First their paper developer was brown, now the film developer

[Wayne]

ADOX, Foma, Ilford. Support these guys instead. They want your business.

I do, for black and white. But I also like C41 and RA4, a lot, and they can't help me with that.

 

[Dusty Negative]

+1
I have used Sprint chemistry in my school lab for 14 years. It's very consistent in quality and I am a huge fan of mixing from liquid instead of from powder. And they are a friendly, down to earth small company. One time I called to place an order and the owner answered the phone.

I’ve been using their full suite of chemicals (film and print) for some weeks now. Liking them quite a bit so far. My only concern (coming from HC110) is how long the STANDARD film developer will last once open. Bottle says “at least” three months, but I’ve distributed into smaller amber bottles hoping to get even more time — I sometimes only develop a handful of rolls per month and would hate to end of wasting any of it.

 

[Andrew Patteson]

I’ve been using their full suite of chemicals (film and print) for some weeks now. Liking them quite a bit so far. My only concern (coming from HC110) is how long the STANDARD film developer will last once open. Bottle says “at least” three months, but I’ve distributed into smaller amber bottles hoping to get even more time — I sometimes only develop a handful of rolls per month and would hate to end of wasting any of it.

I use the 1L "cubetainers", so I don't know how rate of oxidation compares to using the bottles. But from my experience you should have no problem going way beyond 3 months if you are minimizing air in the bottles.

Interestingly (and maybe this is normal?... the intricacies of photo chemistry aren't my specialty), the developer gets more active as it ages. I am working through a batch I received 18 months ago (pandemic scrambled everything, of course) and I am having to cut around 20% from chart development times.

 

[gone]

Kodak never sent me the chemicals they said they would to replace the bad ones. That's low life behavior, and a terrible business practice. Of all the stupid things to do in business, this is the stupidest because they could have easily rectified the situation. Fine w/ me, let 'em go bankrupt again, they deserve it. Selling me bad products was bad enough, but now add lying on top of it.

There's a good side to this though. I'm using Foma and Ilford films now, and trying out some different paper and film developers. These products were less money than the Kodak products, the new stuff actually works!, and more money can go for enlarger paper. Thanks Kodak.

 

[Adrian Bacon]

After discovering the Kodak Dektol I'd just mixed was brown, today I mixed up some D76 and it's purple! I finally found this on an old RFF post

"If you have Catalog #1058270 (Batch 2020/01/23 8438 & Batch 2019/10/09 8432), you may have noticed a discoloring of your product. Please know we’re aware of this and apologize for the inconvenience or confusion this may have caused for a product you’re well used to. Rest assured we want to get this taken care of for you. Please email us at ProPaperChem@KodakAlaris.com and our team will be back in touch to provide you with next steps on this specific product.*If you have the product in your care and have not yet opened it, we encourage you to reach out to us for next steps as well."

This is very frustrating, because that is indeed my batch. It should have been recalled. Both these developers were bought recently from two different photo suppliers.

I've been using the brown Dektol at home and even though it looks like weak root beer, it seems to work just fine.

 

[Nicholas Lindan]

I've been using the brown Dektol at home and even though it looks like weak root beer, it seems to work just fine.

It will work but the paper characteristics will be a bit different. But, who knows, that change may make your prints better.

As noted many times the brown color is oxidized (no longer working) metol. The only active developing agent is then hyroquinone and the paper and film contrast should increase as will the required developing time. Also the s. sulfite will change to s. sulfate and so film grain will increase with less 'solvent' action.

I'm very happy I have changed to using raw chemicals to make my own developer, fixer et al. and don't have to deal with Alaris (or whoever it is now). I do have quite a bit of 'vintage' Microdol-X and Technidol left, if I run out of those I will have to get into experimentation mode (and no, it isn't going to involve Rodinal).

 

[Bill Burk]

Has anyone “proven” the bad developer is truly bad? I thought that Kodak asserted the color was photographically insignificant. I would believe it when it comes to purple. But brown would take some getting used to.

And if it’s really “oxidized” Metol that’s one thing. But if it’s merely a contaminant that doesn’t affect processing I could overlook it.

Unless it’s a health hazard contaminant that could lead to “Metol poisoning” that would stop me.

 

[Dusty Negative]

I use the 1L "cubetainers", so I don't know how rate of oxidation compares to using the bottles. But from my experience you should have no problem going way beyond 3 months if you are minimizing air in the bottles.

Interestingly (and maybe this is normal?... the intricacies of photo chemistry aren't my specialty), the developer gets more active as it ages. I am working through a batch I received 18 months ago (pandemic scrambled everything, of course) and I am having to cut around 20% from chart development times.

Wow. That is interesting....and odd. Might be worth a call in to Sprint to inquire into that. I’m told they are a very friendly, small company.

As far as the cubetainers ... are they essentially boxed winesacks that minimize air contact with the chemistry? Or does the same shelf life apply as with the plastic bottles?

Looks like perhaps *I* should be the one calling them! ;-)

 

[Adrian Bacon]

It will work but the paper characteristics will be a bit different. But, who knows, that change may make your prints better.

As noted many times the brown color is oxidized (no longer working) metol. The only active developing agent is then hyroquinone and the paper and film contrast should increase as will the required developing time. Also the s. sulfite will change to s. sulfate and so film grain will increase with less 'solvent' action.

I'm very happy I have changed to using raw chemicals to make my own developer, fixer et al. and don't have to deal with Alaris (or whoever it is now). I do have quite a bit of 'vintage' Microdol-X and Technidol left, if I run out of those I will have to get into experimentation mode (and no, it isn't going to involve Rodinal).

I use Ilford Multigrade RCV Deluxe (the new purple label) and haven't really noticed a difference. Of course, this should come with a bit of a disclaimer: I'm one of those internet idiots who dumps his used film developer into his paper developer because he can. My paper developer in my home darkroom has been a mix of fresh Dektol, fresh Multigrade, used D-76, used Rodinal, used XTOL, used DD, etc. for so long it's not even funny. I think the only thing I haven't dumped in there is used c-41 developer. I keep a liter bottle that contains the working solution from the last print session, mix up 500ml of fresh developer, but use any used film developer I have for dilution instead of water, dump it in the tray then dump the left over from the last print session in. At the end, keep a liter of developer for the next print session and discard the rest. Funnily enough, it all seems to work just fine. I expose the paper, dump it in the developer and an image starts to form after about 15 seconds, and is fully there by about the 45 second mark. Works for me.

 

[Adrian Bacon]

Has anyone “proven” the bad developer is truly bad? I thought that Kodak asserted the color was photographically insignificant. I would believe it when it comes to purple. But brown would take some getting used to.

And if it’s really “oxidized” Metol that’s one thing. But if it’s merely a contaminant that doesn’t affect processing I could overlook it.

Unless it’s a health hazard contaminant that could lead to “Metol poisoning” that would stop me.

It doesn't look like oxidized developer. It literally looks like root beer. Oxidized developer is more of a brownish tan, this is more like a purplish brown. It also loses that color when you start to run paper through it and shifts more towards the brownish tan that you see after a long print session.

 

[Don_ih]

I'm one of those internet idiots who dumps his used film developer into his paper developer

There's nothing wrong with that because it will have next to no impact, other than to slightly boost the alkalinity of your paper developer. The amounts of active ingredients in film developer are lower than in paper developer - and, already used, their potency has been sapped. The only thing that's potentially problematic is repeatability. A lot of people take notes on how to get a particular finished print, so having their fresh tray developer the same every time is a key to that.

 

[Adrian Bacon]

There's nothing wrong with that because it will have next to no impact, other than to slightly boost the alkalinity of your paper developer. The amounts of active ingredients in film developer are lower than in paper developer - and, already used, their potency has been sapped. The only thing that's potentially problematic is repeatability. A lot of people take notes on how to get a particular finished print, so having their fresh tray developer the same every time is a key to that.

that’s totally true and valid, but at the same time I can actually see a change when a significant amount of XTOL is in the mix, at least with Ilford’s new MGV. I don’t know if it’s the ascorbic acid or phenidone doing it though and probably won’t bother trying to find out.

of course, this is only in my home darkroom, at my lab it’s only ever fresh Ilford Multigrade.

 

[MattKing]

I'd be more worried about stray gelatin and stuff like anti-halation dyes.
Of course if you are a member of the church of Rodinol, maybe the partially spent developer will add to the spirituality of your prints .

 

[Adrian Bacon]

I'd be more worried about stray gelatin and stuff like anti-halation dyes.
Of course if you are a member of the church of Rodinol, maybe the partially spent developer will add to the spirituality of your prints .

LOL... I'm not a member, not by a long shot, though, it's shelf life is quite attractive, at least for a home user, and it's super simple to use.

In terms of bits of gelatin, or anti-halation, I guess that could maybe be a bit of concern, but at the same time, lets be real, this is me screwing around in my home darkroom set up in a laundry room. Literally. I have more problems with lint from the dryer getting on everything. It's the only room in the house that doesn't have windows. I could just go to my darkroom at my lab, but that often means being out quite late, and that's not very conducive to a happy home life, so the only way I can really spend time making darkroom prints of my own negatives is to do it at home in my little laundry room.