Different Xtol Mixtures?

seadrive · Dec 13, 2005

Hi guys and gals,

Can someone tell me why these two packages of Xtol have different quantities/proportions of A and B?

The first image is a picture of the "A" packets (248 grams vs. 73.7 grams), while pic #2 is of the "B" packets (268 vs. 444).

Any ideas?

TIA!

Steve

lee · Dec 13, 2005

another great reason to keep my darkroom an xtol free zone.

lee\c

srs5694 · Dec 13, 2005

This is just a guess, but: This Usenet posting presents what it claims to be the XTOL formula, based on Kodak patent information. Although I wouldn't bet money that it really is the production XTOL, it's probably in the right general ballpark. The Usenet formula has sodium sulfite in both the A and the B packets, and in fact that's the largest single component of (the Usenet version of) XTOL by mass (prior to mixing in water, anyhow), with a total of 10g in part A and 75g in part B per liter (50g and 375g, adjusted for the 5-liter packets you showed). Thus, my guess is that Kodak decided to shift some of the sodium sulfite from packet B into packet A or vice-versa, depending on when the two XTOL products were bought. I've no idea why they would do this, although I could speculate (improving reliability, improving mixing characteristics, reducing manufacturing costs, etc.). If I'm right, then the final mixed product would be identical in either case. (I note a 1.7g discrepancy in the total masses on the packages you've got, though. If this isn't just rounding error, it could signal some additional subtle change in the XTOL formula.) Such changes in manufactured products are hardly novel. There's been a lot of talk here on APUG recently about Rodinal and its history, for instance, which has included (poorly understood) changes in Rodinal composition over the years.

If you're concerned, you might consider calling Kodak and asking about it.

Keith Tapscott. · Dec 13, 2005

seadrive said:
Hi guys and gals,

Can someone tell me why these two packages of Xtol have different quantities/proportions of A and B?

The first image is a picture of the "A" packets (248 grams vs. 73.7 grams), while pic #2 is of the "B" packets (268 vs. 444).

Any ideas?

TIA!

Steve

I have tried Xtol and it`s OK but I prefer Kodak`s classic D-76 (single powder). I use this diluted 1+1 as a one-shot developer.

SchwinnParamount · Dec 13, 2005

seadrive said:
Hi guys and gals,

Can someone tell me why these two packages of Xtol have different quantities/proportions of A and B?

The first image is a picture of the "A" packets (248 grams vs. 73.7 grams), while pic #2 is of the "B" packets (268 vs. 444).

Any ideas?

TIA!

Steve

You'd have to ask a chemist but my guess is that Kodak decided that mixing the XTOL by the method described on the packets yields the best results. I've been using it for years and I find it to be an exceptionally good developer mixed exactly the way Kodak describes. I use it 1:1. Of course, I've always subscribed to the "If it's running good, don't lift the hood" philosophy. I'm not going to monkey with the mixing procedure.

I've used several different developers over the years. Once I started with XTOL I could never go back to d76. It is especially magical with Tri-X.

seadrive · Dec 14, 2005

srs5694 said:
If you're concerned, you might consider calling Kodak and asking about it.

Wow, what a concept, pick up the phone!

I had my doubts that I'd get a living human being on the line, but I gave it a shot. Nice to know you can still talk to someone at a major corporation.

According to the very nice gent I spoke with at Kodak, Xtol was recently repackaged, to make it easier for the chemicals to go into solution. He claims that the resulting developer is exactly the same stuff as before.

One of my packages has an expiration date of 2008-08, while the other is marked 2008-06. Assuming a 3-year shelf life, I guess they may have made the change sometime between June and August of this year.

Whatever!

Thanks for your advice, guys.

Neal · Dec 14, 2005

Dear Steve,

As an Xtol user I would like to thank you for doing the legwork on this.

Neal Wydra

Quinten · Dec 15, 2005

The xtol I bought resently hardly desolved and left these little white "stones" in the water that didn't desolve at all. (I made the water hotter and everything.) But what strikes me is that your packages have a metalic outside while teh ones I had where paper on the outside with a metalic inside can it be that these versions desolve easier. I might give xtol a retry after seeing this.

Keith Tapscott. · Dec 15, 2005

SchwinnParamount said:
You'd have to ask a chemist but my guess is that Kodak decided that mixing the XTOL by the method described on the packets yields the best results. I've been using it for years and I find it to be an exceptionally good developer mixed exactly the way Kodak describes. I use it 1:1. Of course, I've always subscribed to the "If it's running good, don't lift the hood" philosophy. I'm not going to monkey with the mixing procedure.

I've used several different developers over the years. Once I started with XTOL I could never go back to d76. It is especially magical with Tri-X.

My experience with Xtol was with the 1 litre size packs of which I bought 3 in total, not one of them dissolved very well and were caked and lumpy. I am told that the 5 litre size packs are much improved and I may try again some day, but the failure with the 1 litre packs have made me reluctant so far.

srs5694 · Dec 15, 2005

Quinten said:
The xtol I bought resently hardly desolved and left these little white "stones" in the water that didn't desolve at all. (I made the water hotter and everything.) But what strikes me is that your packages have a metalic outside while teh ones I had where paper on the outside with a metalic inside can it be that these versions desolve easier. I might give xtol a retry after seeing this.

My one and (so far) only purchase of XTOL came in thick plastic bags that looked like the ones in the left photo posted by seadrive. I interpret the shininess to be shiny plastic, not a metallic surface.

From your description, I wonder if your XTOL might have been old (expired) and used an older style of packaging. Alternatively, perhaps the XTOL sold in Europe is packaged slightly differently than the XTOL sold in the US. If the former, that might explain the problems you had dissolving it, especially if the package had some tiny pinholes that would let moisture from the air into the packet.

Tony Egan · Apr 6, 2007

Thanks APUGers. I mixed the second last batch of xTol I had on the shelf tonight and always check for the earliest "use by" date and noticed the considerable change in weights of Parts A and B of the more recent mixtures. Interesting I thought. I'm sure there'll be something on APUG about this. The fact that the last post was almost 18 months ago probably says something about the vitality of the B&W market in a relatively small economy like Australia. Either that or I'm just not shooting enough film lately.

hal9000 · Apr 6, 2007

Kodak changed the distribution of components between A and B some time ago. Here is some info from a recent package information sheet: "... Some components that were previously in part B have been moved to part A. Consequently, the part A ... might take slightly longer to dissolve than the part A packaged the old way. The part B should take slightly less time to dissolve. These changes allow the use of improved packaging materials that better protect the product during shipment and storage. The mixed developer solution should provide identical results to those obtained with product packaged in the earlier materials."

Mark Layne · Apr 7, 2007

lee said:
another great reason to keep my darkroom an xtol free zone.

lee\c

Lee
Thebone thing I would say in Xtol's defense is that it will develop 40 year old Fotokemika film with no base fog visible to the eye. Others are ok but with some base fog
Mark

Nicole · Apr 7, 2007

I use Xtol with the replenishing method and have in the past three years (stock, 1:1 and replenishing) never had an issue. It's an excellent developer even with the new packaging. I use a magnetic mixer and mix 5 ltrs at a time. HTH.

nexus · Apr 7, 2007

Nicole, this is a dumb question but what is a magnetic mixer? I must admit i'm new to powdered developers. i used to just use ilford stuff but now for college we are asked to use D-76 and after a few days after developing some negs mine have gotten grey clouds at the bottom and i've been told here and by my tutor that thats from not mixing it properly. does a magnetic mixer help get things dissolved?

Nicole · Apr 7, 2007

Nexus, there's no such thing as a dumb question, ask away. A magnetic mixer is a box, in my case a wooden box, with a little magnetic contraption within, that spins. You place your 5 litre glass jug/container on top of the box and in the jug you place a metal piece that spins around when you turn on the mixer. I make sure the water is as warm a temperature as can be (per instructions) to help mix the Xtol. I also make sure Part A is disolved completely before adding Part B. I don't know how I'd cope without the mixer anymore. HTH.

If I get time I'll try and add a pic later for you.

Keith Tapscott. · Apr 7, 2007

Nicole said:
Nexus, there's no such thing as a dumb question, ask away. A magnetic mixer is a box, in my case a wooden box, with a little magnetic contraption within, that spins. You place your 5 litre glass jug/container on top of the box and in the jug you place a metal piece that spins around when you turn on the mixer. I make sure the water is as warm a temperature as can be (per instructions) to help mix the Xtol. I also make sure Part A is disolved completely before adding Part B. I don't know how I'd cope without the mixer anymore. HTH.

I always use the old fashioned hand-draulic mixer.

Different Xtol Mixtures?

Attachments

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency