DDX or D76??

[mikepry]

Xtol is absolutely marvelous, I’m amazed by it every time.

I have studied the film curves and the effects of DDX, D76, and Xtol when used with TMY. Very impressive. Really impressive. Xtol seems to be the champ as far as developmental latitude goes with D76 and DDX not far behind at all.

 

[Bill Burk]

HC-110 is $28.50 a liter, which can develop 166 rolls of film. That's $0.17 per roll of film.
D-76 is $6.95 for 1 gallon of solution. This can develop approximately 24 rolls of film if using a 1:1 mixture. That's $0.28 per roll, almost double the price of HC-110.

I get 32 rolls per gallon. I decant to quarts and use a 4-roll stainless steel tank that requires 32 ounces of developer to fill.

So that really works out to $0.22 per roll so I would say you have a more modest cost savings around 25% when you choose HC110 over D-76.

 

[Bill Burk]

I have studied the film curves and the effects of DDX, D76, and Xtol when used with TMY.

Interesting graphs. I studied TMX and TMY-2 in D-76

My TMX family curves do not imply shouldering at the higher contrast index, as this series implies. My curves indicate long straight line sections are achieved at all development times.

 

[mikepry]

Interesting graphs. I studied TMX and TMY-2 in D-76

My TMX family curves do not imply shouldering at the higher contrast index, as this series implies. My curves indicate long straight line sections are achieved at all development times.

What dilution were you using? That could have an effect possibly.

 

[Bill Burk]

What dilution were you using? That could have an effect possibly.

1:1 for low to normal contrast then switched to Stock for the high contrast curves. Here’s my TMX family...

 

[Adrian Bacon]

Amongst various concerns, the OP and others have mentioned price and rightly so. Isn't there a clue in the above quote that it might be worth pursuing DD as the alternative to DDX?. Certainly in the U.K market you can buy 5L of DD direct from Harman/Ilford Photo at a much better price than the equivalent 5L of DDX. The price difference means that DD is about half the price of DDX and it would seem that despite DD being meant for large volume commercial processes it can be used for small tank processing, even on a one-off use and dump basis without starter.

I cannot of course state that DD will work exactly as DDX does as I have never tried it but certainly I understand that an Ilford Master Printer, as certain people are labelled by IIford itself. has said that DD is the same as DDX except for the replenishment and it may be that either starter can be used for small tank processing or can be eliminated with appropriate alterations to development times.

If all DDX gives you is "convenience" as compared to DD then it comes at quite a premium

Just a thought

pentaxuser

Roberts stocks 5L and 20L DD and 1L of the starter. The 5L msrp is $67.20 and you have to buy 2. The starter msrp is $53.12 and you have to buy 8.

1L DDX msrp is $21.20 and you have to buy 8

 

[mshchem]

HC-110 is $28.50 a liter, which can develop 166 rolls of film. That's $0.17 per roll of film.
D-76 is $6.95 for 1 gallon of solution. This can develop approximately 24 rolls of film if using a 1:1 mixture. That's $0.28 per roll, almost double the price of HC-110.

Replenish!

 

[bvy]

Well, I've used them all and recently (happily) settled on DD-X. This was my "evolution"...

D-76 - Nice, but I hate mixing powders, and I had some go bad. Fortunately I noticed before I put film through it.

HC-110 - A liquid that lasts forever. Convenient, versatile and cheap. Mediocre results, least suited for machine/constant agitation, which I started doing around this time.

XTOL - Beautiful results, great for constant agitation. But I still hate mixing powders, and I had some go bad. Unfortunately I noticed AFTER I put film through it. Cheap, but inconvenient in five liters. Also, mine always developed a precipitate that I had to filter out.

DD-X - Beautiful results, acceptable for constant agitation (which I'm doing less of anyway). Convenient one liter size, and easy to decant into 60ml bottles for one shot use which also maximizes keeping. Mixes readily. Not as cheap the others.

As far as that last point about DD-X not being cheap, really this is a relative statement. HC-110 and XTOL come out to around 20 cents per roll (without replenishment) and that's hard to compete with. DD-X is somewhere around $1.12 per roll. In the grand scheme of things, a dollar to process a five dollar roll of film is nothing. (Consider all the folks sending E-6 to labs and paying as much as or more than the film cost for processing.) That's not to say I wouldn't love DD-X more if it were cheaper, but it does everything I want and I don't mind paying a little more for that.

(Per roll costs based on B&H's current pricing.)

 

[faberryman]

I use stainless steel tanks which only require 6oz to process a roll of film, so my DDX cost runs about $0.85/roll, substantially more expensive than HC110/D76, but a rounding error given the other costs of maintaining a darkroom, developing, printing, matting, etc. If I were a heavy shooter, I would use XTOL.

 

[John51]

Good to know that full bottles of stock D76 can last a few years.

I have a lever action bottle capper for my homebrew and as a test, I filled a 250ml empty beer bottle to the top with water, came to 265ml. Put a cap on the bottle and there was just a tiny bubble, about the size you'd see in a small spirit level. Seems ideal for me doing 2 rolls at a time. Dilute contents of bottle to 590ml, which is about 1.2+1 and use it one shot.

In the UK, ID11 is currently better value as you can get 5 litres of it for the same price as 3.8 litres of D76.

 

[RattyMouse]

HC-110 - A liquid that lasts forever. Convenient, versatile and cheap. Mediocre results,

 

[RattyMouse]

Replenish!

I will never, ever, EVER replenish. EVER. I will give up film photography entirely rather than submit to the mindless tyranny of replenishment.

 

[mshchem]

I will never, ever, EVER replenish. EVER. I will give up film photography entirely rather than submit to the mindless tyranny of replenishment.

Every lab that processes film and paper in the world replenishes. I've mindlessly kept HC-110 and XTOL tanks going for 3 or 4 years. Only time I would dump them is if I didn't use for a couple months. Eazy Peezee. Talk about wasting Earth's precious resources. Somehow I got hooked on Jobo because I got two processors for next to nothing. Otherwise I would be using a 1 gallon "Tank" and replenishing.
Let the ranting begin!
Peace, Mike

 

[Bill Burk]

I will never, ever, EVER replenish. EVER. I will give up film photography entirely rather than submit to the mindless tyranny of replenishment.

Used to run a processor that replenished automatically. The factory bought too many tanks for it. For many years I had a pair of 30 gallon Nalgene tanks with floating lids... for the day I imagined I was going to need that much developer and fix ready for use...

One day I realized that was never going to happen so I threw them out.

I’ll never replenish either... but if I did, I would run control strips to keep the line under control

 

[RattyMouse]

Every lab that processes film and paper in the world replenishes. I've mindlessly kept HC-110 and XTOL tanks going for 3 or 4 years. Only time I would dump them is if I didn't use for a couple months. Eazy Peezee. Talk about wasting Earth's precious resources. Somehow I got hooked on Jobo because I got two processors for next to nothing. Otherwise I would be using a 1 gallon "Tank" and replenishing.
Let the ranting begin!
Peace, Mike

Few things are certain in this world to me. One thing that is however is that I will NEVER replenish.

 

[mshchem]

Used to run a processor that replenished automatically. The factory bought too many tanks for it. For many years I had a pair of 30 gallon Nalgene tanks with floating lids... for the day I imagined I was going to need that much developer and fix ready for use...

One day I realized that was never going to happen so I threw them out.

I’ll never replenish either... but if I did, I would run control strips to keep the line under control

Absolutely. Not sure anyone makes control strips for black and white anymore? Easy enough to do yourself. I use XTOL , make 5 liters split into absolutely full bottles, use one shot straight or 1:1 on the Jobo. It's fun watching it go spinning around. I have managed to stray the OP's question so I will stop. My vote is use what you like. In US HC-110 Dil. B, one shot, is cheap and easy, concentrate lasts for ever.
Best Regards, Mike

 

[RalphLambrecht]

I have use and enjoy DXX but it is getting pretty scarce these days. BH is out til May 15! I don’t mind D76 so am really thinking the scarcity of DDX is becoming a trend. D76, is, otoh, always available and very easy to come by. Im thinking of making a switch. What would you folks pick? DDX or D76? Thanks.

I've used D76 for decades for all types of films and see no reason to change. However, like all other processing chemicals now, I mix my own from bulk.

 

[Bill Burk]

I've used D76 for decades for all types of films and see no reason to change. However, like all other processing chemicals now, I mix my own from bulk.

When you mix from bulk does it have the same keeping qualities?

 

[pbromaghin]

D-76 goes bad over time. HC-110 does not.

A gallon of D-76 only does about 10 rolls, 20 if doing 1:1. It will last a good 4-6 months if airtight, so that's not a real bad thing.

I've used D76 for decades for all types of films and see no reason to change. However, like all other processing chemicals now, I mix my own from bulk.

how do you go about this? When you mix from bulk, how big a bulk into how small a concentrate at a time? PE jumped all over me a couple years ago because I mixed only the amount of concentrate I needed for a session from the powder, instead of mixing a whole bag to make a gallon of concentrate. My container would hold more than one bag of powder, so when it got down a bit I would dump in a new bag - sort of a replenishment routine, only with powder. His point was that different densities and particle sizes of the different components would lead to inconsistent results.

 

[mikepry]

Well, I've used them all and recently (happily) settled on DD-X. This was my "evolution"...

D-76 - Nice, but I hate mixing powders, and I had some go bad. Fortunately I noticed before I put film through it.

HC-110 - A liquid that lasts forever. Convenient, versatile and cheap. Mediocre results, least suited for machine/constant agitation, which I started doing around this time.

XTOL - Beautiful results, great for constant agitation. But I still hate mixing powders, and I had some go bad. Unfortunately I noticed AFTER I put film through it. Cheap, but inconvenient in five liters. Also, mine always developed a precipitate that I had to filter out.

DD-X - Beautiful results, acceptable for constant agitation (which I'm doing less of anyway). Convenient one liter size, and easy to decant into 60ml bottles for one shot use which also maximizes keeping. Mixes readily. Not as cheap the others.

As far as that last point about DD-X not being cheap, really this is a relative statement. HC-110 and XTOL come out to around 20 cents per roll (without replenishment) and that's hard to compete with. DD-X is somewhere around $1.12 per roll. In the grand scheme of things, a dollar to process a five dollar roll of film is nothing. (Consider all the folks sending E-6 to labs and paying as much as or more than the film cost for processing.) That's not to say I wouldn't love DD-X more if it were cheaper, but it does everything I want and I don't mind paying a little more for that.

(Per roll costs based on B&H's current pricing.)

If the availability issue gets fixed I really think DDX will do it for me. I really don't want to be messing with powders at this point of my life. I don't have the energy I once did. Thats why I've gone from 8/10 to a 4/5 and have to say I'm loving it! I'm not wanting to pay solely for ease but it gives purty good speed with TMY. Fantastic actually. I develop in a Chromega ll drum. If I do one sheet I use 180ml of chemistry. 1+9. In light of the other expenses involved with Large Format, griping about 20 bucks is rather trite on my part when I do a reality check. I was really starting to wonder what was going on with so many retailers out of it. Thanks for the "evolution."

 

[Bill Burk]

A gallon of D-76 only does about 10 rolls, 20 if doing 1:1. It will last a good 4-6 months if airtight, so that's not a real bad thing.


how do you go about this? When you mix from bulk, how big a bulk into how small a concentrate at a time? PE jumped all over me a couple years ago because I mixed only the amount of concentrate I needed for a session from the powder, instead of mixing a whole bag to make a gallon of concentrate. My container would hold more than one bag of powder, so when it got down a bit I would dump in a new bag - sort of a replenishment routine, only with powder. His point was that different densities and particle sizes of the different components would lead to inconsistent results.

The formula for D-76 is well-known. So Ralph mixes the proper amounts of each constituent part.

The Kodak packages of powder contain all the dry components dumped in a bag. I think there may be a secret ingredient to prevent clumping or extend longevity. I also think some constituent dry chemicals are microencapsulated to seal them away from the other parts while they're in the bag. .

The problem mixing a partial bag of Kodak pre-packaged D-76 is that some of the parts might have settled and others might be on top. So you get a half batch with more Metol and the second batch with more Hydroquinone - something bad like that would happen.

 

[Adrian Bacon]

A gallon of D-76 only does about 10 rolls, 20 if doing 1:1. It will last a good 4-6 months if airtight, so that's not a real bad thing.


how do you go about this? When you mix from bulk, how big a bulk into how small a concentrate at a time? PE jumped all over me a couple years ago because I mixed only the amount of concentrate I needed for a session from the powder, instead of mixing a whole bag to make a gallon of concentrate. My container would hold more than one bag of powder, so when it got down a bit I would dump in a new bag - sort of a replenishment routine, only with powder. His point was that different densities and particle sizes of the different components would lead to inconsistent results.

I used to only mix up a partial bag too. Now I just mix the whole thing up and put it in a wine bag in a box. It’s air tight and lasts a very long time. When it starts to get low, mix up another couple gallons and put it in the bag.

That being said, I don’t do much D76 as of late. Largely switched over to replenished XTOL. I make up the 5 liters, and put it in a wine bag, and keep a 1 liter Amber glass bottle as my working solution. For every roll of 135-36 I put 70ml from the wine bag in the bottle then top the bottle off with what I just developed with. For 135-24 it’s 56ml per roll. When the wine bag solution gets low, mix up another 5L and put it in the bag. Piece of cake.

I can certainly understand why some people don’t want to replenish, and they should do what works for them, however in my experience, XTOL is one of the easiest systems to replenish and Kodak’s datasheet for it is excellent.

 

[Vw1302]

I have best results with homemade modificated D76d + replenishment. Less of sodium sulfite is sometimes more and the secret is PEG for latent silver. Best results with Ilford/Kodak films.. And the price is somewhere else as well... then there is no need to count cents per roll..distilled water is the most expensive part..

 

[John Wiegerink]

I used to only mix up a partial bag too. Now I just mix the whole thing up and put it in a wine bag in a box. It’s air tight and lasts a very long time. When it starts to get low, mix up another couple gallons and put it in the bag.

That being said, I don’t do much D76 as of late. Largely switched over to replenished XTOL. I make up the 5 liters, and put it in a wine bag, and keep a 1 liter Amber glass bottle as my working solution. For every roll of 135-36 I put 70ml from the wine bag in the bottle then top the bottle off with what I just developed with. For 135-24 it’s 56ml per roll. When the wine bag solution gets low, mix up another 5L and put it in the bag. Piece of cake.

I can certainly understand why some people don’t want to replenish, and they should do what works for them, however in my experience, XTOL is one of the easiest systems to replenish and Kodak’s datasheet for it is excellent.

This is my method of using Xtol-R almost to the letter. The only difference is that my working solution is store in a larger 1 gallon amber jug. For people that bitch about mixing chemicals and such this is the best thing next to one-shot developers like DDX. Me? I have never minded playing chemist, but some folks do. Several years ago I bought two bottles of DDX and used those with great results. The only negative I saw with DDX was cost. After using DDX I had read here that some folks thought DDX and Xtol were very close in end results. Well, that left me wanting to try Xtol and I'm very glad I did. I was as happy with my HP5+ negatives souped in Xtol as I was with DDX. Then I read here "again" something about Replenishment of Xtol and how it actually might/was better than Xtol one shot. That's where I'm at now and plan on remaining. I really could not be happier with a film developer. Ratty says "never" to replenishment and that's fine for him. Me? I say, "Viva La Xtol-R" ! JohnW

 

[mikepry]

Really great answers and really thought provoking. Thanks very much its been more than helpful.