• Welcome to Photrio!
    Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.
    Click here to sign up

Are We Really Stuck With Ilford MGFB? Where Are the Magic Papers of the Past?

chuckroast said:
I do this regularly ... turn Dektol into 130
Click to expand...

I’m not following. What I mean is can the image characteristics of Ansco 130 be replicated by D-72 / Dektol with added KBr but no glycin. Just an experiment. Of course any results might be paper-dependent.
 
Milpool said:
I’m not following. What I mean is can the image characteristics of Ansco 130 be replicated by D-72 / Dektol with added KBr but no glycin. Just an experiment. Of course any results might be paper-dependent.
Click to expand...

I mean I true up the chemistry to turn Dektol into a very close approximation of A130 and this includes adding glycin. I add the chemicals in the amounts shown in the right column to 710ml of heated Dektol. When dissolved, I add water to make 1l total stock. The 710ml figure was computed to make sure the metol levels match so none need be added and the rest of the component weights were calculated accordingly:



I did this because I have a lot of prepackaged Dektol here and wanted to use it up. The only thing that might vary from D-72 are the sequestering agents not found inf D-72. I am taking the leap of faith that Dektol and D-72 are the same and the sequestering agents don't matter for this purpose.
 
Last edited:
It's like making pancakes. You can make them all kinds of ways and still call it a pancake; doesn't mean they'll taste the same. If you want blueberry pancakes you have to add blueberries. If you want 130, you have to use glycin. Dektol plus KBr just gives you ordinary Dektol with a little more restrainer in it. But I see Chuck has just clarified the question himself.
 

Just reposted in #302 above.

I can provide the actual spreadsheet in anyone wants to fiddle the numbers themselves.
 

Now you’ve done it. I have to find a Norms or Denny’s asap.
 
Lachlan Young said:
130 is nothing special once you understand what is really going on in it. I have had to match prints to ones made with it. It was not difficult. .....
Click to expand...

I, for one, and I'm sure there are others, would greatly appreciate any advice you could offer to match the effects of glycin print developers without that troublesome ingredient.
 
Milpool said:
I’m not following. What I mean is can the image characteristics of Ansco 130 be replicated by D-72 / Dektol with added KBr but no glycin. Just an experiment. Of course any results might be paper-dependent.
Click to expand...

Adding 40% more carbonate and doubling the amount of HQ in D-72 are also places that the defenders of 130 would do well to investigate.
 
Been there, tried that - already "investigated it". Worked OK as a cold tone Polygrade V developer. Don't like the effect at all on current VC papers - too "Dektolish".
 
Looking at local ads for darkroom equipment that have few bidders and low prices I suggest we support the the only company making an effort to support the darkroom community.
 
chuckroast said:
And Kodak and Ilford and Lucky and eTone and OWRO and Fujifilm and ...
Click to expand...
And small start-ups like Zebra dry Plates, now producing large format daylight processing tanks in house among other things.
 
I don't understand the fuss. 130 is darn easy to mix; and glycin powder itself is no more scarce than many favorite films and papers, which also slip in and out of inventory and require strategized or timed purchasing. There nothing "troublesome" about glycin as an ingredient at least. Buy a second bottle and keep it in the freezer to tide you over if there's a temporary scarcity. Same thing as I do with film.

But I can appreciate the predicament of John in Melbourne, where certain supplies might be awfully expensive to ship in. There is, sadly, no work around for glycin if you want to replicate the specific look of 130 with its subtle highlight stain. But, depending on your preferred paper, there might be some other formula which is acceptable in its own right.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register