D76

cliveh · Jun 26, 2012

I think D76 is the best developer formulation in the history of film photography. Any thoughts?

PhotoJim · Jun 26, 2012

I think blue is the best colour ever. Equally unprovable.

Ian Grant · Jun 26, 2012

Kodak never thought so they spent many years trying to improve it. Eventually they gave up by introducing Xtol instead.

It was a developer many companies were stuck with, it was the late 1920' /30's equivalent of an Open Source Cine film developer. Most Company's including Agfa made D76 although with their own name/formula number.

Ian

jovo · Jun 26, 2012

cliveh said:
I think D76 is the best developer formulation in the history of film photography. Any thoughts?

I have no idea if it's the best, because different developers meet different needs, but for most film I use, it (or ID11) used 1:1 has been all I've ever needed.

Roger Cole · Jun 26, 2012

It's not the best in any one aspect. You can beat it for grain, effective film speed, sharpness, storage life, whatever. But it does so many things well enough that it has become the standard against which others are compared.

It's a very good all around developer. I could get by with just D76 if I had to. But there is no one best developer for all needs and all photographers.

Darkroom317 · Jun 26, 2012

I started out with Sprint in college three years ago. After, I got my own darkroom I used ID-II and the D-76, same thing. After, a couple of months I started using Rodinal and I haven't looked back ever since.

Photo Engineer · Jun 26, 2012

For years, it was the "release" developer for all Kodak B&W products. All films had to pass the test with D76 regarding speed and contrast as well as grain and sharpness.

PE

PhotoJim · Jun 26, 2012

Roger Cole said:
It's not the best in any one aspect. You can beat it for grain, effective film speed, sharpness, storage life, whatever. But it does so many things well enough that it has become the standard against which others are compared.

Well said.

I still use it for some purposes. It's cheap, the quality is high and it's flexible (using different dilutions). It's also reliable and predictable.

Perhaps my favourite aspect of it, though, is that the formula is well known so I can mix it from scratch. I don't depend on Kodak's existence to keep using it. (I have been buying Kodak's bags of it again, though, for convenience, so they're making their dollar from me.)

E76 · Jun 26, 2012

I tend to move between a pretty diverse set of films (Ilford, Kodak, Foma) and have standardized on D-76 for this reason. I get great results for all of them and if I ever want to try a new film, I know I can easily find times for it. I have considered moving to Xtol but the large mixing quantities put me off (I just don't process that much).

dehk · Jun 26, 2012

My thought, Best for couple T grain films . Other than that, Xtol for everything else.

erikg · Jun 26, 2012

I don't know, green is pretty awesome.

summicron1 · Jun 26, 2012

depends on what you mean by "best." A friend of mine likes to cite some magazine article he saw years ago that went on and on about some mystery developer that was super fine grain, good for all film, could be diluted easily, worked consistently, stored well and was generally all around wonderful and it was, you guessed it, plain ol' D-76. I've toyed with Microdol, but D-76 diluted 1:1 is my standard. In photography I've found the fewer variables you have, the more control you have over the ones that matter, and using the same developer is my "best" solution to that.

PhotoJim · Jun 26, 2012

erikg said:
I don't know, green is pretty awesome.

Green is blue with yellow added.

Gerald C Koch · Jun 26, 2012

If D-76 is so good then why do so many people seek the holy grail of developers?

removed account4 · Jun 26, 2012

mauve

Photo-gear · Jun 26, 2012

I guess this chart is known by most of you:

Dali · Jun 26, 2012

cliveh said:
I think D76 is the best developer formulation in the history of film photography. Any thoughts?

Yes, I think it is a meaningless statement as you don't define what is the best for you.

Take care.

Photo Engineer · Jun 26, 2012

D-76 is a one part package due to a patented Kodak method of combining the ingredients and preventing deterioration. It also involves some sophisticated mixing equipment.

Ohters may therefore need to pack simialar formulas as 2 parts.

PE

spoolman · Jun 27, 2012

If I remember I believe Mr. Troop in The Darkroom Cookbook stated that the Original formulation for D-76 that the ph of the Metol component began to rise during storage and that Kodak had to do re-formulations over the years to counter act this problem. He also stated that is why ID-11 is in two parts,one part is the Metol alone and the other packet contains the other ingredients. If I am wrong, someone in the know please correct me. I don't have my copy of this book and I am just going from memory.

Doug

summicron1 · Jun 27, 2012

Gerald C Koch said:
If D-76 is so good then why do so many people seek the holy grail of developers?

for the same reason they're never happy with their partner (well, some aren't) or their car, or their camera -- chronic "grass is always greener" syndrome -- you try a different developer you think it's look is better, you use it for a while and try another and think THAT one is better --as I said, I've found -- for me, your results may differ -- that excellence in photography comes from eliminating variables whenever you can and using those you can control most easily to get your results.

When Mary Ellen Mark spoke at Weber State University a bunch of years ago, back before she was into hassies and ginormous polaroids, she said she always used Tri-X and nothing else because she had learned, through practice, to get the best from it. I dunno what she developed it in, but I bet she stuck to one or two developers.

artonpaper · Jun 27, 2012

I never cared for the grain structure with Tri-X. I like HC-110B for its grain better. Rodinol can really handle a long brightness range well. The old DK-50 had better acutance. IMHO

trojancast · Jun 27, 2012

A tough question to answer. I use D76, because it is a good all round developer. But is it the best ever? I doubt it, but I don't have an answer for which one is. I might be persuaded to go with Rodinal however.

F/1.4 · Jun 27, 2012

Caffenol or GTFO.

cliveh · Jun 27, 2012

summicron1 said:
depends on what you mean by "best." A friend of mine likes to cite some magazine article he saw years ago that went on and on about some mystery developer that was super fine grain, good for all film, could be diluted easily, worked consistently, stored well and was generally all around wonderful and it was, you guessed it, plain ol' D-76. I've toyed with Microdol, but D-76 diluted 1:1 is my standard. In photography I've found the fewer variables you have, the more control you have over the ones that matter, and using the same developer is my "best" solution to that.

Couldn't agree more.

John Austin · Jun 27, 2012

What was meant by best? - To me D76d is the best because of the balance of its properties of grain, emulsion speed, tonail range etc

The other best reason is that I made the most recent deep tank line of D76d in May 1985 and have been replenishing it ever since - Like me, it is improving with age, but it never got grumpy - I am tempted to ask if mine is some of the oldest still going, which I presume it must be, but I wonder

Back to the first paragraph, for me D76d is best because of its balance of qualities, not any particular one

John

D76

cliveh

PhotoJim

Ian Grant

jovo

Membership Council

Roger Cole

Darkroom317

Photo Engineer

PhotoJim

E76

dehk

erikg

summicron1

PhotoJim

Gerald C Koch

removed account4

Photo-gear

Attachments

Dali

Photo Engineer

spoolman

summicron1

artonpaper

trojancast

F/1.4

cliveh

John Austin

D76

Membership Council

Attachments

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency