DIY options for standard paper developer

albada · Dec 15, 2022

koraks said:
I think especially ID62 ticks all the boxes of the OP.

It does indeed.
Also, the OP prefers to use hard well-water, and that requires adding a chelation agent to the developer. EDTA works for ID-62, but not for E-72 as it accelerates the Fenton reaction. Thus E-72 requires distilled/DI water, boosting its cost.

BTW, 4 g/L of disodium EDTA successfully chelates my hard San Diego water, but if yours is much harder and you get precipitation, try 6.8 g/L instead of 4. I calculated the amount needed for the worst-case hardness my Internet search found, and got 1.7 g/L for the working solution, hence 6.8 g/L for the stock solution.

Mark

koraks · Dec 15, 2022

I just accept the calcium precipitate clouds for what they are and do without a chelating agent. The developer may not look as pretty as it could, but functionally the chelating agent isn't necessary.

Anon Ymous · Dec 15, 2022

albada said:
It does indeed.
Also, the OP prefers to use hard well-water, and that requires adding a chelation agent to the developer. EDTA works for ID-62, but not for E-72 as it accelerates the Fenton reaction. Thus E-72 requires distilled/DI water, boosting its cost.

BTW, 4 g/L of disodium EDTA successfully chelates my hard San Diego water, but if yours is much harder and you get precipitation, try 6.8 g/L instead of 4. I calculated the amount needed for the worst-case hardness my Internet search found, and got 1.7 g/L for the working solution, hence 6.8 g/L for the stock solution.

Mark

I've mixed ID62 with the addition of 2g/l sodium hexametaphosphate. I live in a very hard water area and didn't get any precipitate.

BHuij · Dec 15, 2022

albada said:
Regarding mixing powders together, I recall reports that developers can be damaged when stored with alkalis, so some companies use two packets, one with developers, and the other with everything else.

Mark

Okay, good to know. The way I'm picturing this is probably 3D printing a handful of containers that act as storage for one tray worth of dry chems. Perhaps the obvious solution would be to just design it such that each chemical lives in its own isolated compartment of the container, or at least that I have separate compartments for "alkalis" and "others."

GregY · Dec 15, 2022

BHuij said:
Okay, good to know. The way I'm picturing this is probably 3D printing a handful of containers that act as storage for one tray worth of dry chems. Perhaps the obvious solution would be to just design it such that each chemical lives in its own isolated compartment of the container, or at least that I have separate compartments for "alkalis" and "others."

Are you going to get a "spoon recipe".....or buy a scale ?
I was under the impression you were looking for a liquid developer?

andynguyen · Dec 15, 2022

albada said:
It does indeed.
Also, the OP prefers to use hard well-water, and that requires adding a chelation agent to the developer. EDTA works for ID-62, but not for E-72 as it accelerates the Fenton reaction. Thus E-72 requires distilled/DI water, boosting its cost.

BTW, 4 g/L of disodium EDTA successfully chelates my hard San Diego water, but if yours is much harder and you get precipitation, try 6.8 g/L instead of 4. I calculated the amount needed for the worst-case hardness my Internet search found, and got 1.7 g/L for the working solution, hence 6.8 g/L for the stock solution.

Mark

(Fe)nton reaction requires iron to take place. If your water isnt having iron, dont worry about it.

I've used E72 for years, always premixed and stored as long as 6 months without issues. I dont even use distilled water. It lasts >24h in open tray at 1:1 dilution as well. Dont worry abt sudden death either, since you can watch as paper develops, unlike film. Afaik, sudden death occurs when phenidone is dead, not ascorbic. There's plenty of ascorbic to go around.

ags2mikon · Dec 15, 2022

I like your idea for the 3-d printed jars / containers. I used film cans and pharmacy bottles and small glass bottles. I scale it out into a set of bottles to make 10-12 tray mixes. I also do it for film developers too. I label the bottles and number them in the order of mixing. It takes only a few mins to do.

Philippe-Georges · Dec 15, 2022

andynguyen said:
(Fe)nton reaction requires iron to take place. If your water isnt having iron, dont worry about it.

I've used E72 for years, always premixed and stored as long as 6 months without issues. I dont even use distilled water. It lasts >24h in open tray at 1:1 dilution as well. Dont worry abt sudden death either, since you can watch as paper develops, unlike film. Afaik, sudden death occurs when phenidone is dead, not ascorbic. There's plenty of ascorbic to go around.

Ha, finally somebody who confirms what I was trying to explain!

relistan · Dec 15, 2022

andynguyen said:
(Fe)nton reaction requires iron to take place. If your water isnt having iron, dont worry about it.

I've used E72 for years, always premixed and stored as long as 6 months without issues. I dont even use distilled water. It lasts >24h in open tray at 1:1 dilution as well. Dont worry abt sudden death either, since you can watch as paper develops, unlike film. Afaik, sudden death occurs when phenidone is dead, not ascorbic. There's plenty of ascorbic to go around.

While your point about being able to see that your paper developer has failed is true, that's also pretty inconvenient.

Regarding the rest: no, you will likely get iron as an impurity in your carbonate so it will be there even if you use pure water. You need a copper and iron sequestrant to prevent that, or to mix in a solution that does not contain enough water for a reaction to happen. If you are using tap water from copper plumbing (e.g. much of America), you are almost certainly going to have copper present.

And again no, sudden death is the result of the Fenton reaction and it's the ascorbic acid that first gets killed. This has been experimented with a lot and you can search this site for more info.

With this reaction it's completely subjective to the environment, the water, the actual chemicals you have on hand. Some people will be fine and others won't. It's just rolling the dice.

andynguyen · Dec 15, 2022

relistan said:
While your point about being able to see that your paper developer has failed is true, that's also pretty inconvenient.

Regarding the rest: no, you will likely get iron as an impurity in your carbonate so it will be there even if you use pure water. You need a copper and iron sequestrant to prevent that, or to mix in a solution that does not contain enough water for a reaction to happen. If you are using tap water from copper plumbing (e.g. much of America), you are almost certainly going to have copper present.

And again no, sudden death is the result of the Fenton reaction and it's the ascorbic acid that first gets killed. This has been experimented with a lot and you can search this site for more info.

With this reaction it's completely subjective to the environment, the water, the actual chemicals you have on hand. Some people will be fine and others won't. It's just rolling the dice.

Idk if there's another type of Fenton reaction you are referring to. The one I know & sometimes use in my field of wastewater treatment is nothing quite applicable here:
- Fe only acts as a catalyst. A strong oxidizing agent still needs to be present to do the oxidisation
- pH is controlled in the 3-5 range, not alkaline like in developer because then Fe3 will precipate out & become useless as catalyst. Same goes for copper.
In another word, we have to engineer it to make it happen. And we hate it when we do because it's pretty expensive to operate.

relistan · Dec 15, 2022

andynguyen said:
Idk if there's another type of Fenton reaction you are referring to. The one I know & sometimes use in my field of wastewater treatment is nothing quite applicable here:
- Fe only acts as a catalyst. A strong oxidizing agent still needs to be present to do the oxidisation
- pH is controlled in the 3-5 range, not alkaline like in developer because then Fe3 will precipate out & become useless as catalyst. Same goes for copper.
In another word, we have to engineer it to make it happen. And we hate it when we do because it's pretty expensive to operate.

Just read from here on, from folks who really know their stuff, including the late PE who worked at Kodak for decades in their research and development labs: https://www.photrio.com/forum/threa...-developers-please.122879/page-3#post-1626430

relistan · Dec 15, 2022

This thread is pretty off track. It sounds like @koraks and @albada referred the OP to ID-62 and that's probably where it should end. I'm out

BHuij · Dec 15, 2022

GregY said:
Are you going to get a "spoon recipe".....or buy a scale ?
I was under the impression you were looking for a liquid developer?

@GregY I already have a precision scale I use for ammo reloading. I'll definitely be weighing out ingredients here, it's not any more difficult than volumetric measuring, and it removes one more variable that might cause problems.

andynguyen said:
(Fe)nton reaction requires iron to take place. If your water isnt having iron, dont worry about it.

I've used E72 for years, always premixed and stored as long as 6 months without issues. I dont even use distilled water. It lasts >24h in open tray at 1:1 dilution as well. Dont worry abt sudden death either, since you can watch as paper develops, unlike film. Afaik, sudden death occurs when phenidone is dead, not ascorbic. There's plenty of ascorbic to go around.

I would be flabbergasted to find out my tap water doesn't have iron. It comes out of the tap at PH 8.1 and leaves hard water stains everywhere

relistan said:
While your point about being able to see that your paper developer has failed is true, that's also pretty inconvenient.

Regarding the rest: no, you will likely get iron as an impurity in your carbonate so it will be there even if you use pure water. You need a copper and iron sequestrant to prevent that, or to mix in a solution that does not contain enough water for a reaction to happen. If you are using tap water from copper plumbing (e.g. much of America), you are almost certainly going to have copper present.

And again no, sudden death is the result of the Fenton reaction and it's the ascorbic acid that first gets killed. This has been experimented with a lot and you can search this site for more info.

With this reaction it's completely subjective to the environment, the water, the actual chemicals you have on hand. Some people will be fine and others won't. It's just rolling the dice.

While I don't particularly care which specific component of the developer is failing to cause sudden death, it's probably a nonissue for me. I'm hoping to avoid keeping a stock solution, instead mixing directly from powders to working strength and then discarding at the end of the print session (unless I have another one planned for tomorrow, in which case I might try and get two sessions out of one batch).

If I do ultimately end up needing to use a stock solution, it's not a big deal for me to toss a scrap of paper into the tray with the lights on at the start of every session to confirm that Fenton hasn't screwed me over

npl · Dec 15, 2022

Depending where you live tetenal chemicals can be an option https://tetenal.com/en/consumer-shop/black-white-chemistry/paper-developer/

I use eukobrom. Liquid, not very expensive, no problem with tap water. It can be use one shot but also reused within days or even weeks if stored properly

Doremus Scudder · Dec 15, 2022

I mix print developers from scratch immediately before use, using spoon recipes.

Here are my recipes for D-72 and ID-62:

D-72
(to make 1 liter of working solution)

Water ---------------------- ~120°F
a pinch of sodium sulfite (Metol dissolves better if you add a bit of sulfite first - a pinch is all you need)
Metol ----------------------- 1/3 tsp (you won't find a measuring spoon this size, but just estimate, it's not critical)
Sodium Sulfite -------------- 2 tsp
Hydroquinone -------------- 1/2 Tbsp short (i.e., just a bit less than 1/2 Tbsp - again, it's not critical)
Sodium carbonate (mono) - 1 1/2 Tbsp
Potassium bromide --------- 1/8 tsp
Water to make -------------- 1 liter

(Triple the above recipe to make a 1-liter stock solution that you dilute 1+2)

ID-62
(to make 2 liters of working solution - Alternately, you can simply double the recipe below and mix it to just one liter and have a one-liter stock solution that you then dilute 1+3 for a working solution. The stock keeps for some months.)
Water ----------------------- ~120°F
Sodium sulfite --------------- 1 Tbsp + 1/4 tsp
Hydroquinone --------------- 2 1/8 tsp
Sodium carbonate (mono) -- 2 Tbsp
Phenidone ------------------- 1/8 tsp
Potassium bromide ---------- rounded 1/8 tsp
Benzotriazole --------------- 10 ml of a 1% solution (which you make up beforehand - 10g/liter - keeps forever)

ID-62 is my current favorite. It has a long tray life (I often use it for two sessions, storing it in a bottle between sessions).

Hope this helps,

Doremus

andynguyen · Dec 15, 2022

BHuij said:
I would be flabbergasted to find out my tap water doesn't have iron. It comes out of the tap at PH 8.1 and leaves hard water stains everywhere

Hardness mostly come in the form of calcium and some magnesium. Iron is not as common or alkaline as those 2. And if your stains are of white & not rust color, i wouldnt worry much about iron.

Don_ih · Dec 15, 2022

Doremus Scudder said:
Benzotriazole --------------- 10 ml of a 1% solution (which you make up beforehand - 100g/liter - keeps forever)

10 g per litre.

BHuij · Dec 15, 2022

Doremus Scudder said:
I mix print developers from scratch immediately before use, using spoon recipes.

Here are my recipes for D-72 and ID-62:

D-72
(to make 1 liter of working solution)

Water ---------------------- ~120°F
a pinch of sodium sulfite (Metol dissolves better if you add a bit of sulfite first - a pinch is all you need)
Metol ----------------------- 1/3 tsp (you won't find a measuring spoon this size, but just estimate, it's not critical)
Sodium Sulfite -------------- 2 tsp
Hydroquinone -------------- 1/2 Tbsp short (i.e., just a bit less than 1/2 Tbsp - again, it's not critical)
Sodium carbonate (mono) - 1 1/2 Tbsp
Potassium bromide --------- 1/8 tsp
Water to make -------------- 1 liter

(Triple the above recipe to make a 1-liter stock solution that you dilute 1+2)

ID-62
(to make 2 liters of working solution - Alternately, you can simply double the recipe below and mix it to just one liter and have a one-liter stock solution that you then dilute 1+3 for a working solution. The stock keeps for some months.)
Water ----------------------- ~120°F
Sodium sulfite --------------- 1 Tbsp + 1/4 tsp
Hydroquinone --------------- 2 1/8 tsp
Sodium carbonate (mono) -- 2 Tbsp
Phenidone ------------------- 1/8 tsp
Potassium bromide ---------- rounded 1/8 tsp
Benzotriazole --------------- 10 ml of a 1% solution (which you make up beforehand - 100g/liter - keeps forever)

ID-62 is my current favorite. It has a long tray life (I often use it for two sessions, storing it in a bottle between sessions).

Hope this helps,

Doremus

Several people have recommended ID-62 over D-72, primarily those who prefer PQ to MQ formulas - which seems to basically come down to shelf life. However, the E72 recipe I'm using uses Phenidone in place of Metol already, so what advantage does ID-62 have over E-72?

koraks · Dec 15, 2022

ID62 doesn't rely on ascorbic acid, which is more risky in terms of stability in solution than hydroquinone. Hydroquinone on the other hand is more toxic than ascorbic acid, which is also easier to obtain. There are valid arguments on both sides that would turn the tables any number of times, so it's down to personal preference mostly.

BHuij · Dec 15, 2022

koraks said:
ID62 doesn't rely on ascorbic acid, which is more risky in terms of stability in solution than hydroquinone. Hydroquinone on the other hand is more toxic than ascorbic acid, which is also easier to obtain. There are valid arguments on both sides that would turn the tables any number of times, so it's down to personal preference mostly.

Yeah, for my use case where I'm hoping to store things dry rather than in solution, seems like there's no specific reason to avoid the ascorbate, particularly if it's slightly cheaper and more eco friendly.

albada · Dec 15, 2022

koraks said:
I just accept the calcium precipitate clouds for what they are and do without a chelating agent. The developer may not look as pretty as it could, but functionally the chelating agent isn't necessary.

@koraks, do the precipitate clouds leave any white powder stuck on the gelatin? Even when viewed in a loupe?

Mark

Don_ih · Dec 15, 2022

albada said:
@koraks, do the precipitate clouds leave any white powder stuck on the gelatin? Even when viewed in a loupe?

Mark

Why would it? The print is dry and hard when it goes in the developer. It's in there for 2 minutes (I use ID62 for 1.5 minutes, normally). Then it goes in stop, fix, and a long wash. If anything is left from the developing stage, I'd be amazed.

albada · Dec 15, 2022

Don Heisz said:
Why would it? The print is dry and hard when it goes in the developer. It's in there for 2 minutes (I use ID62 for 1.5 minutes, normally). Then it goes in stop, fix, and a long wash. If anything is left from the developing stage, I'd be amazed.

Why would it? Because precipitates are solid particles that (I think) will not be dissolved in the post-dev steps of stop/fix/wash. It's conceivable they could stick to the emulsion in the dev, and stay there forever. BTW, thanks for mentioning your normal time is 1.5 minutes in ID-62. I've been using 2 minutes, and was thinking of reducing that.

Mark

Don_ih · Dec 15, 2022

albada said:
Why would it? Because precipitates are solid particles that (I think) will not be dissolved in the post-dev steps of stop/fix/wash. It's conceivable they could stick to the emulsion in the dev, and stay there forever. BTW, thanks for mentioning your normal time is 1.5 minutes in ID-62. I've been using 2 minutes, and was thinking of reducing that.

Mark

My point was the paper emulsion is not softened during dev - or at least not much - so the precipitate wouldn't stick that easily.

I find ID62 is done at 1.5 minutes, at least with the majority of papers I use (all Ilford). Some of the ancient papers (like Medalist or Kodabromide, some of which is 60 years old) need over 2 minutes.

Lately, I've only been using ID62. It really does last a long time, even at working strength.

albada · Dec 15, 2022

Don Heisz said:
My point was the paper emulsion is not softened during dev - or at least not much - so the precipitate wouldn't stick that easily.

The OP (@BHuij) will appreciate that bit of good news. It means he can forget about adding a sequestrant such as EDTA.

Don Heisz said:
I find ID62 is done at 1.5 minutes, at least with the majority of papers I use (all Ilford). Some of the ancient papers (like Medalist or Kodabromide, some of which is 60 years old) need over 2 minutes.

60 years old! And I keep paper refrigerated because I worry about it being at room temperature for a week. I guess I'm being over-cautious.

Don Heisz said:
Lately, I've only been using ID62. It really does last a long time, even at working strength.

And that's more good news for the OP.

Mark

DIY options for standard paper developer

albada

koraks

Moderator

Anon Ymous

BHuij

GregY

andynguyen

ags2mikon

Philippe-Georges

relistan

andynguyen

relistan

relistan

BHuij

npl

Doremus Scudder

andynguyen

Don_ih

BHuij

koraks

Moderator

BHuij

albada

Don_ih

albada

Don_ih

albada

DIY options for standard paper developer

Moderator

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency