ID11 & D76

[dustym]

Are the powders diluted to make a concentrate and then further diluted,
As I am giving Tri x a go these seem to be the two most popular developers.


rgds

 

[Roger Hicks]

Are the powders diluted to make a concentrate and then further diluted,
As I am giving Tri x a go these seem to be the two most popular developers.


rgds

You make a stock solution which can then be re-used (and even replenished), which is the traditional approach, or you can then dilute the stock solution, usually 1+1 or 1+3 though of course 1+2 is entirely feasible, for 'one-shot' use.

Incidentally I have found Tri-X to be magic in Ilford DD-X.


Cheers,

Roger

 

[Harry Lime]

Incidentally I have found Tri-X to be magic in Ilford DD-X.
Cheers,
Roger

I second that. Tri-X in DD-X makes for brilliant negatives. Highlight and shadow detail is excellent and grain is very reasonable, remaining tight and crisp without going mushy. I also prefer Tri-X in DD-X over XTOL. Somehow I thought that the XTOL negs looked very...'brash' or 'loud'. Difficult to describe. A very modern look. Tri-X in DD-X looks more pearly. Very lush.

I used to be a D76 man for Tri-X, but over all DD-X is better. It looks less 'mushy'. Certainly the highlights look less compressed. I still use D76, when I am going for a period look (very 1950's-1960's AP)

HL

 

[Bob F.]

Are the powders diluted to make a concentrate and then further diluted,
As I am giving Tri x a go these seem to be the two most popular developers.


rgds

I've only used ID-11, not D76 but they are almost identical so I assume the same applies to D76.

You make a stock solution from the powder as directed on the box. This you store. Note the manufacturer's recommended expected storage life.

You can then develop your film by either using the stock solution at it's full strength or by diluting it with water. The ID-11 PDF on Ilford's web site gives times for many films in stock, 1+1 and 1+3 dilutions - I'm sure the D76 info on Kodak's site will do much the same.

Cheers, Bob.

 

[David Brown]

... The ID-11 PDF on Ilford's web site gives times for many films in stock, 1+1 and 1+3 dilutions - I'm sure the D76 info on Kodak's site will do much the same.

Cheers, Bob.

Yes, the Kodak charts do the same. For that matter, the Ilford charts for their films give times for both the ID-11 and D76 dilutions.

 

[fschifano]

You are correct about mixing the powders to make what is called a stock solution. I'm not sure if calling the stock solution a concentrate is accurate though. The stock solution can be used as is to develop film. Concentrated developers to me are things like Rodinal and HC-110 which must be diluted with water in order to work.

The two formulas are virtually identical in performance. Any differences in the developers' composition have no photographic significance. I've used the two interchangably over the years and both developers have never failed to deliver excellent results with roll and sheet film. Kodak's D-76 times for Kodak's films and Ilfords times for Ilford's films are good starting points. I have even, on occassion, mixed 1/2L of D-76 with 1/2L of ID-11 and used that as if it were D-76 and it worked exactly as expected.

 

[jmal]

Sorry to highjack the thread, but as the initial question has been answered, I'll ask another. Roger, when you say that Tri X in DDX is magic, what exactly do you mean? I have been using it in D76 or HC110, but am looking for something a little different. Also, if you don't mind listing your time, temp, dilution, and EI, I'd appreciate it. Thanks.

Jmal

 

[Roger Hicks]

Sorry to highjack the thread, but as the initial question has been answered, I'll ask another. Roger, when you say that Tri X in DDX is magic, what exactly do you mean? I have been using it in D76 or HC110, but am looking for something a little different. Also, if you don't mind listing your time, temp, dilution, and EI, I'd appreciate it. Thanks.

Jmal

Ummm...

The catch with 'magic' is that it's hard to define. Pearly, classical, lush -- any of those words.

True ISO in DDX is probably 500-650 so 400 (which I use) is generous; slight extra grain & loss of sharpness but even nicer tonality. For dev times, etc., Ilford's recommendations are a good starting point but I give a little longer to get negs that print on grade 2 with my Meograde heads. Doesn't seem to matter much whether you choose 20 or 24 degrees (68/75) at the appropriate times.

Actually, Tri-X is my wife's main film, alongside Ilford XP2; I use more Ilford HP5 Plus, developed identically (often at the same time) in DD-X. Equally magical; a bit different. If you subscribe to Black and White (UK) then you might care to look up Frances's article on 'The Leica Glow' a few months back: she addressed the question of whether it exists, and if it does, what causes it.

Hope this helps.

Cheers,

R.

 

[jmal]

Thanks Roger. I wish I had a copy of that article. I'm interested in the Leica glow myself, if it really exists. I sometimes get that glow with my Nikon, but I think it's a matter of good light and the right exposure.

Jmal

 

[Harry Lime]

I'm a Leica M shooter and really sold on Tri-X in DD-X.

There is a very pearly quality to the combination.

Here are two shots I took with my 1.4/35 Summilux-ASPH. Tri-X @400 in DD-X

Pic #1
http://elanphotos.com/ElanFotos/New_Orleans_2006/Pages/slides/slide_380.htm

Pic#2
http://elanphotos.com/ElanFotos/New_Orleans_2006/Pages/slides/slide_390.htm

Here's one with a vintage 2/50 Summicron-DR. On AGFA Classic fiber (glossy) this print glows like crazy.

http://elanphotos.com/ElanFotos/Portfolio/pages/slide_080.htm