D-76; yields and re-use

Kirks518 · Jul 2, 2015

According to Kodak, one gallon of D-76 stock will yield 16 sheets of 8x10, or 64 sheets of 4x5 (1280 sq inches).

From a fresh batch of D-76, I have developed in stock solution, a total of 13 sheets of 4x5, or 260 sq inches, in 3 sessions. Sessions 1 & 2 were in Paterson tank using the taco method (4 sheets and 3 sheets respectively), and one session in an F-R Cut Sheet tank (6 sheets). The F-R tank uses a whopping 1600ml per run, or (in this case) 166.66ml per sheet, so I used the full gallon for those 3 runs.

I saved the used stock solution in 3 unused/empty containers, ie, I didn't pour it back into my working solution.

So now I have just under a gallon of D-76 that has had about 20% of it's working capacity (1280/260) depleted. This batch is about 2 weeks old, so still very young.

Do I need to make some type of compensation for the 20%-less-potent solution, or should it be good to go the way it is? I know D-76 is cheap, but this just seems incredibly wasteful, and it no longer is cheap when you only get a 20% yield(cost increases 5x).

Xmas · Jul 2, 2015

I filter back into stock bottle to avoid film chips migrating and stop at ten x 135 films for one litre per Ilfords ID11 or Microphen data sheets, if you try for 11 expect grief, please don't ask how I know.

Yes I mix and use over a weekend so no storage to speak off in concertina brimmed to lip edge.

Gerald C Koch · Jul 2, 2015

Fore future reference D-76 can be used 1+1 as a one shot or full strength as a replenished system. Both methods are more economical than what you have previously done.

You can also switch to HC-110 which was designed by Kodak to produce results close to D-76. According to Kodak the differences between the two developers is said to be slight. The shelf life of the concentrate is very long. Use it as a one-shot.

Xmas · Jul 2, 2015

Xmas said:
I filter back into stock bottle to avoid film chips migrating and stop at ten x 135 films for one litre per Ilfords ID11 or Microphen data sheets, if you try for 11 expect grief, please don't ask how I know.

Yes I mix and use over a weekend so no storage to speak off in concertina brimmed to lip edge.

Forgot each film needs 10% longer, 2nd 110%, 3rd 120%, etc.

MattKing · Jul 2, 2015

Use X-Tol in a replenishment regime, and you can stop worrying about it.

Or T-Max RS.

Or ID-11, if you follow Ilford's recommendations on the web. The fact that ID-11 comes in a package made up of two separate parts makes it possible.

The 5 litre packages of X-Tol contain enough developer to make up a working (replenishable) solution of two litres, plus enough replenisher to develop over 40 8x10 sheets. Then when you mix your second 5 litre package, that and every one that follows will give you enough replenisher to develop 70 more 8x10 sheets - that is about 20 cents per 8x10 in my market..

If you find you haven't used up all of a package in six months, you are not wasting much money if you discard what remains and mix up a new package.

And replenished developers are nice!

gone · Jul 2, 2015

I wonder if the discrepancy is due to using tanks instead of trays? Kodak doesn't list any capacities using 4x5, but the one sheet film that I see on their chart applies to 8x10 processed in a tray. The roll films are given estimated capacities when used in tanks.

Lots of people use D76 1:1, and even 1:3. I like the look using it full strength, and always use it that way, then dump it. Never goes back into the stock solution. I have had too many problems w/ consistency from this developer, especially in Florida where the home gets warmer that most places.

My scheme is to save up rolls and use it, then dump anything left in 3 weeks before the PH rises and I get inconsistent results. It's why I finally switched to TD-16 from Photographers Formulary, a very similar developer that gave me consistent results with up to 3 months of storage. Now I use Mic-X or Rodinal, but the consistency issue w/ D76 drove me nuts until I started doing as I described. Maybe wasteful, but consistent.

Xmas · Jul 2, 2015

momus said:
I wonder if the discrepancy is due to using tanks instead of trays? Kodak doesn't list any capacities using 4x5, but the one sheet film that I see on their chart applies to 8x10 processed in a tray. The roll films are given estimated capacities when used in tanks.

Lots of people use D76 1:1, and even 1:3. I like the look using it full strength, and always use it that way, then dump it. Never goes back into the stock solution. I have had too many problems w/ consistency from this developer, especially in Florida where the home gets warmer that most places.

My scheme is to save up rolls and use it, then dump anything left in 3 weeks before the PH rises and I get inconsistent results. It's why I finally switched to TD-16 from Photographers Formulary, a very similar developer that gave me consistent results with up to 3 months of storage. Now I use Mic-X or Rodinal, but the consistency issue w/ D76 drove me nuts until I started doing as I described. Maybe wasteful, but consistent.

If you want to use d76 stock you need to use a/the buffered version that won't drift in pH.
And if you dilute 1+1 or 1+3 you should not feed back to stock bottle.

MattKing · Jul 2, 2015

momus said:
I wonder if the discrepancy is due to using tanks instead of trays? Kodak doesn't list any capacities using 4x5, but the one sheet film that I see on their chart applies to 8x10 processed in a tray. The roll films are given estimated capacities when used in tanks.

The capacity numbers are based mainly on square inches of film, so to convert from 8x10 capacities just multiply by 4 for 4x5. You will sometimes see different numbers for trays or tanks - most likely to account for oxidation.

The difficulty that sometimes arises is that one must also take into account the geometry of the tank you are using. Kodak's numbers account for necessary chemical activity, which is a separate concern from how much solution is needed to fully submerge the film in the tank.

flavio81 · Jul 2, 2015

Kirks518 said:
I know D-76 is cheap, but this just seems incredibly wasteful, and it no longer is cheap when you only get a 20% yield(cost increases 5x).

Kirks,

Use the D-76 replenisher formula. The formula is available out there on the web. Yes, D76 can be replenished, and used in this way it gets really really cheap. Basically you use the D76 full strength, and over time you add a small quantity of replenisher to compensate. I think that i've read that some user on APUG had, years ago, a D76 bath which was replenished again and again for decades!

Another alternative is ID11 replenishment - didn't know about it but if it uses the stock ID11 package then it's a great idea.

Also, as pointed above, if you use D76 1:1 or 1:3, you need to discard the mix. Replenishment is to be used with full-strength D76.

Ian Grant · Jul 2, 2015

D76 collapse after a few months when replenished, usually you need to start again every 6-9 months depending on the use. It's Ilford's Autophen which was a PQ equivalent of D76/ID-11 which one customer replenished for years without replacing and starting again, that's not possible with D76 due to the Bromide build up affecting the Metol.

Replenishment gives higher quality results one seasoned and is extremely economic, personally I'd suggest replenished Xtol where the developer is self replenishing with fresh developer and it's s slightly better developer than D76, sharper, finer grain and better shadow details.

Ian

Maris · Jul 2, 2015

Ian Grant said:
...
Replenishment gives higher quality results one seasoned and is extremely economic, personally I'd suggest replenished Xtol where the developer is self replenishing with fresh developer and it's s slightly better developer than D76, sharper, finer grain and better shadow details.

Ian

+1

My 1.6 litre batch of replenished Xtol has done hundreds of films in tanks and trays. It gets replenished at the rate of 90ml per film instead of Kodak's recommendation of 70ml. And it's now 8 years old and working superbly: strong and predictable.

Thomas Bertilsson · Jul 2, 2015

Maris said:
+1

My 1.6 litre batch of replenished Xtol has done hundreds of films in tanks and trays. It gets replenished at the rate of 90ml per film instead of Kodak's recommendation of 70ml. And it's now 8 years old and working superbly: strong and predictable.

I did that for over five years with Xtol, at 70ml of replenishment per film. That developer never skipped a beat. Super consistent, and so easy to mix and use. Great results too, especially when light hit the subject directly rather than reflected light. Almost impossible to block up highlights, and great shadow speed!

Ian Grant · Jul 3, 2015

I began using replenished developers at school, I guess I used them for over 35 years, Microphen/ID-68, ID-II in deep tanks then Adox-Borax MQ and finally Xtol. Always stable and easy and extremely economic, a huge advantage is very quick to use.

Ian

RalphLambrecht · Jul 3, 2015

I just take the volume I need for one film and mix with water 1+1 for one-time use

Bill Burk · Jul 3, 2015

I like to think that the capacity of D-76 is slightly conservative. Not in a cynical sense to guarantee more sales, but in a straightforward way to guarantee success.

I think it helps ensure time and temperature processing gives consistent results.

If you control your process with test strips (or sensitometry), you can see how much more you can get out of it. It's easy (haaa) to see how re-using a batch leads to a longer required developing time for the next run(s).

If you establish a replenishment routine, same thing. It's easy to get more out of the same chemistry.

But it happens. If you don't increase time or add fresh replenisher, you get measurably reduced contrast on subsequent runs.

One person's measurable difference... is another person "just fine" results. Even the negatives where I lost 30% contrast by running three batches through one tray... are printable.

I don't speak for Kodak, though I work there.

flavio81 · Jul 3, 2015

Bill Burk said:
I like to think that the capacity of D-76 is slightly conservative. Not in a cynical sense to guarantee more sales, but in a straightforward way to guarantee success.

I think it helps ensure time and temperature processing gives consistent results.

If you control your process with test strips (or sensitometry), you can see how much more you can get out of it. It's easy (haaa) to see how re-using a batch leads to a longer required developing time for the next run(s).

If you establish a replenishment routine, same thing. It's easy to get more out of the same chemistry.

But it happens. If you don't increase time or add fresh replenisher, you get measurably reduced contrast on subsequent runs.

One person's measurable difference... is another person "just fine" results. Even the negatives where I lost 30% contrast by running three batches through one tray... are printable.

I don't speak for Kodak, though I work there.

Great post !!

Xmas · Jul 3, 2015

Bill Burk said:
I like to think that the capacity of D-76 is slightly conservative. Not in a cynical sense to guarantee more sales, but in a straightforward way to guarantee success.

I think it helps ensure time and temperature processing gives consistent results.

If you control your process with test strips (or sensitometry), you can see how much more you can get out of it. It's easy (haaa) to see how re-using a batch leads to a longer required developing time for the next run(s).

If you establish a replenishment routine, same thing. It's easy to get more out of the same chemistry.

But it happens. If you don't increase time or add fresh replenisher, you get measurably reduced contrast on subsequent runs.

One person's measurable difference... is another person "just fine" results. Even the negatives where I lost 30% contrast by running three batches through one tray... are printable.

I don't speak for Kodak, though I work there.

Ilford say increase time 10% for each successive film up to 10 x 135 per litre of ID11 ditto for Microphen.

Gerald C Koch · Jul 3, 2015

The instructions for Atomal not only figured in the total number of rolls but also the time delay between processing. For example if you processed 2 rolls and waited 2 weeks for using the developer again the time increase would be greater than if the next roll was processed immediately.

Sirius Glass · Jul 3, 2015

MattKing said:
Use X-Tol in a replenishment regime, and you can stop worrying about it.

Or T-Max RS.

Or ID-11, if you follow Ilford's recommendations on the web. The fact that ID-11 comes in a package made up of two separate parts makes it possible.

The 5 litre packages of X-Tol contain enough developer to make up a working (replenishable) solution of two litres, plus enough replenisher to develop over 40 8x10 sheets. Then when you mix your second 5 litre package, that and every one that follows will give you enough replenisher to develop 70 more 8x10 sheets - that is about 20 cents per 8x10 in my market..

If you find you haven't used up all of a package in six months, you are not wasting much money if you discard what remains and mix up a new package.

And replenished developers are nice!

I do the first one. Replenished XTOL is easy to store and I do not have to keep calculating the time adjustments.

Ronald Moravec · Jul 8, 2015

You are playing with fire. To do replenishment, do it properly with D76 r replenisher, test strips and densitometer reading. You can make D76 & D76R. A certain amount of R is added to stock after each film and then stock is topped off with used developer.

OPtion 2 is D76 1:1 and use one time. Partially full bottle go bad very fast, week perhaps, and nowhere near the months Kodak says. So you make up your stock, and put into 4 oz glass bottles. Add 4 ox water, stir and process.

D76 in a sealed glass bottle is good for 6 months when it slowly goes less active. I have done careful tests to confirm.

To save money, mix your own D76. Stop buying the expensive bag from Kodak.

Sirius Glass · Jul 8, 2015

Ronald Moravec said:
You are playing with fire. To do replenishment, do it properly with D76 r replenisher, test strips and densitometer reading. You can make D76 & D76R. A certain amount of R is added to stock after each film and then stock is topped off with used developer.

No one can successfully replenish without the test strips and densitometer readings. I have done it for years without them and never had a problem.

flavio81 · Jul 8, 2015

Ronald Moravec said:
OPtion 2 is D76 1:1 and use one time.

Just as a note, Option 2 (D76 1:1) will give different results than straight D76. Straight D76 will bring significantly finer grain.

Ian Grant · Jul 9, 2015

flavio81 said:
Just as a note, Option 2 (D76 1:1) will give different results than straight D76. Straight D76 will bring significantly finer grain.

Replenished D76 will give the finest grain.

Best dilution for economy (if not using Replenishment) is 1+2 surprisingly never listed, works equally as well with Xtol, Perceptol etc. Dilution increases sharpness, grain becomes less mushy, and on balance 1+2 is a good compromise, at 1+3 grain becomes more obvious and the tonal range becomes compressed. Some of the best FP4 negatives I've printed were shot with an Exacta VX1000 and CZJ lenses processed in ID-11 (D&^) at 1+2 at the request of the photographer.

Ian

D-76; yields and re-use

Kirks518

Xmas

Gerald C Koch

Xmas

MattKing

Moderator

gone

Xmas

MattKing

Moderator

flavio81

Ian Grant

Maris

Thomas Bertilsson

Ian Grant

RalphLambrecht

Bill Burk

flavio81

Xmas

Gerald C Koch

Sirius Glass

Ronald Moravec

Sirius Glass

flavio81

Ian Grant

D-76; yields and re-use

Moderator

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency