Developing Hp5 plus with Xtol... Conflicting development times?

[Thomas71]

I am set up to use the replenishing method of replacing 70ml per film roll on my working solution. Do you find this method very unreliable?

Thanks!

XTOL 1+1 one shot gives repeatable results.
Stock solution replenished with "70ml method" tends to loose its original strenght development after development. How much does it weaken? It depends on the negative developed: if you develop a night scene the level of developer exhausion is lower than in case of a bright sun scene.
A pro-lab that I know uses XTOL replenished for massive works; it's cheap and reliable for high volume works. The same lab suggests to use one-shot 1+1 diluition for more precise low quantity works

 

[pentaxuser]

.
Stock solution replenished with "70ml method" tends to loose its original strenght development after development. How much does it weaken? It depends on the negative developed: if you develop a night scene the level of developer exhausion is lower than in case of a bright sun scene.
A pro-lab that I know uses XTOL replenished for massive works; it's cheap and reliable for high volume works.

So is there a replenishment rate that ensures it does not lose its strength and if so what is that rate 80ml, 85ml or more?

If replenishment causes a loss of strength then how does the pro-lab manage to use it for massive works which I assume you mean as high volume development? Shouldn't the loss of strength be even quicker and more risky?

pentaxuser

 

[MattKing]

So is there a replenishment rate that ensures it does not lose its strength and if so what is that rate 80ml, 85ml or more?

If replenishment causes a loss of strength then how does the pro-lab manage to use it for massive works which I assume you mean as high volume development? Shouldn't the loss of strength be even quicker and more risky?

pentaxuser

70 ml is a good place to start, and what the manufacturer recommends as a starting point.
Replenishment rate should be monitored and varied as required. The most accurate way to monitor is with control strips and a densitometer. But as activity tends to vary quite slowly and incrementally, I and others have had good results and are comfortable with monitoring results through visual inspection of negatives and varying the rate up or down slightly when the slight change in activity becomes noticeable.
I rarely have to vary from my typical rate of 75 ml. And when I do, it usually ends up back at 75 ml in relatively short order.
One thing I do that aids in consistency is using the same amount of developer each time. I always use a full 1 litre in my Paterson tank sized for three 35mm reels, whether I develop 1, 2, 3 or 4 rolls in it - 4 rolls being two 120 rolls on each of two reels. The amount of replenisher used each times corresponds with the number of rolls developed. And in each case, I add the replenisher to the working solution bottle while the currently being used developer is still in the developing tank. The excess developer that is discarded always comes from the recently used developer, not the total volume. An absolutely consistent approach is important!
This method only works because replenished X-Tol has a lot of capacity per litre, and because discarding ~70 ml of recently used developer is effective at removing a significant amount of unwanted development byproducts. Older replenishment products and regimes often used much smaller volumes per roll, and were/are more difficult for small volume users to accurately monitor and control.

 

[remjet5219]

Ok another question...

Do I need to adjust my developing times when using the replenish method?

 

[pentaxuser]

Thanks Matt but I already knew what your response would be. I was asking Thomas71 what he believes to be the case based on his comments.

pentaxuser

 

[Sirius Glass]

XTOL 1+1 one shot gives repeatable results.
Stock solution replenished with "70ml method" tends to loose its original strenght development after development. How much does it weaken? It depends on the negative developed: if you develop a night scene the level of developer exhausion is lower than in case of a bright sun scene.
A pro-lab that I know uses XTOL replenished for massive works; it's cheap and reliable for high volume works. The same lab suggests to use one-shot 1+1 diluition for more precise low quantity works

I have used replenished XTOL in low volumes and I have never had a problem with it. It is always exactly as it should be when one follows the replenishment with 70ml per roll and stick the the replenishment development times.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Ok another question...

Do I need to adjust my developing times when using the replenish method?

Use the Kodak published development times for replenished XTOL. Those times are close the the 1:1 times interestingly.

 

[Moose22]

Use the Kodak published development times for replenished XTOL. Those times are close the the 1:1 times interestingly.

Datasheet is only for Rotary development in replenished.

Small tank is only for 1:1 and full strength in those datasheets. This is where it gets confusing for people. That said, I've been using 1:1 times for non-rotary small tank and hoping for the best.

 

[Steven Lee]

I have used replenished XTOL in low volumes and I have never had a problem with it. It is always exactly as it should be when one follows the replenishment with 70ml per roll and stick the the replenishment development times.

Sirius, something is not right. Either you are not mentioning some critical detail, or just not telling the whole story. Because my personal experience measuring control strips, Kodak datasheets, and common sense will all say: if you always, 100% of the time, replenish with exactly 70ml, the activity level will drift. Periodic adjustments are required if you want consistent results.

This is true for all replenished systems, because the amount of byproduct released back into a working developer varies with film speed, film manufacturer, exposure and subject matter. Unless you shoot the same grey card on HP5+ and develop exactly the same number of rolls per week, you cannot possibly have a stable solution by replenishing with a fixed amount.

Here are my control strip readings showing the swings. Normally I replenish with the same amount, but I had to make 4 corrections since March 2022:

Date	DMax	DMin	LD	HD	HD-LD
03/29/2022	1.53	0.29	0.38	1.08	0.7
06/11/2022	1.71	0.29	0.41	1.22	0.81
10/17/2022	1.58	0.28	0.37	1.10	0.73
02/12/2023	1.61	0.28	0.4	1.14	0.74
06/19/2023	1.54	0.29	0.38	1.09	0.71

The activity jumps were caused by batches of low speed film exposed after a vacation/event, or just different film, i.e. not HP5+ which is my usual. I do not shoot films faster than ISO 400 and never push, maybe that's my activity level never dipped.

 

[remjet5219]

remjet5219, on a more serious note about the replenishment method and its reliability, it was my impression that while it drew a lot of discussion ( when does a thread on Photrio never draw a lot of posts?) there was a remarkable degree of agreement that properly done it was a reliable method

pentaxuser

Thank you!

I am going to try it. It's a bit confusing about how to properly do it for a small 1l tank and using 1L working solution. At least for the first few before it gets "seasoned". Also confusing that Kodak published replenish times but only for rotary tubes and big tanks. I am probably going to be doing a 1 + 1 development times from now on and hope for the best.

 

[remjet5219]

Datasheet is only for Rotary development in replenished.

Small tank is only for 1:1 and full strength in those datasheets. This is where it gets confusing for people. That said, I've been using 1:1 times for non-rotary small tank and hoping for the best.

Ditto!

 

[remjet5219]

Sirius, something is not right. Either you are not mentioning some critical detail, or just not telling the whole story. Because my personal experience measuring control strips, Kodak datasheets, and common sense will all say: if you always, 100% of the time, replenish with exactly 70ml, the activity level will drift. Periodic adjustments are required if you want consistent results.

This is true for all replenished systems, because the amount of byproduct released back into a working developer varies with film speed, film manufacturer, exposure and subject matter. Unless you shoot the same grey card on HP5+ and develop exactly the same number of rolls per week, you cannot possibly have a stable solution by replenishing with a fixed amount.

Here are my control strip readings showing the swings. Normally I replenish with the same amount, but I had to make 4 corrections since March 2022:

Date	DMax	DMin	LD	HD	HD-LD
03/29/2022	1.53	0.29	0.38	1.08	0.7
06/11/2022	1.71	0.29	0.41	1.22	0.81
10/17/2022	1.58	0.28	0.37	1.10	0.73
02/12/2023	1.61	0.28	0.4	1.14	0.74
06/19/2023	1.54	0.29	0.38	1.09	0.71

The activity jumps were caused by batches of low speed film exposed after a vacation/event, or just different film, i.e. not HP5+ which is my usual. I do not shoot films faster than ISO 400 and never push, maybe that's my activity level never dipped.

This is so interesting. How do you detrmine how to adjust your replish amount based on these readings? In other words, how do these translate into ml of replenishment?

 

[Steven Lee]

@remjet5219 I try to add a control strip to every run if there's room in the tank, which is about 30% of the time. When the readings get too hot I just skip replenishing until they get back to normal. When the reading goes down, start replenishing with 100ml until it gets back. There are no hard rules, as I said it really depends on film speed and what I shoot. That jump to 0.81 in June of last year - that's me developing a bunch of FP4+ from the Hawaii trip, and since the tank was always 100% utilized I didn't see the density for quite a few rolls. But from the eyeballing perspective, it was "fine".

Replenishing is a pain in the ass. There are no image quality benefits, only a slight speed loss. But taking old chemicals to my local hazmat is even bigger pain in the ass, so I picked the lesser pain.

 

[remjet5219]

@remjet5219 I try to add a control strip to every run if there's room in the tank, which is about 30% of the time. When the readings get too hot I just skip replenishing until they get back to normal. When the reading goes down, start replenishing with 100ml until it gets back. There are no hard rules, as I said it really depends on film speed and what I shoot. That jump to 0.81 in June of last year - that's me developing a bunch of FP4+ from the Hawaii trip, and since the tank was always 100% utilized I didn't see the density for quite a few rolls. But from the eyeballing perspective, it was "fine".

Replenishing is a pain in the ass. There are no image quality benefits, only a slight speed loss. But taking old chemicals to my local hazmat is even bigger pain in the ass, so I picked the lesser pain.

Thanks! I'll give that a try. My last question for you is: How forgiving is this process? I am using a 1000ml working solution accordion bottle and I just developed my first two rolls with it. I am planning on replenishing 140ml and developing my thrid and fourth rolls at 1+1 time. Would you recommend I gradually increase my development time to 1+1 for the first 6 rolls until my working solution is "seasoned"?

 

[MattKing]

Thank you!

I am going to try it. It's a bit confusing about how to properly do it for a small 1l tank and using 1L working solution. At least for the first few before it gets "seasoned". Also confusing that Kodak published replenish times but only for rotary tubes and big tanks. I am probably going to be doing a 1 + 1 development times from now on and hope for the best.

I would definitely suggest more than a 1 litre working solution storage tank.
I've had good results with two litres of working solution in the storage tank, and a developing tank that holds 1 litre.
For me, replenishing is as convenient if not more convenient than one shot, and as I posted, I've been very happy with consistency.
Part of the reason I like replenishment is that I live in a temperate climate and I always develop at ambient temperatures.
I also have moderate volumes of film - rarely no more than the 4 rolls of 120 in a single tank that is my maximum.
I also almost exclusively use two similar films - T-Max 100 and T-Max 400.

 

[Steven Lee]

How forgiving is this process? I am using a 1000ml working solution accordion bottle and I just developed my first two rolls with it.

My bottle is 1/2 gallon, so about 1,900ml and I am considering doubling it to smooth out the jumps. 1L seems too low.

Would you recommend I gradually increase my development time to 1+1 for the first 6 rolls until my working solution is "seasoned"?

In the Xtol datasheet they have a capacity table in the sub-chapter about reusing the developer without replenishment. That table contains the number of rolls per 1L with development time adjustments. That's all you need: simply keep reusing the developer until the development time matches Xtol-R time in the datasheet, adjusting for agitation. Once you hit the Xtol-R activity level, you have a fully seasoned solution.

 

[MattKing]

I am using a 1000ml working solution accordion bottle

These are bad news! They are often highly oxygen permeable, and they are just about impossible to properly clean.

 

[Steven Lee]

Agree with Matt. Those bottles are not good. I recommend amber glass jars. They are completely impenetrable for oxygen. I've had Xtol-R kept in them for years without problems, as well as C-41 developer for 9+ months.

 

[remjet5219]

Agree with Matt. Those bottles are not good. I recommend amber glass jars. They are completely impenetrable for oxygen. I've had Xtol-R kept in them for years without problems, as well as C-41 developer for 9+ months.

How do you remove the oxygen from them? I chose the accordion bottles because I can squeeze the oxygen out. But I can see how they would allow oxygen to seep back in through the plastic caps. Thanks for the link!

 

[Steven Lee]

@remjet5219 For storing the working batch of Xtol you don't need to because they will be full, literally filled to the brim, 100% of the time.

 

[remjet5219]

@remjet5219 For storing the working batch of Xtol you don't need to because they will be full, literally filled to the brim, 100% of the time.

I understand and agree with your method. I'm gonna try it Steven, just ordered one. I'll pour 1000ml into my paterson tank from this bottle and replenish from my stock solution (which I have in 2L accordion bottles... eeek may need to change to the wine storage bags). In theory this working bottle should last me a really long time (years?).

 

[Steven Lee]

Yep, years. The longest I've done was 2 years, and then it got ruined by a defective bag of Xtol, not by oxidation. BTW, I agree with your decision to move to wine bags. They are perfect for storing replenisher because they allow pouring without letting any oxygen in. Besides, having that little tap is super convenient for pouring precise amounts. I use the AstraPouch brand, also available on Amazon.

 

[Moose22]

I hate accordion bottles. When they leak in storage they suck air IN... that's the opposite of good.

I use a 2L brown bottle. I do like Matt, I fill my 3 roll tank whether I have 1, 2, or 3 reels in there, so the brown bottle will be half empty.

While it's going, I fill my replenishment graduate out of a wine bag of unused Xtol. I have lines drawn in sharpee at 70, 140, 210, and 280. I can't miss, 70ml per roll of film.

I pour that in to the brown bottle. Then when development is done I set the working solution storage bottle in the sink. I empty the tank back into the brown bottle and anything that doesn't fit goes down the drain. The bottle is completely and totally full, so there's not enough air on top to matter.

The mechanics of it all now are stupid simple, so I never have to worry about that. I'm only worried about the right times and agitation.

I won't comment about whether 70ml is right or control strips or whatever, people argue that enough.

 

[remjet5219]

Yep, years. The longest I've done was 2 years, and then it got ruined by a defective bag of Xtol, not by oxidation. BTW, I agree with your decision to move to wine bags. They are perfect for storing replenisher because they allow pouring without letting any oxygen in. Besides, having that little tap is super convenient for pouring precise amounts. I use the AstraPouch brand, also available on Amazon.

Just ordered a 5L bag to keep my replenisher solution. Thanks again for all the tips.

My bottle is 1/2 gallon, so about 1,900ml and I am considering doubling it to smooth out the jumps. 1L seems too low.



In the Xtol datasheet they have a capacity table in the sub-chapter about reusing the developer without replenishment. That table contains the number of rolls per 1L with development time adjustments. That's all you need: simply keep reusing the developer until the development time matches Xtol-R time in the datasheet, adjusting for agitation. Once you hit the Xtol-R activity level, you have a fully seasoned solution.

I see the chart. I guess I'll mix my 1L (already used for 2 rolls) into my new 2L container (that gets delivered tomorrow- thanks!), process at normal times for my next 4 rolls, then change my time to 10 1/2 minutes at 20C?

The only thing I'm confused about is that the times listed are for rotary tubes and large tanks and I'm using a paterson tank.

Thanks so much for all your help!!

 

[reddesert]

Just to close the loop on this, the MDC lists:
- HP5+ rated 400, in Xtol stock, 8.5 minutes
- HP5+ rated 400, in Xtol stock, 6 minutes, notes = continuous agitation
- HP5+ rated 400, in Xtol 1:1, 12 minutes

Kodak recommended 8.5 minutes and Ilford 8 minutes, in Xtol stock.
So the MDC isn't way off here. In fact, it probably sourced its first number from the Kodak Xtol datasheet. The problem is that it _also_ includes the continuous-agitation number.

It is necessary to review all the times on the MDC rather than narrowing one's search too much. I do look things up on the MDC, but my issue with the MDC is not that it's unreliable, but that it doesn't include source references. Many of its times are in fact identical to datasheets, but knowing which ones are datasheet and which are Some Guy on the Internet would be useful.