Chemical advice for Tri-X

ruilourosa said:

that kodak graph besides being non objective is highly partial and incorrect, at least for old emulsion technology emulsions like foma.

Click to expand...

Really? You think? Doesn't look to me like Kodak is saying that it's true for every film. They say, and I quote, "This chart illustrates the general characteristics these Kodak developers have with many films, based on tests from matched contrast negatives developed in fresh solutions." Nowhere in that statement does Kodak claim that these observations are universally true. Seems to me that you're just trying to stir up some dust, and trying to obfuscate matters even more for a newbie seeking good solid information.

From my own personal and admittedly anecdotal experience, Kodak's observations are pretty much in line with what I've seen. FWIW, Foma 100 and 400 work pretty well in XTOL and D-76. Not so much in HC-110 almost certainly due to the fact that HC-110 dilution B is very active and Foma films are very sensitive to over development. This isn't rocket science.

Wholeheartedly agree with Frank. I had a stint of poor cash flow where I couldn't afford my favorite film, so I used Arista.EDU 100 (Foma 100). Worked just fine with replenished Xtol. In fact, some of the prints from those negs are some of the best I've made. (Attached file on Ilford MGIV in Ethol LPD)

You just can't generalize in photography and claim that your experience is the only truth there is, and in the same breath point your finger at Kodak for putting their findings in a chart for people to use as a baseline for developer choice.

fschifano said:

Really? You think? Doesn't look to me like Kodak is saying that it's true for every film. They say, and I quote, "This chart illustrates the general characteristics these Kodak developers have with many films, based on tests from matched contrast negatives developed in fresh solutions." Nowhere in that statement does Kodak claim that these observations are universally true. Seems to me that you're just trying to stir up some dust, and trying to obfuscate matters even more for a newbie seeking good solid information.

From my own personal and admittedly anecdotal experience, Kodak's observations are pretty much in line with what I've seen. FWIW, Foma 100 and 400 work pretty well in XTOL and D-76. Not so much in HC-110 almost certainly due to the fact that HC-110 dilution B is very active and Foma films are very sensitive to over development. This isn't rocket science.

Click to expand...

Sirius Glass said:

.....You had one bad experience with XTOL and you will not use it again. That sounds a lot like subjective. Anyone can have a bad experience with any developer.....Steve

Click to expand...

I have had only one Volkswagen (bought new). Would I buy another? No way. Why not? There are alternatives and I've received advice that influences me. (I know this is a bit OT, but the service manager at my local official VW dealership told me that if I want a reliable car I need to look at Honda, Mazda or certain Toyotas)

It's not just a sample size of one. There is a lot of anecdotal evidence that Xtol sudden death happens.

Developers like D76 are robust and if they get a bit old they discolour and you throw them out or use them and suffer some speed loss. In the case of Xtol, there is no colour change and the failure can be sudden. There are numerous cases and what bothers me is that there is no complete explanation from Kodak, at least as far as I know. There was probably more than one cause. Certain packaging (the old 1L) was faulty and obvious before mixing, with caked powder. Other users have had sudden death from the 5L packaging. What did they do wrong? Of course it's hard to say.

If Kodak had come out with an announcement that they had changed the formulation I'd have more confidence.

I have never suffered Xtol sudden death, but I make sure that I use it only very fresh.

For someone starting out, D76/ID11 are the obvious recommendations IMO.

It's kind of like the economy. Everybody hears the economy is bad and stops spending, which perpetuates the bad economy.

I don't know anybody that has had problems with Xtol since Kodak fixed the 1L package issue, but I know quite a few that use it without problems.

Xtol is a fine developer, and I claim it's reliable, because I've never seen it fail. I know I store it well and I test it to make sure it's active with a film strip if I haven't used it for a while. My replenished batch of Xtol is going on over a year now, and it looks ugly, but works wonderfully.
That doesn't mean it can't fail. But that's not going to stop me from using it. As I'm sure many people will drive Volkswagens in the future too.

I agree D76/ID11 are great recommendations for someone starting out, because there is so much information available on it. It seems everybody has used it at some point or another, and some people use it all the time. They are both amazing products.

- Thomas

john_s said:

Developers like D76 are robust and if they get a bit old they discolour and you throw them out or use them and suffer some speed loss. In the case of Xtol, there is no colour change and the failure can be sudden. There are numerous cases and what bothers me is that there is no complete explanation from Kodak, at least as far as I know. There was probably more than one cause. Certain packaging (the old 1L) was faulty and obvious before mixing, with caked powder. Other users have had sudden death from the 5L packaging. What did they do wrong? Of course it's hard to say.

If Kodak had come out with an announcement that they had changed the formulation I'd have more confidence.

I have never suffered Xtol sudden death, but I make sure that I use it only very fresh.

For someone starting out, D76/ID11 are the obvious recommendations IMO.

Click to expand...

it wasn't just the 1L packages
they used to suggest extreme dilutions like
and there wasn't enough developer in the solution
to last the whole development.
i have had xtol die on me,
more than once.
i have kept using it over the years
but it doesn't give my film
the snap that i like ...

to each their own ...

take the iron out of your water and you won´t have a problem... better use destilled water... dilute and be gentle in your agitation and get the snap

ruilourosa said:

take the iron out of your water and you won´t have a problem... better use destilled water... dilute and be gentle in your agitation and get the snap

Click to expand...

I agree with using distilled/de-ionized water since iron is not the only metal ion which can cause the Fenton reaction to occur (sudden death). Copper is just as bad and many homes have copper pipes. But the problem with Xtol was traced to iron and copper compounds in the photograde chemicals that Kodak was using. Other ascorbate developers being sold at that time also had the same problem. A lot of work was done to find a way to complex the offending metal ions. Traditional complexing agents like EDTA actually encourage the Fenton rreaction. Many compounds were studied with varying success. Surprisingly, one of the better ones was cheap, readily available salicylic acid.

Since the products of the Fenton reaction are colorless there is no way to tell if the developer has gone bad other than to develop a test bit of film. Yes, its a nice developer when it works but I choose to use something else.

that´s true, suzuki used salicylic acid in some ds formulas with ascorbate. I also used to use a home made x-tol from paul lewis (mytol) but i´m prefering the simplicity and ease of pc-tea, with a "true" grain! although mytol never failed on me.

ruilourosa said:

take the iron out of your water and you won´t have a problem... better use destilled water... dilute and be gentle in your agitation and get the snap

Click to expand...

i was processing the way kodak said to ...
( when the developer first came out and the internet was not like it is today,
you had to rely on friends and the good folks at kodak for advice )

my normal in tray or in tank development ( i replenished ) ...
i didn't use xtol 4 times use up the chemicals and say "forget it"
i had been using it for a good few years before i said, it wasn't for me.
... i continued to use it after it died on me, thinking it was "user error"
thankfully kodak stopped suggest people dilute it beyond 1:3 ..
that was a problem ...


jerry

from what i have experienced, read and understand
the "clip test" doesn't work every time. it can give you
a false " the developer is good " reading.

i always used 1+3 and even 1+5 for tech pan and push processing, no problem noted, but i used mytol not x-tol, although, have a look at suzuki´s formulas, seems they eliminate the iron (and copper) problem, well if you have the chemistry to make them... if not, buy, because it´s soooooooooooooooooooooo cheap to make x-tol and pc-tea and fixer and d-76 and everything, including strange things! it´s a hobby

sound like fun ...
that is ryuji suzuki of silver grain ?

1:5 isn't bad,
the big K used to suggest more dilute than that
something like 1:7 for contact prints

john

jnanian said:

from what i have experienced, read and understand
the "clip test" doesn't work every time. it can give you
a false " the developer is good " reading.

Click to expand...

Thank you very much for that tip. Jerry

yes it is ryuji, also you can always try the e-76 or it´s variants, with metol and ascorbate. but honestly i´m way into TEA based developers, and trying some additives and variations, it´s practical, long lasting, and the negative are really good, the grain is beautiful, inovative.