I do not like the extolled XTOL

StephenT · Sep 25, 2016

Peter Schrager said:
John develop straight for about 18 minutes
It'll work on azo
Ok here's another point..why do you think coffee is so eco??...it's a destructive exploited industry...it's all bs and helping to subject people to modern day slavery system; highly labor intensive and eco destroying for the natural surroundings...not the least to say it runs down your adrenal system. ..
Best peter

Hey Peter. I tend to agree with the first part of your statement about the industry. The second part about the adrenal system was news to me and motivated me to do an internet search. One of the pages I came across was this one: http://www.quickanddirtytips.com/static/ND_zombies.pdf

Would you agree or disagree with the author's conclusions?

Stephen

Peter Schrager · Sep 25, 2016

Take it to the pm dept... please

Christiaan Phleger · Sep 25, 2016

Xtol was released in 1996 and the problems did which yes were real and were that first year or two of production and an pain and yes I had two *small* occurrences of less than optimal negatives with that 1l size and after that was resolved by the removal of the 1 liter size off the market and we all started using the 5 liter size and paying attention to excessive iron in the stock water and its worked amazingly well for my for decades since over *thousands* of rolls personally and professionally and yet YET still people insist on repeating old bad information from 1997. If the user insists on creating failure in the negative procedure I can recommend many more original and creative ways to screw up black and white negatives than by just using Xtol replenished, 1:0 or 1:1.
XTOL is a quality developer that is flexible and consistent with standard professional or fine art level attention to its use.

ColColt · Sep 25, 2016

I mixed up the 5 gal of Xtol back in mid May and put what I wasn't immediately using in brown glass bottle up to the top. I haven't shot a lot this Summer due to extreme, unusual heat this year. Getting better and I'm wondering if it's still good or just dump it?

removed account4 · Sep 25, 2016

colcolt
some have said it is a binary test,
you take a film leader and in broad daylight stick it in the developer
and see if the leader changes color. i'm not sure where the OP gets
his ideas that you can't tell if it is good or not ...
the other option is don't use it if it worries you, an exposed roll of film
is time and effort wellspent to have it ruined by bad developer is a shame.

Sirius Glass · Sep 25, 2016

RidingWaves said:
... If the user insists on creating failure in the negative procedure I can recommend many more original and creative ways to screw up black and white negatives than by just using Xtol replenished, 1:0 or 1:1.

The OP has shown the capability to be able to turn any successful product into a disaster with his random experimentation and then blame the product. Why should we expect the future to be different from the past?

ColColt · Sep 25, 2016

jnanian said:
colcolt
some have said it is a binary test,
you take a film leader and in broad daylight stick it in the developer
and see if the leader changes color. i'm not sure where the OP gets
his ideas that you can't tell if it is good or not ...
the other option is don't use it if it worries you, an exposed roll of film
is time and effort wellspent to have it ruined by bad developer is a shame.

I hate to dump nearly 5 gallons of developer so, it will get the "acid" test first. Even at four months old, it's been corked up in brown glass bottles out of the light.

MattKing · Sep 25, 2016

Four months - it should be fine. Do a test now to confirm.

After six months, test more regularly.

It cost you about $2.00 per litre of working strength developer. Weigh that against the value of your film, and your time.

Christiaan Phleger · Sep 26, 2016

The OP has shown the capability to be able to turn any successful product into a disaster with his random experimentation and then blame the product. Why should we expect the future to be different from the past?

Ha! Thanks for the laugh. I think the random addition of restrainer into a complex balanced formula created by two Phd photo-chemists over 10 years using the full resources of Kodak Research Laboratory at the very height of Big Yellow's wealth and power certainly would prove to most just how lousy Xtol was back in 1997. The internet is not wrong especially when information is repeated with every mention of Xtol.

baachitraka · Sep 26, 2016

May switch to PC-TEA and it will bring the results very close to x-tol.

Andrew Kleinfeld · Sep 26, 2016

I've never had a problem, get slightly nicer negatives (with better speed and contrast) than D-76. I mix it (and all developers - our tap water is very iron-rich) with distilled water, and decant the 5 liters into 16 ounce bottles filled to the stopper, and use it straight, one shot. Still fine even a year old. I do pour some of the solution into the part B bag and then back into the beaker, and I mix part A for a very long time before pouring in the part B.

removed account4 · Sep 26, 2016

RidingWaves said:
The OP has shown the capability to be able to turn any successful product into a disaster with his random experimentation and then blame the product. Why should we expect the future to be different from the past?

Ha! Thanks for the laugh. I think the random addition of restrainer into a complex balanced formula created by two Phd photo-chemists over 10 years using the full resources of Kodak Research Laboratory at the very height of Big Yellow's wealth and power certainly would prove to most just how lousy Xtol was back in 1997. The internet is not wrong especially when information is repeated with every mention of Xtol.

i had sudden death with it before, i didn't mention in my original post cause it was only once, the lack of contrast and ability to build contrast no matter what i did
was a regularly occuring thing over a 4+year time period. no, not used as an experimentalist who added other chemistry/restrainers into the mix, or using 1L packets
but a working professional using it as directed, adding to the national archives ( HABS ), who couldn't afford to use another bad kodak developer.
whether it was at the height of their wealth and power it still didn't stop them from telling people in the resources
they gave out to professional photographers to "dilute 1:10 for contact prints", what a load of hooie, that was what i did when it died on me [ they have since stopped telling people to do that ]
.. also it never stopped the good folks at their professional photographers division back when they had it, to give out poor advice,
like wrong dilutions and wrong products, when other products hit the streets like tmax developer .. also in the height of their power also another developer people either love or hate ... i'll never it again either after a kodak employee told me
to use non RS on sheet film in tanks/hanger system and then didnt' even know which of their own products i could use to remedy the situation. i pretty much gave up after that.

it has no thing to do with their wealth and power in the 80s or 90s but misinformation printed in their literature &c. great papers, sure, great films, sure, all their developers are great, nope.
ymmv

dpurdy · Sep 26, 2016

I started using it commercially right after it was introduced. In the 90s I processed film for a lot of different photographers and it was a few of them that convinced me to switch from D76 to Xtol. I have literally processed over 30,000 rolls of film with it and who knows how much sheet film. I have used it straight and diluted 1-1 and for a time even diluted 2-1. I have used the replenishment method and the extend the time method. Not one problem ever. Really good developer.
Dennis

StephenT · Sep 26, 2016

ColColt - it should be fine. I have used the stock solution that has been in amber Boston Rounds, filled to the top, that has been over a year old.

bvy · Sep 26, 2016

I had a failure with the first batch I mixed up just a few months ago, which was too bad because I loved the results I was getting. It was my fault; I wasn't careful storing the particular quantity that I used. It was in a small plastic bottle at about 80% capacity and sealed tight. It was kept that way for about a month. I always do a clip test, and the clip darkened, but didn't develop to black. I thought it was curious but proceeded anyway. Seeing it darken had always enough. Now I look for it go to black, and even then I'm nervous (is it dark enough?). I had been used to mix-and-go, bulletproof HC-110 from a small bottle that never goes bad (within reason). Now I'm trying to convince myself that I love HC-110 more than I do and/or that XTOL isn't as inconvenient as it is.

Sirius Glass · Sep 26, 2016

MattKing said:
Four months - it should be fine. Do a test now to confirm.

After six months, test more regularly.

It cost you about $2.00 per litre of working strength developer. Weigh that against the value of your film, and your time.

Wot he sez

ColColt · Sep 26, 2016

So, if you do a test clip and it turns black in a reasonable amount of time that means it's still ok?

bvy · Sep 26, 2016

ColColt said:
So, if you do a test clip and it turns black in a reasonable amount of time that means it's still ok?

Yes. But BLACK. Not brown, beige, etc.

baachitraka · Sep 26, 2016

There is an 1l equivalent from FOMA otherwise PC-TEA(this stuff is really good).

Dismayed · Sep 26, 2016

Opinions about developers are a lot like religion - immune to appeal to reason or to fact. I tried a number of developers before I settled on Xtol. Yes, I could be happy with several other options, but I'd prefer to standardize and to really learn the characteristics of a single developer. So why did I choose Xtol? Doesn't matter because I'm not trying to sell anyone.

Christiaan Phleger · Sep 26, 2016

I started using it commercially right after it was introduced. In the 90s I processed film for a lot of different photographers and it was a few of them that convinced me to switch from D76 to Xtol. I have literally processed over 30,000 rolls of film with it and who knows how much sheet film. I have used it straight and diluted 1-1 and for a time even diluted 2-1. I have used the replenishment method and the extend the time method. Not one problem ever. Really good developer.

Its been my experience that people who have processed at this quantity come to this conclusion.

Neal · Sep 27, 2016

I've used Xtol almost exclusively for the last 16 years. Never an issue.

bvy · Sep 27, 2016

Dismayed said:
So why did I choose Xtol? Doesn't matter because I'm not trying to sell anyone.

Then why post at all? You can tell us why it works for you without suggesting that it will work that way for everybody. I, for one, am curious to know.

rpavich · Sep 27, 2016

MattKing said:
There are a lot of reasons to like XTol (low toxicity, excellent results, powder rather than liquid) but its biggest advantage is that it serves as its own replenisher. A replenishment regime rocks!

Can you elaborate on what you mean by this? I'm a bit of a noob.

baachitraka · Sep 27, 2016

- Mix 5l of x-tol and store in 2l(W) + 1l(A) + 1l(B) + 1l(C) bottles.
- Develop x-tol from 2l and after each roll of development pour 70ml from A to W.
- If A=0ml, take from B and so on.

For air tight storage you may use wine bags...

rpavich · Sep 27, 2016

bvy said:
Yes. But BLACK. Not brown, beige, etc.

Doh!

Good to know. I wouldn't have figured that out on my own.

I do not like the extolled XTOL

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency