Huge differences in Xtol time/temp German, American sheets

Paul Verizzo · Apr 19, 2009

As I was perusing the time/temp suggestions from Kodak for Xtol, I suddenly realized that the German and the American seldom agree! Has anyone else noticed this, or can explain why? The American one is dated March, 2008 so we can probably presume it is up to speed on TMY-2. Yet, there are differences even in Plus and Tri X, especially once out of the 20C temp. I cannot find a date on the German sheet which is often suggested for dilutions higher than the American one.

I know this cut and paste from a simple xls I did won't format right, but you can probably figure it out.

20C/68F 21C/70F 24C/75F 27C/80F

Tri-X, German 6.75 6 4.75 3.75
Tri-X, English 7 6.25 4.75

T-Max 400, German 6.5 5.75 4.5 3.5
T-Max 400, English 6.5 6.75 5.25

Plus-X, German 5.25 4.75 3.75
Plus-X, English 8.25 7.5 5.75

Wouldn't one think that the Great Yellow Father in Rochester would say, "Yo, Berlin! Here's the scoop."

Any thoughts?

Tim Gray · Apr 19, 2009

How old is the German sheet? If it is before the upgrade of Tri-X and Plus-X (in the early 2000's?) then they might be for the old spec films.

Paul Verizzo · Apr 19, 2009

Tim Gray said:
How old is the German sheet? If it is before the upgrade of Tri-X and Plus-X (in the early 2000's?) then they might be for the old spec films.

As I mentioned, I couldn't find a date for the German sheet. But those are some huge differences for Plus and Tri X that have been stable for a few years.

Here's the link: http://www.kodak.fr/AT/plugins/acrobat/de/professional/xtolEntwickler.pdf

Lee L · Apr 20, 2009

Paul Verizzo said:
As I mentioned, I couldn't find a date for the German sheet. But those are some huge differences for Plus and Tri X that have been stable for a few years.

Here's the link: http://www.kodak.fr/AT/plugins/acrobat/de/professional/xtolEntwickler.pdf

Document properties
Created: 12/07/1998
Modified: 03/05/1999
Acrobat Distiller 3.0 f r Power Macintosh

Lee

Paul Verizzo · Apr 20, 2009

Lee L said:
Document properties
Created: 12/07/1998
Modified: 03/05/1999
Acrobat Distiller 3.0 f r Power Macintosh

Lee

Thanks, Lee. I was looking for the obvious, you know, like a date printed in the file? Ten year old information? Wow.

Considering that so many folks look to that German page for guidance, especially for high dilutions, that is really disappointing. Especially that it is still there as a reference.

Lee L · Apr 20, 2009

Paul Verizzo said:
Thanks, Lee. I was looking for the obvious, you know, like a date printed in the file? Ten year old information? Wow.

Considering that so many folks look to that German page for guidance, especially for high dilutions, that is really disappointing. Especially that it is still there as a reference.

I looked for a date in the text first as well. I think it may be left up as a resource for dilutions greater than 1:1, but that's just a wild guess.

It also uses the old names for Tri-X and the TMax films, plus emulsion numbers, plus Verichrome Pan, and Acros is missing with other Neopans there. I always took those as clues to its age.

Lee

Nick Zentena · Apr 20, 2009

Did they give contrast index? Or whatever it's called.

If you think of Agfa they would give some very different times depending on the contrast.

Lee L · Apr 20, 2009

Nick Zentena said:
Did they give contrast index? Or whatever it's called.

If you think of Agfa they would give some very different times depending on the contrast.

Yes, both the old German language and the newer English language tech bulletins give a range of temperatures, contrast indices, and film speed ratings.

Lee

Paul Verizzo · Apr 20, 2009

Lee L said:
I looked for a date in the text first as well. I think it may be left up as a resource for dilutions greater than 1:1, but that's just a wild guess.

It also uses the old names for Tri-X and the TMax films, plus emulsion numbers, plus Verichrome Pan, and Acros is missing with other Neopans there. I always took those as clues to its age.

Lee

But a resource with bad information is worse than nothing at all.

I did notice the Verichrome Pan, but it went right over my head. I have no knowledge of emulsion numbers, so that didn't set off any alarms, either.

Bottom line: Dump this much mentioned pdf. The Spanish pdf has the American sheet ID of J-109 but seems to have the same times as the German one, w/o the high dilution ones.

Does anyone have an old American Xtol sheet with high dilution times?

srs5694 · Apr 20, 2009

My understanding is that Kodak stopped recommending or supporting XTOL dilutions higher than 1+1 some time ago in response to the "XTOL sudden death" problems. Thus, the only high-dilution information you'll find on XTOL will either be hopelessly out of date but official from Kodak or unofficial stuff from users.

Paul Verizzo · Apr 20, 2009

srs5694 said:
My understanding is that Kodak stopped recommending or supporting XTOL dilutions higher than 1+1 some time ago in response to the "XTOL sudden death" problems. Thus, the only high-dilution information you'll find on XTOL will either be hopelessly out of date but official from Kodak or unofficial stuff from users.

The decisions of corporations are often mysterious. I don't think the Xtol "sudden death" had any connection to dilutions. Dare I also be cynical in noting that with high dilution they don't sell so much developer????:rolleyes:

An old American sheet with high dilutions would still be valuable as a way of more quickly dialing in, even with emulsion changes since then. Compare then and now, add or subtract a percentage and you will be real close, I think.

This is an example of why I don't trust the Massive Development Chart except for general information or for maybe now unavailable films. We don't know what emulsion is being talked about with "recent" Kodak changes. I doubt if there is any deleting of old data. Does TMY data reflect current or old? Probably both, especially at higher dilutions.

Dave Swinnard · Apr 20, 2009

1998 data sheet...

I have an Xtol data sheet, J-109, dated April 1998 with the dilute times. I kept it because I used to use 1+3 Xtol a lot. I never had a problem with it, never experienced the "failure" issue and used a good number of the 1 litre packages over the years (until they went away...).

Tim Gray · Apr 20, 2009

So it's clearly before Tri-X and Plus-X were moved to the new facilities. Didn't the new films (400TX and 125PX) get longer times? I have the US 1998, 2004, and 2008 pdfs for XTOL here. I know the 2008 version removed the old Tri-X and Plus-X from the data. The 2004 sheet has both the new and old. The 1998 sheet has the old. The German one is in German, so I don't look at that. haha.

The 1998 English sheet agrees with the values you have listed above for German, for Tri-X. The 2004 sheet has both times - the English values above correspond to the new 400TX, the German times correspond to the old TX. I think that's all you are seeing there. As far as Plus-X goes, it looks like your English values above are for 1:1, because in the 2008 pdf I see (6, 5.5, 4.25, 3.25) for full strength XTOL. The 125PX data sheet more or less agrees with the 2008 XTOL data sheet too (a number or two is off by 15 seconds).

Dave Swinnard · Apr 20, 2009

1998 data sheet...I

I have an Xtol data sheet, J-109, dated April 1998 with the dilute times. I kept it because I used to use 1+3 Xtol a lot. I never had a problem with it, never experienced the "failure" issue and used a good number of the 1 litre packages while they were available.

I've also found a copy of J108 - Xtol for Rotary Tube Processors, November 1997 with dilute times.

PM me if you'd like a copy.

Dave

Huge differences in Xtol time/temp German, American sheets

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency