ID-11 alternative?

Anon Ymous

Member
Joined
Feb 7, 2008
Messages
3,663
Location
Greece
Format
35mm
Daniela said:
That's an awesome resource, thank you! I'll be able to get to it when you provide the recipe to combat laziness No, seriously, it does make it seem doable to my non-chemist brain.
Click to expand...

If you can make a cake, you can also scratch-mix a developer. Actually, it's even simpler and more fool proof. No need to be a chemist.
 

MattKing

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
53,339
Location
Delta, BC Canada
Format
Medium Format
Anon Ymous said:
If you can make a cake, you can also scratch-mix a developer. Actually, it's even simpler and more fool proof. No need to be a chemist.
Click to expand...

Don_ih said:
Exactly. Number one: you don't need to bake a developer. Clean up is easier, too.
Click to expand...

Just don't lick the mixing beaters or the bowl!
 

Lachlan Young

Member
Joined
Dec 2, 2005
Messages
4,964
Location
Glasgow
Format
Multi Format
Milpool said:
Another strange thing is some people seem to believe ID-11 wouldn’t have all the same “instability” issues as D-76.
Click to expand...

It's up there with those who extensively denigrate D-76/ID-11 and then expend paragraphs of fluff about how Pyrocat slices their bread for them - without ever stopping to notice that Pyrocat is a very simple D-76/ Autophen derivative (hence why it actually develops films more-or-less OK) with an isomer substitution.
 

john_s

Member
Joined
Nov 19, 2002
Messages
2,153
Location
Melbourne, A
Format
Medium Format
If you look at it like that, I suppose just about every developer is such a derivative. Simple can be good.
 

RalphLambrecht

Subscriber
Joined
Sep 19, 2003
Messages
14,667
Location
K,Germany
Format
Medium Format
Daniela said:
This is interesting to know. I always assumed I'd need special equipment...

So it's not just here...thanks for sharing!


I just also bought some Adox D76 for now. Let's keep each other informed of any developments!
Click to expand...

@Brian: thre is no need for special equipment for mixing your processing chemicals from bulk; just a set of kitchen spoons or kitchen scales (both easy to obtain and inexpensive to purchase)
 

Lachlan Young

Member
Joined
Dec 2, 2005
Messages
4,964
Location
Glasgow
Format
Multi Format
john_s said:
If you look at it like that, I suppose just about every developer is such a derivative. Simple can be good.
Click to expand...

No. The ratio of M:Q or P:Q defines a very great deal of the developer's characteristics. D-76 is 2:5 M:Q, Autophen subs P for M at 1:10 (which, while it might have been the right choice in this instance, every unthinking substitution since has used it - which immediately confirms they haven't checked the work of Levenson and others on the viable P:Q ratio ranges) and then Pyrocat swaps HQ for Catechol at 1:1. Fortuitously for Pyrocat, 1:25 happens to be a pretty good P:Q ratio, but it's been very well known to the industry (and thoroughly commercially exploited) for decades.

The buffering changes don't really count as Kodak (and everyone else) published innumerable possible variants, none of which pretended to be anything other than D-76 variants.
 
Last edited:

Ian Grant

Subscriber
Joined
Aug 2, 2004
Messages
23,283
Location
West Midland
Format
Multi Format
D76 was not the first Borax-MQ fine grain developer. The 11th Edition of The Wellington Photographic Handbook lists the following developer:

Wllington Borax-MQ Developer

Metol 2g
Hydroquinone 5g
Sodium Sulphite (anhyd) 10g
Borax 20g
Water to 1 litre

Later editions add that it is a fine grain developer. The PDF of i 11th Ed Handbook claims it's 1910, but the preface talks about the duration of the war, and 75% of their original staff absent for military service, so obviously WWI. So the 11th ed is likely to be late 1918 or early 1919.

So the same M-Q ratio as D76, this was changed to 1:1 in the 1922 12th Edition.

Ian
 

Milpool

Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2023
Messages
776
Location
n/a
Format
4x5 Format
You're probably correct regarding the Phenidone : Catechol ratio in Pyrocat not being particularly novel (and being fortuitous), but I think its popularity is simply a matter of it being a staining developer with "pyro" in the name, with the benefit of catechol being more stable than pyrogallol. It probably gives very slightly better emulsion speed than its metol-pyrogallol predecessors but that's minor.

 

RalphLambrecht

Subscriber
Joined
Sep 19, 2003
Messages
14,667
Location
K,Germany
Format
Medium Format

It's a relief to realize that B&W processing chemicals are the last thing we will run out of. Paper and film will be gone much before the chemicals. We can easily mix processing chemicals from bulk. Making paper and film ourselves will be another cattle of fish
 

pentaxuser

Member
Joined
May 9, 2005
Messages
20,039
Location
Daventry, No
Format
35mm

The problem here might be that Clayton F76 is unknown in the U.K and as far as I know is not available in France either. The problem with sources of developers, etc is that not all are available everywhere

pentaxuser
 

Tom Kershaw

Subscriber
Joined
Jun 5, 2004
Messages
4,974
Location
Norfolk, United Kingdom
Format
Multi Format
pentaxuser said:
The problem here might be that Clayton F76 is unknown in the U.K and as far as I know is not available in France either. The problem with sources of developers, etc is that not all are available everywhere
Click to expand...

I guess Fotospeed FD10 is still available? This used to be mentioned frequently but haven't seen mention of it more recently. Adox D-76 is available in the UK anyway.

Adox D-76 Film Developer, makes 5 litres

Alternative to the classic Kodak developer, will process 50+ films
www.firstcall-photographic.co.uk
 

john_s

Member
Joined
Nov 19, 2002
Messages
2,153
Location
Melbourne, A
Format
Medium Format
Lachlan Young said:
............ Fortuitously for Pyrocat, 1:25 happens to be a pretty good P:Q ratio, but it's been very well known to the industry (and thoroughly commercially exploited) for decades.
.....................................
Click to expand...

It is on the record that Sandy King tried a wide range of amounts of phenidone in arriving at his formula for Pyrocat-HD, so I think the use of the word "fortuitously" isn't appropriate.

I'd have to admit that I've used a few developers in my half century of photography but I've been blissfully unaware of whether or not they were "derivative." I think that only one wasn't (Rodinal), and they've all had shortcomings compared to my current derivatives, Pyrocat and ID-68.
 
OP
OP

Daniela

Member
Joined
Feb 20, 2017
Messages
1,083
Location
France
Format
Multi Format
Just checked 4 places here (3 with stores in Paris) and it still doesn't seem to be available...
 

Angarian

Member
Joined
Sep 4, 2018
Messages
231
Location
Europe
Format
Multi Format
Daniela said:
Just checked 4 places here (3 with stores in Paris) and it still doesn't seem to be available...
Click to expand...

My suggestion from my own experience:
ID-11 and D76 offer the same performance.
When Kodak developed XTOL, it was designed as a bit "better D76": Delivering the qualities of D76, but with an even little bit finer grain, and more environmentally friendly by using Isoascorbate.

And now we have Adox XT-3 as an even further improved XTOL version.
Therefore in my experience Adox XT-3 is a perfect replacement or alternative for ID-11 / D-76.
 

John Wiegerink

Subscriber
Joined
May 29, 2009
Messages
3,701
Location
Lake Station, MI
Format
Multi Format
I was a very happy Xtol user and never experienced the "sudden death" syndrome. When I couldn't get Xtol for my new batch of replenished Xtol I tried Adox XT-3. I like it a lot and it's super-easy to mix plus it comes in two sizes. Nope, I like it so much I won't be going back to Xtol. Might not be the cheapest Xtol clone, but when running it replenished the cost difference means practically nothing.
 
OP
OP

Daniela

Member
Joined
Feb 20, 2017
Messages
1,083
Location
France
Format
Multi Format
Thanks for the recommendation. I'm quite happy with D76 (n fact, I just mixed 5L of it), but I'll keep the others you mention in mind for the future.

So, a recap of the alternatives suggested:
DD-X
HC 110
D23
XTOL
Adox XT-3
F76
Arista A76
Legacy Pro L76
Foma Retro Special
FOMADON P
 

cliveh

Subscriber
Joined
Oct 9, 2010
Messages
7,561
Format
35mm RF

You wont regret using D76, it is a superb reliable developer and very consistant.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…