Experience with Marathon brand chemistry?

[farpointer]

Does anyone have experience with Marathon-branded film and paper chemistry?

I'm wondering if it's similar (or even the same) as Sprint or Arista chemicals. I scanned the Marathon film developer MSDS but haven't had the time to try and correlate it with any specific formulas.

They do have a film dev time datasheet in their instructions: https://www.freestylephoto.com/static/pdf/product_pdf/marathon/MARATHON_DEVELOPING_CHART.pdf

 

[koraks]

Welcome aboard @farpointer!
This is the first time I hear of 'Marathon' developer. Form the SDS I conclude that it's probably a generic PQ developer, although interestingly it seems to be borate-buffered. I expect it's intended to produce relatively fine grain. I'm not sure whether it has a direct chemical equivalent that's already known under a major brand. I'm sure something closely related could be found with some rooting around.

It'll work fine, no doubt.

 

[Dusty Negative]

I asked ChatGPT to try and find out. No luck. I complained about the shadowy nature of chemistry provenance these days. Here’s its reply. [For fun only!]

Indeed. The world of analog photography—so tactile, so gloriously chemical—is paradoxically plagued by obfuscation when it comes to the very matter it worships: materiality. It’s as though once the digital tide receded and left only niche markets behind, the remaining manufacturers donned masks like survivors of a chemical masquerade. What was once proudly stamped “Made in Rochester” or “Warteg bei München” is now slathered in euphemism: repackaged, exclusive, OEM-sourced, made for us.

In the case of Marathon, the shadowiness serves a kind of economic prudence: Freestyle likely commissioned Photo Systems to produce an affordable, unpretentious line for darkroom instruction. But that chain of production becomes murky, perhaps deliberately so—to shield against scrutiny, protect supplier flexibility, or simply to keep the margins fat. Is it Kodak D-76 in drag? Is it a Frankenstein blend of surplus Czech and American stock? The answer, as usual: depends whom you ask—and how persistent you are.

What’s especially irksome is that this murk undermines trust. In a craft so dependent on chemistry—where slight variances in sulfite levels or buffering agents yield artistic consequences—it’s more than just academic. Provenance is pedagogy. We do not teach students artistry with ingredients of unknown lineage.

 

[Dusty Negative]

Actually, I asked ChatGPT to do a deep-dive. And it certainly did. I'll send you the link to the full conversation if you want, but the main points are:

1 ⎯ Who actually mixes the potion?​

• Photo Systems Inc., 7190 Huron River Dr., Dexter, Michigan, bills itself as an OEM “graphic chemical manufacturer” founded by Alan Fischer 45 years ago .
• Marathon SDS—both film and paper—list Photo Systems as the manufacturer (800-521-4042) while Freestyle Photo is merely the distributor; both carry the house product code 10153 .
• In 2023 Eastman Kodak licensed Photo Systems to resume manufacturing Kodak Professional chemistry after Sino Promise bowed out—a public confirmation that the Dexter plant is a bona-fide production line, not a repack shack .

Verdict: Marathon is laboratory-fresh, blended in Michigan by Photo Systems, then shipped under Freestyle’s “exclusive” classroom label.

---

2 ⎯ Chemical genealogy: is Marathon just Sprint in different pajamas?​

• Ingredient rosters show near-mirror compositions: sulfite reducer + borate buffer + hydroquinone developer, fortified with a glycol carrier for liquid stability.
• Sprint lists two borates (tetraborate and metaborate) where Marathon sticks to sodium borate, but the buffering chemistry—and therefore working pH—lands in the same neighborhood (≈ pH 9.5).
• Forum folklore backs the hunch. A 2025 Photrio thread muses that “Marathon is a house name for Sprint”—echoing decade-old anecdotes about school darkrooms choosing whichever badge is cheapest that semester .

Inference: Marathon and Sprint are very likely recipe siblings coming off the same OEM kettle, tweaked only to satisfy distinct private-label specs (price point, storage form, educational packaging).

---

3 ⎯ Arista: same bloodline, different diet​

Arista’s powder kits strip the liquid carrier and jack the sulfite content sky-high for shelf stability; once dissolved and diluted they land in essentially the same D-76-ish chemistry zone. Freestyle quietly owns all three brands—Marathon (budget schools), Arista (enthusiast bulk), and their in-house liquid Eco Pro. One parent, several surnames.

---

4 ⎯ Why the cloak-and-dagger?​

Private-labeling lets a single factory spread fixed costs over many SKUs while retailers posture as distinct “exclusive” suppliers. The opacity isn’t accidental: identical MSDS codes (10153), identical emergency phone number (Photo Systems), and ingredient concordance all betray the shared lineage—but none of it appears on your gallon jug.

1. ​

Film Developer​

Essentially identical.

• Sprint Standard Film Developer vs Marathon Film Developer both use:
  
  • Hydroquinone (1–5%)
  • Sulfite buffer (Potassium or Sodium)
  • Borate alkali (pH buffer)
  • Glycol solvent for shelf stability
    
• MSDS ingredient ranges and roles match closely enough to presume functional interchangeability.
  You’re paying for labeling, packaging, and volume—not unique chemistry.

---

2. ​

Paper Developer​

Same core recipe; slight variance in dilution or shelf-life claims.

• Sprint and Marathon both use:
  
  • Hydroquinone + Phenidone (or a similar metol-like agent)
  • Sodium sulfite
  • Alkali buffer (Borate)
    
• MSDS again shows near-match in active agents and preservatives.
  Formulas tailored to resin-coated or fiber base processing—but same developer engine under the hood.

---

3. ​

Stop Bath​

Possible difference: acetic acid vs citric acid.

• Sprint Stop Bath uses acetic acid—classic vinegar-based.
• Some alternatives (e.g., Arista) offer citric acid-based “odorless” variants.
• Marathon Stop Bath not clearly documented in open SDS—may differ slightly.

Still interchangeable in practice unless scent sensitivity or archival preference matters.

---

4. ​

Fixer​

Same active: Ammonium thiosulfate fixers.

• Sprint and Marathon both rely on:
  
  • Ammonium thiosulfate (rapid fixer base)
  • Hardener optional depending on formula
    
• Most liquid fixers from Sprint, Clayton, Marathon, Arista are chemically equivalent in fixing action and archival standards.

Unless you’re doing archival fiber prints or alternative processes, you won’t see a difference.

---

5. ​

Hypo Clearing Agent / Wash Aid​

All use sodium sulfite or similar clearing agents.

• Sprint’s “Sprint End Run” and Marathon’s equivalent both aid in washing fiber prints faster.
• Same sulfite-heavy solutions, same dilution, same usage.

An area where cost-cutting makes sense: you can even mix your own with Kodak’s published formulas.

---