D-76 increase per roll

[Auroraua]

If I am using a stock dilution of D-76 - one liter - should I increase the development time after each 2 rolls?
Like 15 percent after each two rolls?

 

[cliveh]

Use it 1:1 with water and discard after use and you wont need to ask that question.

 

[Auroraua]

I have some films that only has times for stock, but I normally prefer to use it 1+1.
So question is still up if anyone knows.
I know that for example Foma Excel recommends 10 percent after each 4 rolls (or perhaps it was 15%), guess D-76 is similar?

 

[chriscrawfordphoto]

Kodak's tech data sheet for D-76 answers your question.

http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/support/techPubs/j78/j78.pdf

Page 7 says that you can do four rolls in a liter without any compensation. After that, add 15% for each roll after the first four. You can do a total of 16 rolls this way. This is for un-diluted developer. Diluted developer cannot be reused.

Personally, I would not reuse any developer. Even with time compensation, the quality will change as you go beyond the original four rolls. D-76 is not expensive; its dumb to try and save money this way. Film costs a lot more!

 

[NB23]

Use it 1:1 with water and discard after use and you wont need to ask that question.

What do you mean? Actually it's quite the opposite.

A gallon of D76 has the same developing capacity as a 2 gallons of D76 1:1.

You see, according to Kodak, a gallon of D76 develops 15 (fifteen) 36 exp rolls (3.78liters/250ml=15.12 rolls)
If you dilute 1:1, you don't suddenly double the capacity because you still need 250ml of stock solution per film. All you're doing is developing the same film in double the quantity of liquid which contains the same amount of stock solution in order to get a different looking negative.

And you can't replenish a 1:1 solution. But you can replenish a stock solution. Therefore D76 stock becomes a more economic solution!

Also, what you are doing to your negatives is under-developing them by 15% (my ruff approximation) if you use kodak's 1:1 times without following their minimum solution quantity.

You're maybe happy with your negs but I'm willing to bet they are not optimal (ceteris paribus).

 

[cliveh]

All you're doing is developing the same film in double the quantity of liquid which contains the same amount of stock solution in order to get a different looking negative.
And you can't replenish a 1:1 solution. But you can replenish a stock solution. Therefore D76 stock becomes a more economic solution!

I don't consider it to be about a more economic solution.

 

[Ricardo Miranda]

I know that for example Foma Excel recommends 10 percent after each 4 rolls (or perhaps it was 15%), guess D-76 is similar?

Where did you read that?
The datasheet doesn't say anything about extending development time.
http://foma-cz.cs4.cstech.cz/en/catalogue-fomadon-excel-detail-422

 

[Ricardo Miranda]

You see, according to Kodak, a gallon of D76 develops 15 (fifteen) 36 exp rolls (3.78liters/250ml=15.12 rolls)

Actually the datasheet says 16 rolls per gallon or 4 per litre. And no where it says 250ml. It says: "You can develop one 135-3 roll (80 square inches)
in 473 mL (16 ounces) or two rolls together in 946 mL (one quart) of diluted developer."

That is very uneconomical.
Fomadon P develops 10 rolls per litre.
See this on page 9: http://foma-cz.cs4.cstech.cz/ew/92cad2bd-ec2b-4442-bc3c-b13be9ea63ff-en

 

[Auroraua]

Can´t remember where I read it, I have it in my notes:
If undiluted use the following
1-4 films no adjustment
5-8 films - +15% development time
9-12 + 15% dev time and then +15% dev time

 

[summicron1]

What do you mean? Actually it's quite the opposite.

A gallon of D76 has the same developing capacity as a 2 gallons of D76 1:1.

You see, according to Kodak, a gallon of D76 develops 15 (fifteen) 36 exp rolls (3.78liters/250ml=15.12 rolls)
If you dilute 1:1, you don't suddenly double the capacity because you still need 250ml of stock solution per film. All you're doing is developing the same film in double the quantity of liquid which contains the same amount of stock solution in order to get a different looking negative.

And you can't replenish a 1:1 solution. But you can replenish a stock solution. Therefore D76 stock becomes a more economic solution!

Also, what you are doing to your negatives is under-developing them by 15% (my ruff approximation) if you use kodak's 1:1 times without following their minimum solution quantity.

You're maybe happy with your negs but I'm willing to bet they are not optimal (ceteris paribus).

um. that's not what he meant. You don't make two gallons of d-76 from a one gallon bag and use it up that way. You make one gallon of stock and ad a cup of stock to a cup of water and develop with that, then discard the two cups of 1:1 solution.

And the negatives come out fine, at least in my experience. Only been doing it that way for 45 years, mostly because the whole compensation thing, or adding replenisher, was too complicated.

 

[mnemosyne]

What do you mean? Actually it's quite the opposite.

A gallon of D76 has the same developing capacity as a 2 gallons of D76 1:1.

You see, according to Kodak, a gallon of D76 develops 15 (fifteen) 36 exp rolls (3.78liters/250ml=15.12 rolls)
If you dilute 1:1, you don't suddenly double the capacity because you still need 250ml of stock solution per film. All you're doing is developing the same film in double the quantity of liquid which contains the same amount of stock solution in order to get a different looking negative.

And you can't replenish a 1:1 solution. But you can replenish a stock solution. Therefore D76 stock becomes a more economic solution!

Also, what you are doing to your negatives is under-developing them by 15% (my ruff approximation) if you use kodak's 1:1 times without following their minimum solution quantity.

You're maybe happy with your negs but I'm willing to bet they are not optimal (ceteris paribus).

You completely misread cliveh. All he is saying is that when you use it 1+1 rather than stock, you do not have to deal with time compensation --- which is what the question of the TO was about.

 

[R.Gould]

when using D76 I always use the Ilford data for ID11, which is pretty much the same developer, and the regime I follow is after the first film increace the time by 10%, then 20,30,40,Etc up to 90% for the 10th film, I find it works perfectly with no loss of quality, the last is as good as the first, I am talking about the ! liter size, I never use the larger size as I don't use D76 as much as RO9, and the liter is large enough

 

[Gerald C Koch]

The problems with using D-76 FS without replenishment are:

o Bromide buildup with loss of film speed and higher contrast.
o Change in developer pH leading to higher contrast.
o Loss in developing agents due to oxidation.

For consistent results it is better to use D-76 1+1 as a one-shot or FS in a replenished system.

 

[Xmas]

The problems with using D-76 FS without replenishment are:

o Bromide buildup with loss of film speed and higher contrast.
o Change in developer pH leading to higher contrast.
o Loss in developing agents due to oxidation.

For consistent results it is better to use D-76 1+1 as a one-shot or FS in a replenished system.

I thought the d76 in yellow packs was D-76d with a buffered pH & note I only use microphen or ID68 cause I get ezama intermittently.

And 1+2 or 1+3 are one shot options as well?

 

[Bill Burk]

The problems with using D-76 FS without replenishment are:

o Bromide buildup with loss of film speed and higher contrast.
o Change in developer pH leading to higher contrast.
o Loss in developing agents due to oxidation.

For consistent results it is better to use D-76 1+1 as a one-shot or FS in a replenished system.

Thanks Gerald C Koch, I always enjoy reading your clear explanations.

To Auroraua,

Allowing 15% after a few rolls have gone through full strength sounds like a reasonable idea (assuming the disadvantages Gerald pointed out do not matter to you, and assuming consistency ... as Cliveh pointed out... is also not a top priority).

I like to test the contrast that I get and choose development time to reach a contrast that I think will be right for the negatives I am developing. (I find Contrast Index using sensitometry paper charts and a transparent CI "meter").

If you can learn to do that, you can be more independent... You can refer to the available charts to find a starting point, and then adjust according to actual results.

Everybody correct me if I'm wrong, but I think all time recommendations are considered starting points... to be adjusted as needed.

 

[Bill Burk]

I want to add, that using time recommendations "as-is" can lead to successful negatives.

I've only developed to planned contrast since joining APUG. Before that I used the recommended times "as-is" and my vintage negatives are "not bad".

 

[Gerald C Koch]

Everybody correct me if I'm wrong, but I think all time recommendations are considered starting points... to be adjusted as needed.

+1

A film or developer manufacturer's recommendations are just that suggestions. Everyone has their own particular methods. Thermometers, agitation and desired Gamma can all vary.

 

[Gerald C Koch]

I thought the d76 in yellow packs was D-76d with a buffered pH & note I only use microphen or ID68 cause I get ezama intermittently.

And 1+2 or 1+3 are one shot options as well?

Kodak published a few variants to the original D-76 formula, D-76c, D-76d, DK-76 ... but that was decades ago. Some like D-76c were intended for specialized purposes and not general use. But that was as far as it went. You had to mix your own.

For those curious the variant names that I have seen are a, b, c, d, f, h, H, and x. D-76H was suggested by Grant Haist. It omits the hydroquinone from the traditional formula and increases the Metol to 2.5 g and is intended as a one-shot.


Weaker dilutions could probably be used.

 

[Gerald C Koch]

I believe that D-76c was intended for microphotography where additional contrast is desired.

 

[Xmas]

Kodak published a few variants to the original D-76 formula, D-76c, D-76d, DK-76 ... but that was decades ago. Some like D-76c were intended for specialized purposes and not general use. But that was as far as it went. You had to mix your own.

For those curious the variant names that I have seen are a, b, c, d, f, h, H, and x. D-76H was suggested by Grant Haist. It omits the hydroquinone from the traditional formula and increases the Metol to 2.5 g and is intended as a one-shot.


Weaker dilutions could probably be used.

Ian has database...
http://www.lostlabours.co.uk/photography/formulae/developers/devD76_variants.htm

 

[Ian Grant]

Current production D76 is supposedly somewhere between D76 and D76d with some added buffering compared to the original formula presumably to help when used dilute.

Originally Kodak didn't recommend using D76 dilute, I think it was May & Baker Promicrol that was the first film developer that came with recommended times for FS or dilute.

D76 works well at 1+2 which is more economic than 1+1.

Ian