Better version of D-76 for Tri-X

NB23 · Oct 13, 2022

bernard_L said:
From the horse's mouth © 2017 Kodak Alaris Inc. December 2017 • J-78

View attachment 318765
(. . .)
View attachment 318764

No need to go to such extremes. Just read the printed manufacturer's instructions.

The 10% info has been added over time.

NB23 · Oct 13, 2022

Don Heisz said:
@NB23 That was a nice little sermon. It doesn't exactly mesh with what you described as your current procedure, though, which would result in significantly weakened developer by the 8th roll. Returning used developer to the jug doesn't just return spent developing agents, it also boosts the bromide content of the developer. So every roll developed for the same time should be ever so slightly lower contrast and thinner. Every roll will develop differently.

No sermon, really. I know my writing may sound that way... sorry for that

Donald Qualls · Oct 14, 2022

Leica most likely suggested D-76 stock because that's an old manual, and anything you could do to soften grain in 35 mm was considered a good thing (films then weren't what they are now).

Don_ih · Oct 14, 2022

Donald Qualls said:
Leica most likely suggested D-76 stock because that's an old manual, and anything you could do to soften grain in 35 mm was considered a good thing (films then weren't what they are now).

It wasn't a suggestion - they didn't say there was any other way to use it. D76 was one of numerous developer recipes - but cited as being low contrast with good shadow detail.

Alan Edward Klein · Oct 14, 2022

Does anyone know anything about Clayton F76+ which is supposed to be similar to Kodak D76? North Coast Photo Lab in California uses it.

Donald Qualls · Oct 14, 2022

Based on this listing at Freestyle, it appears to be a phenidone-based D-76 emulator.

Ian Grant · Oct 14, 2022

TomTX said:
Secondly, is it correct that Kodak's packaged D-76 is a PQ rather than an MQ as in the original formula?

Tom

Ilford published a PQ version of D76/ID11 in Kendall's Phenidone patent, and later spent some years working on it eventually marketing it as Autophen, a long-life replenished developer for large scale photo-finishers. It was available was a powder or a liquid, it was discontinued as the amateur D&P market switched to colour films & prints.

Ian

Alan Edward Klein · Oct 14, 2022

Donald Qualls said:
Based on this listing at Freestyle, it appears to be a phenidone-based D-76 emulator.

Don: Their review on that link says:

Designed to match Kodak D-76 in quality of tonal range, grain structure and contrast.

That's good to know. Thanks. Alan.

Ian Grant · Oct 14, 2022

Alan Edward Klein said:
Don: Their review on that link says:

Designed to match Kodak D-76 in quality of tonal range, grain structure and contrast.

That's good to know. Thanks. Alan.

I think that's a key point, it's a concentrate, uses Sodium Metaborate (Kodalk) rather than Borax, and has a much lower Sulphite level once diluted 1+9.

The first MQ Borax developer was a Wellington & Ward formula. Wellington had worked as a senior manager at Kodak Ltd (Harrow UK) from its founding. There are a series of traceable steps from Wellington's initial formula to D76.

While Clayton F76 is more dilute than D76 and has much a lower Sulphite level, it has a higher pH, so in real terms it's like a more active version of D76, somewhere between 1+1 & 1+3 dilution.

Ian

Raghu Kuvempunagar · Oct 15, 2022

D-76 can also be used in 1+9 dilution if one adds a little bit of sodium hydroxide, about 0.6g/l, to the working solution.

Keith Tapscott. · Oct 15, 2022

Ilford ID11 is an excellent equivalent to D76.

Bill Burk · Oct 15, 2022

NB23 said:
Since a Gallon of D76 develops 16 rolls of 36 exposure 135 film, regardless…

My whole life I have done 32 rolls per gallon bag of D-76.

That’s four quart bottles a batch*, two runs per bottle at 1:1

Quart tank holds four rolls.

I almost always use it all, even if it takes a few years. If I find a half bottle on the sink shelf after I haven’t been in the darkroom for a while I might throw it out. But if it’s only been a couple weeks I will still use it.

Only once in my life have I had a suspected “failure to develop”. But that could have been the famous “grabbed stop by mistake” trick.

It’s definitely less than Kodak recommended stock per square inch. I make up for it with longer development time. Standard time for me is 13:30 (TMAX100/ Tri-X, TMY2) to aim 0.62 CI.

*I mix water to give 8 ounces more than a gallon, each quart bottle holds 34 ounces and I top them off.

I won’t say it’s best but it’s certainly economical. NB23, you definitely process a safe quantity.

Roger Cole · Oct 19, 2022

Bill Burk said:
My whole life I have done 32 rolls per gallon bag of D-76.

That’s four quart bottles a batch*, two runs per bottle at 1:1

Quart tank holds four rolls.

I almost always use it all, even if it takes a few years. If I find a half bottle on the sink shelf after I haven’t been in the darkroom for a while I might throw it out. But if it’s only been a couple weeks I will still use it.

Only once in my life have I had a suspected “failure to develop”. But that could have been the famous “grabbed stop by mistake” trick.

It’s definitely less than Kodak recommended stock per square inch. I make up for it with longer development time. Standard time for me is 13:30 (TMAX100/ Tri-X, TMY2) to aim 0.62 CI.

*I mix water to give 8 ounces more than a gallon, each quart bottle holds 34 ounces and I top them off.

I won’t say it’s best but it’s certainly economical. NB23, you definitely process a safe quantity.

Your "quart" bottles appear to be liter bottles then.

Donald Qualls · Oct 19, 2022

Roger Cole said:
Your "quart" bottles appear to be liter bottles then.

Seems that way. That's only about 5% weaker solution, however, and so long as you're consistent it won't cause any problems.

Bill Burk · Nov 26, 2022

That's pretty funny.

Better version of D-76 for Tri-X

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency