ID11 or D76 1+1

[David Lingham]

Is there any noticeable difference between ID11 and D76 used 1+1 with 35mm FP4.

 

[tedr1]

From what I have read over the years the two are identical.

 

[John Wiegerink]

Is there any noticeable difference between ID11 and D76 used 1+1 with 35mm FP4.

This might sound stupid since I don't use either anymore, but I did years ago and it was the first two developers I ever used. I talk college Photography Arts course #101 and D76 was required for use with Tri-X 35mm. Toward the end of the course I ran out of D76 and bought ID11 instead. People might not believe this, but I did see a difference in my Ilfobrom prints even at 8x10 size. I used it for the rest of the course and passed with flying colors. I never used D76 again. I'm sure they, Kodak and Ilford, probably changed some of the formula since the 70's so I can't say about now. Either would work so toss a coin and call it!

 

[Bob Carnie]

I went from D76 to ID11 and agree I saw no change.

 

[John Wiegerink]

I went from D76 to ID11 and agree I saw no change.

Bob,
I said you might not agree with me. Ha! Ha!

 

[David Lingham]

My reason for asking is, here in the UK D76 as become expensive.

 

[trendland]

Is there any noticeable difference between ID11 and D76 used 1+1 with 35mm FP4.

David pls. Notice: There is indeed a difference.

It is like ham and eggs Vs scrambled eggs with ham.

You will allways meet some people who are tasting a big difference.

with regards

 

[John Wiegerink]

David pls. Notice: There is indeed a difference.

It is like ham and eggs Vs scrambled eggs with ham.

You will allways meet some people who are tasting a big difference.

with regards

I never said it was a big difference, but I did see a difference and my eyes were like a Hawks back then. I still seemed to think it looked different/better, but don't really care to argue about it since I haven't used either in many years.

 

[trendland]

My reason for asking is, here in the UK D76 as become expensive.

Ähhh....forgetting to read this.
What do you mean with expensive?

As I learned one thing the last 15 years
with prices is that everthing is going more and more and more AND? ?? -
"MUCH MUCH MORE".....and more.....
expensive E X C E P T : D-76?????
The price is the same since years.
$ 6,20 - $ 6,80

The last I bought was with the friendly
words from a dealer : "Ah the good D-76,
it is today $ 6,65 to you"

David : $6,65 to one gallone = $ 1,75 L.

 

[Ian Grant]

There is a slight difference between the current versions of D76 and ID-11, this is due to slightly differing changes in buffeing from the original publish formulae, this almost certainly helps when they are used dilute. To all intents and purposes they are still inter-changeable dev times though might be marginally different, probably only noticeable if the same scene is shot at the same time and the results compared side by side.

Ian

 

[MattKing]

While ID-11 replenisher has been discontinued, the different packaging (two part vs. single part) allows you to still use ID-11 in a replenishment regime - something that doesn't work with D-76 since D-76 replenisher is no longer available.

Here are the ID-11 replenishment instructions (from the new Ilford website): https://www.ilfordphoto.com/amfile/file/download/file_id/2009/product_id/708/

 

[trendland]

I never said it was a big difference, but I did see a difference and my eyes were like a Hawks back then. I still seemed to think it looked different/better, but don't really care to argue about it since I haven't used either in many years.

Ok - but when you just see a difference you may allways see a difference between several stock solutions.
Solution A (5weeks old) looks different to
Solution B (2days old )
You may notice a difference in temperature of developer 1,2 degree more than usual.
You may notice a difference between several developing times.
(2'15" looks different to 2'21")
It may be possible that your hawk-eyes
noticed this within 0,154 sec. everytime.
But I doubt a bit to this - sorry to say but
sometimes it is just our brain telling our
eyes what they should see.
A kind of darkroom voodoo (a voodoo priest is still sitting behind you in darkroom )
Obviously we can't see him but sometimes we hear his voice.

Well John - but on the other hand I shoud not exaggerate this and I will not do so because we all know differences in
formulation of ID-11 to different times.
It seams to be so that you have the same
developper over decades but in reality you bought every few years other ID- 11
because Ilford changes agends and other integrients.
The same is to D-76.
So you may be right John.Perhaps a little difference is to be seen (even without voodoo priest)
I haven't noticed this until now but perhaps I should check some films to this.
A difference more posible to me is between some substitude formulations
of D-76 ID 11.
AND THE GREAT QUESTION IS TO SOME
OTHER DEVELOPER AND ITS ORIGINALES.

with regards

 

[John Wiegerink]

There is a slight difference between the current versions of D76 and ID-11, this is due to slightly differing changes in buffeing from the original publish formulae, this almost certainly helps when they are used dilute. To all intents and purposes they are still inter-changeable dev times though might be marginally different, probably only noticeable if the same scene is shot at the same time and the results compared side by side.

Ian

Yes, when I thought there was a difference, but couldn't know for sure, I went back to one of my favorite subjects for a reshoot. A very huge Oak tree in the middle of a winter wheat field. I bulk-loaded Tri-X at the time so rolled out 20 exp. I shot the scene on a tripod and kept everything the same. In the darkroom I cut the film in half and process each in the two developers. My printing time changed just slightly, but contrast was still pretty much right on for grade 2 Ilfobrom. I seemed to pick the ID11 print as the best and ask a few kids(blind test) in the class if they saw a difference. Almost all said yes, but it was about a toss-up to them as to which was the winner. I do realize that that one variable of enlarger exposure time could have an effect on the outcome, but that didn't matter at the time since the ID11 print looked slightly and I say slightly better to me.

 

[pentaxuser]

They have both been around so long that each has adopted the stereotyped national characteristics. So the tops of the ID 11 packs are stiff and you need to mix it correctly as befits a nation known for its stiff upper lip and love of ceremony. The D76 on the other hand can be handled in a more relaxed fashion and enjoys being vigorously shaken as befits a nation that prides itself on being informal and the source of rock and roll.

pentiaxuser

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Is there any noticeable difference between ID11 and D76 used 1+1 with 35mm FP4.

no difference other than the manufacturer.

 

[Ian Grant]

no difference other than the manufacturer.

As I pointed out earlier in this thread there's no difference in the original published formulae, however the current commercial products differ in their buffering in practice development times vary slightly. the effects of the differing buffering will affect their activity when diluted.

Ian

 

[John Wiegerink]

Ian,
Maybe that explains why I saw a slight difference. I have never used either straight and always used diluted. Back then I think it was always 1+1. I wouldn't have thought that even 1+1 there should have been any difference, but hey, what do I know.

 

[Ian Grant]

John, Ilford list some slightly differing times for their films in D76 compared to ID-11, some are the same. Current D76 is somewhere between the published formula for D76 and D76d with Boric acid in the buffering which isn't present in ID-11. The change is almost certainly due to the increased popularity of using it dilute.

You might try using a 1+2 dilution which is more economic, I never liked 1+3. While there's no published times I drew a graph and extrapolated to get a starting point, many years ago an ex employee wanted quite a few rolls of FP4 processed in ID-11 at that 1+2 dilution and the results were superb, it works well with Perceptol and Xtol as well. Normally I use(d) these developers replenished for commercial use ans I could be processing 10-20 films at a time, or similar numbers of sheet films.

Ian

 

[John Wiegerink]

John, Ilford list some slightly differing times for their films in D76 compared to ID-11, some are the same. Current D76 is somewhere between the published formula for D76 and D76d with Boric acid in the buffering which isn't present in ID-11. The change is almost certainly due to the increased popularity of using it dilute.

You might try using a 1+2 dilution which is more economic, I never liked 1+3. While there's no published times I drew a graph and extrapolated to get a starting point, many years ago an ex employee wanted quite a few rolls of FP4 processed in ID-11 at that 1+2 dilution and the results were superb, it works well with Perceptol and Xtol as well. Normally I use(d) these developers replenished for commercial use ans I could be processing 10-20 films at a time, or similar numbers of sheet films.

Ian

Ian,
I have used ID11 at all dilutions to 1+3 and it worked just fine. I never bought D76 after the class I took and stayed with ID11 until I went to HC-110. Now I use none of the above since it's all Pyrocat-HDC or Xtol Replenished. I use the Pyrocat for almost everything except some street stuff and lower light shots where I need a little better speed. Still, if I didn't mix my own and couldn't get anything but ID11 or even D76 I could still be happy.

 

[Harry Stevens]

Good god ID11,D76 HC110 Is anybody really going to think that any of these developers are going to result in bad negatives coming out the developing tank....I would use any of them .........And I do

 

[John Wiegerink]

Good god ID11,D76 HC110 Is anybody really going to think that any of these developers are going to result in bad negatives coming out the developing tank....

Nope! At least not me anyway.

 

[Harry Stevens]

This is to fast.....

 

[Bill Burk]

Which one keeps longer? I ask because, well, sometimes I use D-76 1:1 from stock that is over a year old and it still works fine.

Haaa and I always use it 1:1 instead of 1+1 (to those with eagle eyes it's only a notation difference U.S. Kodak convention to use a colon vs U.K. convention to use a + which means exactly the same thing).

 

[swchris]

1:1 would be stock

 

[Ian Grant]

Which one keeps longer? I ask because, well, sometimes I use D-76 1:1 from stock that is over a year old and it still works fine.

Haaa and I always use it 1:1 instead of 1+1 (to those with eagle eyes it's only a notation difference U.S. Kodak convention to use a colon vs U.K. convention to use a + which means exactly the same thing).

It's not specifically a UK convention it's Word wide, it's just Eastman Kodak using a convention wrongly.

Ian