Done With X-Tol

[bvy]

Sudden death is real, and I'll not risk it again. This on a three month old solution stored in a plastic bottle with the air squeezed out. I even clip tested the working solution as I always do; the mistake I made was not allowing the clip to go to full black. After I saw it darken sufficiently, I assumed it was good. The negative (Acros 100) is very thin.

Too bad, because I liked the results I was getting when things worked out.

I'm open to suggestions for another developer that works well with constant agitation. And maybe isn't so volatile.

 

[Bill Burk]

Welcome back to D-76...

I just developed three rolls of Tri-X in a batch mixed 2/27/2015 and thought I'd play it safe and add a few minutes to the processing.

Dang if I didn't blow out my highlights and now I have a treasured neg that is hard to print on Grade 2.

 

[MattKing]

There is something in your environment that is extra-ordinary. Over-developed edges, flaking film, X-Tol that dies far faster than for just about anyone else.

I feel for you, but I don't understand it at all!

 

[bvy]

There is something in your environment that is extra-ordinary. Over-developed edges, flaking film, X-Tol that dies far faster than for just about anyone else.

I feel for you, but I don't understand it at all!

Yeah, I know. I guess a few updates are in order.

Over-developed edges - This was a side effect of doing constant rotary agitation with Paterson reels. I solved this by switching to stainless steel tanks and reels.
Flaking film - This was happening to me only with Acros. I solved this by better temperature control and switching to a hardening fixer.

As for this, I was using 300ml of stock solution that I had stored in a small plastic bottle, maybe 95% full. Apparently that wasn't good enough!

 

[MattKing]

Well, Kodak does say that the storage life of the stock in a partially filled, tightly closed container is "At least 2 months".

It would seem to me that 300 ml in a container is much more likely to deteriorate than a larger amount in a larger container.

I'd be happy to repeat my recommendation for a replenishment regime, but you have probably read it before.

 

[bvy]

Thanks Matt. I'm sure I can find it. I liked using it 1+1 for different reasons, but maybe I'll revisit it.

The only reason I switched from HC-110 is because, by all accounts, it was too active for constant agitation.

 

[Sal Santamaura]

Sudden death is real, and I'll not risk it again...Too bad, because I liked the results I was getting when things worked out...I'm open to suggestions for another developer that works well with constant agitation. And maybe isn't so volatile.

Sure. XTOL mixed using (and, at time of use, diluted with) distilled water, then stored in glass, not plastic, bottles of a size equal to what you use per one-shot roll/batch. See here

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)​

for details. Note that actual, steam-distilled water is appropriate, while the merely "filtered/purified" stuff some stores sell ("for distilled water uses") might not be.

 

[John Bragg]

Thanks Matt. I'm sure I can find it. I liked using it 1+1 for different reasons, but maybe I'll revisit it.

The only reason I switched from HC-110 is because, by all accounts, it was too active for constant agitation.

Why constant agitation ? Where is the benefit here ? I am at the other end of the spectrum with minimal agitation. HC-110 can be very versatile especially when diluted sufficiently. There is more to life than Dilution B. I feel for your loss with Xtol though as the same happened to me with Ilfosol years ago. It is highly frustrating to loose negatives that held potentially great images.

 

[Bill Burk]

Why constant agitation ? Where is the benefit here ?

If you can accept constant agitation, then you can use automated equipment, like a Jobo for example...

 

[John Bragg]

If you can accept constant agitation, then you can use automated equipment, like a Jobo for example...

Hi Bill, I understand the mechanics, but not the benefits image wise. I learnt a lot from the information in the following link.
http://www.mironchuk.com/hc-110.html

That said I am sure HC-110 diluted sufficiently would work for a Jobo system. I used to own one.

 

[bvy]

Why constant agitation ? Where is the benefit here ?

The benefit for me is even development. This is how I won the battle with airbells and/or foam (with Acros). When I think of all the film I burned and time I wasted putting esoteric agitation techniques to the test, I'm sorry I didn't do it sooner. I'm getting beautifully even negatives now.

And what Bill said.

 

[John Bragg]

The benefit for me is even development. This is how I won the battle with airbells and/or foam (with Acros). When I think of all the film I burned and time I wasted putting esoteric agitation techniques to the test, I'm sorry I didn't do it sooner. I'm getting beautifully even negatives now.

And what Bill said.

Glad it works for you. I hope you find something to replace Xtol. Perhaps dilute HC-110 ?

 

[baachitraka]

Time for D-76/HC-110 and Rodinal.

 

[Oscar Carlsson]

Not very helpful, but time to try something you mix yourself (like D-23) or Rodinal/R09/Adonal?

 

[bdial]

Any mixed developer is subject to dying after a few weeks/months/whatever from oxidation in storage. Not trying to argue that you should reconsider Xtol, but if storage longer than a few weeks is a necessity, you may want to consider glass instead of plastic, or possibly different plastic.

 

[Tom Taylor]

FWIW I have used Xtol stock that was mixed 7 (SEVEN) months back that was still good. It had some brown growth in it but it worked as if freshly mixed. I store the stock (5L) in a tank with a floating lid and while I usually use it up in 3 or 4 months, I have gone 6 and then 7 months before mixing fresh stock. On the 7 mon th stock, I needed about 250 mL and had about twice that amount remaining - was too lazy to toss it out and mix a fresh batch so took a chance on two 8x10 negatives and it worked fine. I've since replaced tap water for mixing stock with distilled water and that eliminated any growths from developing in the stock - it remains clear till the end.

Thomas

 

[bvy]

It's a new day. I was pretty peeved last night. Thanks for the feedback.

Regarding HC-110 and constant agitation, I discovered this last night. It's a comparison of XTOL and HC-110 rotary processed. One could argue that the XTOL example is overdeveloped (and slightly out of focus) relative to the HC-110 sample. But what's interesting to me is how good the HC-110 sample looks -- good acutance and shadow detail, minimal grain. And in spite of what I've been reading, the contrast doesn't seem to be out of control. But maybe it's time to stop reading and do my own tests.
http://www.victoriasphoto.com/Notes/Jobo_XTOL_dil_HC100/

(like D-23)

Hmmm...

you may want to consider glass instead of plastic

I've had good luck with plastic -- granted, thicker plastic that holds more solution. But, yes. Lesson learned. My last two successes with XTOL were from small glass bottles with polyseal caps, filled to capacity.

 

[Gerald C Koch]

"Sudden death" is just that Xtol loses ALL developing action not just a partial amount. What the OP is seeing may not even be Xtol's fault. Need more information.

 

[juan]

I have a theory, and no way to test, that those plastic squeeze bottles increase, rather than decrease, oxidation. When one squeezes the bottle and screws on the cap the bottle is in tension trying to restore it's shape. The tendency would be to suck in air through the side walls. For that reason I keep all developers in glass. I don't think the surface area of a well stoppered bottle is significant.

 

[Old-N-Feeble]

I have a theory, and no way to test, that those plastic squeeze bottles increase, rather than decrease, oxidation. When one squeezes the bottle and screws on the cap the bottle is in tension trying to restore it's shape. The tendency would be to suck in air through the side walls. For that reason I keep all developers in glass. I don't think the surface area of a well stoppered bottle is significant.

Interesting theory... I suspect you may be right (slow infusion).

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

In all the years I used Xtol, I never once experienced failure... and I kept stock solutions in plastic accordion-type bottles for up to 8 months. It was my go to developer until I started using Pyrocat-HD in 2002.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

In all the years I used Xtol, I never once experienced failure... and I kept stock solutions in plastic accordion-type bottles for up to 8 months. It was my go to developer until I started using Pyrocat-HD in 2002.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

In all the years I used Xtol, I never once experienced failure... and I kept stock solutions in plastic accordion-type bottles for up to 8 months. It was my go to developer until I started using Pyrocat-HD in 2002.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Why the heck did my message post 3 times?? Weird... Sorry about that!

 

[bvy]

"Sudden death" is just that Xtol loses ALL developing action not just a partial amount. What the OP is seeing may not even be Xtol's fault. Need more information.

The negative is very thin but the images can be made out. I used half of the 300ml of developer to make a 1+1 solution, so I had some of the sample left. I took a clip of film, cut it in half, and dropped one into this stock solution and the other into known good (or better) stock solution. The latter turned almost black in four minutes; the former did not, but it did darken.

 

[ParkerSmithPhoto]

Plastic bottles are complete crap. I've had Dektol stock in plastic bottles turn brown within days and also had stop bath eat through plastic and leak on the floor. It's just not worth it.

When I was using XTOL for several years I would mix and decant into 32oz (approx 500mL) brown glass bottles. Two batches went over 1 year and both were perfect. I suspect any trouble you had was directly related to that crummy accordion bottle. Trash it and buy some brown glass at USPLASTIC.com