D76H developer

pentaxuser · Jun 11, 2024

I notice that a Brazilian member, today, has mentioned using this developer and the same developer with exactly the same ingredients and quantities was used by John Hicks on Unblinking Eye. It has prompted me to post this thread

It has some one ingredient in common with D23 and uses the same amount, namely Sodium Sulphite @ 100g

It has a second ingredient in common with D23 namely Metol but uses 2.5g instead of 7.5 g

It has one additional ingredient, namely Borax at 2.5g

So in summary it uses Borax at 2.5 while D23 has none: Metol at 5 g less than D23 and Sodium Sulphite at equal amounts of 100g

Can I ask anyone who has used or uses both, what difference they have found in the negatives?

Secondly can anyone who has knowledge of using the ingredients but may not have used both or either developers say what might be expected to be the differences in the negatives in terms of speed, accutance and grain or any other differences I have omitted to think of

Thanks

pentaxuser

xkaes · Jun 11, 2024

D-23 has a lot of Metol because it lacks an accelerator, like borax, which D76 uses. So by reducing the amount of developing agent, Metol, they are compensating by adding boxax, an accelerator. How much this moves the results in the Speed/Acutance/Grain triangle? I have no idea.

Milpool · Jun 11, 2024

D-76 “H” was formulated by Grant Haist (of Kodak fame) in an attempt at more or less replicating the sensitometry and image structure of D-76 without hydroquinone, so it would indeed be similar to D-23.

Of course other characteristics such as capacity and replenishment would be different than D-76, in particular because there is no secondary superadditive developing agent to regenerate metol. There were two proposed versions (g/l):

Metol 2g
Sodium sulfite (anh.) 100g
Borax 2.5g

Metol 2.5g
Sodium sulfite (anh.) 100g
Borax 2g

Haist’s work was later than the advent of D-23.

pentaxuser said:
I notice that a Brazilian member, today, has mentioned using this developer and the same developer with exactly the same ingredients and quantities was used by John Hicks on Unblinking Eye. It has prompted me to post this thread

It has some one ingredient in common with D23 and uses the same amount, namely Sodium Sulphite @ 100g

It has a second ingredient in common with D23 namely Metol but uses 2.5g instead of 7.5 g

It has one additional ingredient, namely Borax at 2.5g

So in summary it uses Borax at 2.5 while D23 has none: Metol at 5 g less than D23 and Sodium Sulphite at equal amounts of 100g

Can I ask anyone who has used or uses both, what difference they have found in the negatives?

Secondly can anyone who has knowledge of using the ingredients but may not have used both or either developers say what might be expected to be the differences in the negatives in terms of speed, accutance and grain or any other differences I have omitted to think of

Thanks

pentaxuser

koraks · Jun 11, 2024

Sounds like something @Ian Grant may want to comment on!

Keith Tapscott. · Jun 11, 2024

DK-76b is an official Kodak formula without hydroquinone.

Metol 2 grams
Sodium sulphite, anhydrous 100 grams
Kodalk 2 grams
Water to make 1 litre of stock solution.

It is said to replicate D76.
As far as I know, D76H isn't an official Kodak formula, but there is a D-76h buffered borax formula.

Ian Grant · Jun 11, 2024

D76h is a published Kodak formula with Hydroquinone, it's in a Crabtree & Henn research paper.

D76h
Metol 2.5g
Sodium sulphite (anh.) 100g
Hydroquinone 5g
Borax 2g
Boric Acid 15g
Water to 1 litre

Haist suggested in discussion with Troop that you could mix a version of D76 with no Hydroquinone, and made a suggestion.

This is probably what Haist was really thinking of:

Eastman Kodak Research Laboratories (1927) - Fine Grain Film Developer
For Fine grain. - A developer recommended by the Eastman Kodak Research Laboratories for use when images of specially fine grain are required is as follows:-

Metol	2 g	8 gr
Sodium Sulphite (anh)	100 g	400 gr
Borax	2 g	8 gr
Water to	1.6 litre (1600 ml)	14 oz
The developer works more slowly than those of normal formula.	(No times were given)

From the 1928 British Journal Photographic Almanac - Epitome of Progress, (published 1927), with a reference to - A.P., May 25, p. 504.

The formula was published in Avoirdupois form. Whether the unit of volume is UK or US isn't given, but as the formula comes from the Eastman Kodak Research Laboratory it's likely to be US.

This seems to be one of the earliest published Kodak Fine Grain film developer for still films. D76 was published around the same time initially as a motion picture developer.

The formula bears a marked resemblance to Grant Haist's Hydroquinone free H76 (mis-named as D76H) which is not a Kodak formula.

Ian

Milpool · Jun 11, 2024

That’s correct Haist’s version(s) were research work, disclosed, but not “official” Kodak formulas as far as I’m aware.

Keith Tapscott. said:
DK-76b is an official Kodak formula without hydroquinone.

Metol 2 grams
Sodium sulphite, anhydrous 100 grams
Kodalk 2 grams
Water to make 1 litre of stock solution.

It is said to replicate D76.
As far as I know, D76H isn't an official Kodak formula, but there is a D-76h buffered borax formula.

bluechromis · Jun 11, 2024

xkaes said:
D-23 has a lot of Metol because it lacks an accelerator, like borax, which D76 uses. So by reducing the amount of developing agent, Metol, they are compensating by adding boxax, an accelerator. How much this moves the results in the Speed/Acutance/Grain triangle? I have no idea.

View attachment 372022

I like the chart.

RalphLambrecht · Jun 11, 2024

Milpool said:
D-76 “H” was formulated by Grant Haist (of Kodak fame) in an attempt at more or less replicating the sensitometry and image structure of D-76 without hydroquinone, so it would indeed be similar to D-23.

Of course other characteristics such as capacity and replenishment would be different than D-76, in particular because there is no secondary superadditive developing agent to regenerate metol. There were two proposed versions (g/l):

Metol 2g
Sodium sulfite (anh.) 100g
Borax 2.5g

Metol 2.5g
Sodium sulfite (anh.) 100g
Borax 2g

Haist’s work was later than the advent of D-23.

D76 proper also has the peculiar characteristic of increasing in strength over time. ASFAIK D76H was to rectify this issue; in my experience, it works much more consistently than plain D76.

Corn_Zhou · Jun 12, 2024

Ian Grant said:
Boric Acid 15g

Wait, 15g of boric acid?
Wouldn't it throw off the pH buffering making the whole solution acidic?

Keith Tapscott. · Jun 12, 2024

RalphLambrecht said:
D76 proper also has the peculiar characteristic of increasing in strength over time. ASFAIK D76H was to rectify this issue; in my experience, it works much more consistently than plain D76.

DK-76b will do that too. If Kodalk (sodium metaborate) is unavailable, an alternative way is to make it as follows.

Metol 2 grams
Sodium sulphite anhydrous 100 grams
Sodium hydroxide 0.3 gram
Borax 1.4 grams
Water to make 1 litre.

Ian Grant · Jun 12, 2024

Corn_Zhou said:
Wait, 15g of boric acid?
Wouldn't it throw off the pH buffering making the whole solution acidic?

It is mildly acidic in solution, a 4% solution is around pH 4.8 to 5 but with Borax it forms a strong buffer solution stabilising pH.

Milpool said:
That’s correct Haist’s version(s) were research work, disclosed, but not “official” Kodak formulas as far as I’m aware.

Grant Haist was not involved on the research work, in fact he only joined Kodak over a decade later in 1950.

Ian

pentaxuser · Jun 12, 2024

T hanks all. It was less the history of it than the experience of it that I was looking for but if no-one has used it then that's that. Pity that no-one except out new Brazilian member appears to has experience of it and of course John Hicks of Unblinking Eye but he isn't a member here

I'll start a conversation with our new Brazilian member if that is possible

pentaxuser

Keith Tapscott. · Jun 12, 2024

pentaxuser said:
T hanks all. It was less the history of it than the experience of it that I was looking for but if no-one has used it then that's that. Pity that no-one except out new Brazilian member appears to has experience of it and of course John Hicks of Unblinking Eye but he isn't a member here

I'll start a conversation with our new Brazilian member if that is possible

pentaxuser

There was a website I saw years ago where variants of the D76 type were reviewed, but I can't find the link.
I remember that DK76b kept better than the Grant Haist formula and from the author's point of view was more consistent.
Perhaps someone here will be able to find it.

pentaxuser · Jun 12, 2024

Keith Tapscott. said:
There was a website I saw years ago where variants of the D76 type were reviewed, but I can't find the link.
I remember that DK76b kept better than the Grant Haist formula and from the author's point of view was more consistent.
Perhaps someone here will be able to find it.

Thanks, Keith Such sources may well be useful This variant does seem a simple one in terms of chemicals in comparison with others versions of D76. As I see it and as bluechromis appears to see it the lack of metol compared to D23 means that a third chemical of Borax, an accelerator, is required so does that mean that it is slower, the same as, or faster than D23 in terms of development times

With the same amount of Sodium Sulphite you might assume the grain remains the same fine grain as D23 but there may be a flaw here in the above reasoning

It isn't clear to me if D23 stock achieves box speed with the likes of HP5+ and most 400 speed film but this looks unlikely. In that area it is probably similar to Perceptol but this is speculation on my part.

At the end of the day it may be that there is very little difference between the 2 developers in terms of the negatives produced to make D76H worthwhile but these are questions with as yet no answers

pentaxuser

D76H developer

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency