 and exactly the same formula was also made by some other companies, each using their own nomencleture presumably standardised for the motion picture industry.

Certainly by 1942 ID-11 was readily available "supplied in tins to make 20 oz, 80 oz, 1 gallon & 3 gallons of working strenght developer".
 
Joined
Jun 11, 2005
Messages
1,826
Location
Plymouth. UK
Format
Multi Format
The material safety data sheets may give a clue to this question.

The MSDS for Ilford ID11 is as follows:
Part A contains Metol and Hydroquinone.
Part B contains Sodium sulphite, Sodium Tetraborate(Borax) and Sodium Tripolyphosphate.

The MSDS for Eastman Kodak D-76 is as follows:
Sodium Sulphite, Hydroquinone, Sodium Tetraborate-Pentahydrate,
Bis(4-hydroxy-N-metylanilinium) sulphate (METOL), Boric anhydride and
Pentetic acid Pentasodium Salt. This developer is supplied as a one-part developer. D-76 is my regular developer.
 

glennfromwy

Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2004
Messages
278
Format
Multi Format
There has been reference made here to formulas published in the '30s, when D-76 and ID-11 were pretty much the same. ID-11 has stuck to the original formula pretty well over the years. D-76, however, is not exactly the same as it once was. Functionally, they are about the same. Chemically, a little different. Times given are always starting points and only testing will show what works for you.
 
Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links.
To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here.

PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Ilford ADOX Freestyle Photographic Stearman Press Weldon Color Lab Blue Moon Camera & Machine
Top Bottom