D76 versus ID11, Are they the same things ?

[gbroadbridge]

Pepsi Max

 

[Don_ih]

Why does this keep happening??!

It doesn't. It's actually different from all the other times - just like D76 is different from ID11.....

 

[Alex Benjamin]

In scientific terms, these two are called Schrödinger Developers, i.e., simultaneously both the same and not the same when observed from a photography-devoted forum.

 

[retina_restoration]

"This life as you now live it and have lived it, you will have to live once more and innumerable times more; and there will be nothing new in it, but every pain and every joy and every thought and sigh and everything unutterably small or great in your life will have to return to you, all in the same succession and sequence."
— Friedrich Nietzsche

So basically it’s a blend of The Never-Ending September and Groundhog Day?! Ugh!

 

[John Wiegerink]

So basically it’s a blend of The Never-Ending September and Groundhog Day?! Ugh!

Easy Paul, don't pull your hair out. Actually, I think it's more like "to presoak or not to presoak". OMG, let's not go there again!

 

[pentaxuser]

Perhaps each time we answer Umut's questions so thoroughly that he never needs to participate further but as koraks says we have said it all before and it's all already on Photrio, often in one long previous thread in the case of this question

pentaxuser

 

[John Wiegerink]

Perhaps each time we answer Umut's questions so thoroughly that he never needs to participate further but as koraks says we have said it all before and it's all already on Photrio, often in one long previous thread in the case of this question

pentaxuser

It's called "SEARCH"! I have to admit that I have, on occasion, committed the sin of asking here before searching myself. 30 lashes to me with a wet noodle.

 

[retina_restoration]

Easy Paul, don't pull your hair out. Actually, I think it's more like "to presoak or not to presoak". OMG, let's not go there again!

No indeed.

 

[brian steinberger]

I agree, this has been discussed lots on this site and can be found in the search.

I would recommend the OP buy a package of each developer and see for themselves and draw their own conclusions.

 

[Paul Howell]

Stock, yes. But not at 1+1 or 1+3.

And not pushed at 800.

I did not look at the other times, not sure why at stock same times but not a bit, quite of difference with 1:1 1:3 and push.

 

[Don_ih]

That suggests that D76 is somewhat more active than ID11 at higher dilutions. Perhaps the Ph is higher. Maybe Ilford skimps on the borax. Or perhaps the times could be the same and the results virtually identical. Maybe they think, if you use D76, you want your film to be lower-contrast - especially if you water it down.

(Times shown from Delta 100).

 

[Raghu Kuvempunagar]

Mustafa,

You may find this useful:

CONVERSION TABLE FOR KODAK CHEMISTRY USERS WISHING TO FIND AN ILFORD EQUIVALENT TO THEIR CURRENT KODAK CHEMISTRY

https://www.ilfordphoto.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/ILFORD-PHOTO-to-Kodak-equivalents.pdf

 

[Milpool]

Keep in mind when it comes to pushing or any EI other than ISO speed, there are no standardized criteria so recommendations can be quite different for identical materials / developers.

Ilford’s and Kodak’s standard agitation recommendations are also a little different, which could have minor effects on recommended development times.

Then there’s just the fact we don’t really know what each manufacturer does to determine recommended times for other manufacturers’ products. Some of it could simply be extrapolation. It could also be plain wrong. Consider (one example) for a long time Ilford’s recommended development time for its own Delta 100/DD-X combination was wrong. Etc.

I did not look at the other times, not sure why at stock same times but not a bit, quite of difference with 1:1 1:3 and push.

 

[koraks]

I think it's more like "to presoak or not to presoak".

ID11 requires a stop bath after development, with D76 a plain 'water stop' is fine.

I'll show myself out now.

 

[Don_ih]

Ilford’s and Kodak’s standard agitation recommendations are also a little different, which could have minor effects on recommended development times

I would assume that, since it's Ilford's data sheet, their times for their own film in the numerous developer listed are using their own agitation scheme. They almost certainly did the testing themselves.

 

[ADOX Fotoimpex]

D76 versus ID11, Are they the same things ?

It depends what you define as "the same". Do they work in a similar way? Yes certainly.
They feature a very similar activity and developer/replenisher system using identical substances (hydroquinone/metol).
Would there be a differences in formulation if you had and mixed both recipes from raw chemicals for a fresh mix? Here already there would be yes.
Are they manufactured in the same way: Certainly not as anyone can see by the two part packaging of ID-11 vs. the one part packaging of D76. The later requires a different and more sophisticated buffer system.
Apart from this every manufacturer had it´s own supply chain and was favouring "their" seqestering agent, buffer, ph adjuster, filler etc. so historically they differ to and they do here.

Will there be noticeable differences for the end consumer?
Difficult to say. Most likely slight variations will show over extended storage times between the two.

PS I am aswering because I was not sure if the european topic starter might have refered to our ADOX D-76.

 

[Paul Howell]

Is there a posted ILford ID 11 formula? I've always been old that ID11 and D76 are the same, while Ansco GAF 17 is different . I asked a couple of AI that I have access to and both reported that the formulas are Identical in terms of active ingredients with Kodak having anti clumping additives but could not ID what those are. Must have addressed in an older threads, when I have time I will plow my though them. If the same, still no sure whey ILford recommends more time in ID 11 at 1:1 1:3 and pushed to 800.

 

[John Wiegerink]

It depends what you define as "the same". Do they work in a similar way? Yes certainly.
They feature a very similar activity and developer/replenisher system using identical substances (hydroquinone/metol).
Would there be a differences in formulation if you had and mixed both recipes from raw chemicals for a fresh mix? Here already there would be yes.
Are they manufactured in the same way: Certainly not as anyone can see by the two part packaging of ID-11 vs. the one part packaging of D76. The later requires a different and more sophisticated buffer system.
Apart from this every manufacturer had it´s own supply chain and was favouring "their" seqestering agent, buffer, ph adjuster, filler etc. so historically they differ to and they do here.

Will there be noticeable differences for the end consumer?
Difficult to say. Most likely slight variations will show over extended storage times between the two.

PS I am aswering because I was not sure if the european topic starter might have refered to our ADOX D-76.

Thanks for chiming in and adding something to this discussion when I didn't think there was much to add. I will say this and then I'm done. Years ago, in the time of the dinosaurs, I used both D76 and a product Ilford called ID-II+. Did I see a difference? I'll just say at the time I was using those that I switched over to ID-II+. Now, the developers makeup is slightly different so I don't know one way or the other. Plus, my eyes aren't so good now so there wouldn't be any difference to me.

 

[Don_ih]

Let's put it this way: whatever difference there is between the two is practically irrelevant. You can use them both interchangeably and get perfectly good results.

 

[John Wiegerink]

Let's put it this way: whatever difference there is between the two is practically irrelevant. You can use them both interchangeably and get perfectly good results.

That's a two thumbs up!