ID11 Useful Storage Life

[pentaxuser]

To make way for Perceptol I threw away the remants of my ID11 today. The stock solution was made up in mid July 2004 so was about 17 months old. My understanding is that even in a compressed concertina bottle, using ID11 stock solution at anything over 12 months is risky.

As I recall it when it was made up it was a pale straw colour, similar to white wine. Well it came out the same colour. Is this proof absolute that I have thrown away good ID11 or is colour not a satsifactory test. If so is there anyway to test a stock solution other than taking a chance and using it. Given that most negs are not easily repeated this could be a big gamble if it is the only test.

Pentaxuser

 

[srs5694]

You could always shoot a short roll of pointless photos (snaps of your darkroom, say). This is, of course, a bit easier and less costly if you bulk roll your film. Short of that, you could take a snip of film (say, the leader or part of it) and see if the developer blackens the film. If it does, that indicates that the developer is still active, although it doesn't prove that it'll have precisely the level of activity that fresh developer would.

 

[gainer]

You could always shoot a short roll of pointless photos (snaps of your darkroom, say). This is, of course, a bit easier and less costly if you bulk roll your film. Short of that, you could take a snip of film (say, the leader or part of it) and see if the developer blackens the film. If it does, that indicates that the developer is still active, although it doesn't prove that it'll have precisely the level of activity that fresh developer would.

I doubt that anyone will believe me, but you can extend the life of either ID-11 or D-76 by adding hydroquinone. It works even better with a PQ developer.

 

[hka]

Throw away. Take no risks for that lousy $5,= and start with fresh dev.

 

[Bob F.]

Although I have used 14 month old ID-11 which was also the original colour, I would say bin it unless you can run a test roll through it. My guess is that it is probably OK but if you can't easily repeat the negs why risk it? I used it on some HP5+ l that I shot in a local park so it was not an important roll. It came out fine, but I have no idea if there was a 5% or 10% loss of activity...

Cheers, Bob.

 

[pentaxuser]

Thanks for the replies. The thread was more driven by curiosity than thrift. My conclusion based on your collective replies would be that even if it looks the same, it may not be the same and there is no scientific test that doesn't involve wasting film or taking a big risk with negs that may not be repeatable.

Even had it proved OK, you'd always be left with the nagging doubt that next time at about the same storage interval something else may have been different. All thing are seldom equal except in scientifically controlled experiments.

I now await a reply from Lowell Huff which begins "Now if only you had stored the Clayton developer equivalent of ID11...."

Only kidding Lowell but I still await your demonstration supported by evidence that a single 10 minute wash of fibre paper is sufficient. Sadly as each day goes by that faith wavers.

Pentaxuser