Ilfords equivalents?

ChristopherCoy · Dec 28, 2012

I'm planning on attempting a 52 roll project for 2013, and I want to switch from Kodak stuff to Ilford stuff to do it.

I've been shooting TriX, and using XTOL, Dektol, Kodak Indicator Stopbath, and Kodak Fixer.

Would the Ilford equivalent to the above be HP5, Ilfosol 3, Ilford Multigrade, and Ilford Rapid Fixer?

Ilford doesn't make a stop bath, so I'll continue to use the rest of the Kodak that I still have until I find a replacement.

I'd like to stick to Ilford brand stuff, but if there is something more comparable to XTOL than Ilfosol, I'm open to trying it.

MattKing · Dec 28, 2012

Christopher:

Ilford makes a very good citric acid based stop bath - Ilfostop, which I use for printing (I use Kodak indicator stop bath for film).

I recommend either Ilford Rapid Fixer or Hypam in preference to Kodak Fixer. Kodak Rapid Fixer is closely equivalent to Ilford Rapid Fixer, except the Kodak Rapid Fixer is only sold with the hardener additive, in the quantities I use. Unfortunately (for some) the Rapid Fixers are liquid, so they can involve much more in shipping costs.

I don't know that there is a close equivalent to XTol in the Ilford range.

It seems to me that Bromophen is the closest equivalent to Dektol in the Ilford range.

TriX and HP5+ are different, and if you combine a change in film with a change in developers, you will have changed a lot of variables. Not generally a good idea before starting a long project.

Why change if you are happy with what you are using? The Kodak chemistry is manufactured by Champion, who are stable and long term The Kodak film is manufactured by the same people who are manufacturing the Kodak motion picture film - that contract remains lucrative and is guaranteed until at least 2015.

adelorenzo · Dec 28, 2012

Ilford makes Ilfostop stop bath, although AFAIK nothing but the film and developer is really critical to the final result.

ChristopherCoy · Dec 28, 2012

MattKing said:
Why change if you are happy with what you are using? The Kodak chemistry is manufactured by Champion, who are stable and long term The Kodak film is manufactured by the same people who are manufacturing the Kodak motion picture film - that contract remains lucrative and is guaranteed until at least 2015.

Because I don't want to put it off for another two more years. I'd like to just switch, relearn a new film/chemistry setup, and move on.

And I figured a 52 roll project would be a good motivator for me to do it with.

StoneNYC · Dec 28, 2012

As far as I've been able to discern from my limited scope of understanding, Ilfsol 3 is best used for the lower ASA ilford "traditional" grain films like Pan F+ and FP4 while DD-X is specifically for the full line of Delta series which has the T grain emulsion. As far as HP5, depends what you want, I know that Perceptol matched with HP5 gives a very fine grain for traditional grain high speed film like HP5, but at that point why not just shoot Delta 400 and DD-X developer?

Why are you choosing the HP5 over Delta 400? That's your first question before you choose a developer to go with it, if you WANT the grain that HP5 can produce, then Ifsol S would work well on it, but I'm not sure how long they will still cary that line, since it was "replaced" by ilfsol 3, which is focused more on the lower ASA films. I plan to develop a roll of HP5 sitting in my fridge, I can develop it in Ilfsol 3 or DD-X and send you a full TIFF scan of one of the images if that might help? it's just christmas photos I believe... just let me know which chemistry

albada · Dec 28, 2012

You can avoid switching developers by using a clone of XTOL. Here's one sold by Freestyle Photo:

http://www.freestylephoto.biz/74771...der-BandW-Film-Developer-to-make-5?cat_id=301

Mark Overton

StoneNYC · Dec 28, 2012

After looking xtol over a bit, it seems like Ilford's ID-11.

Also, the "clone" isn't a clone it's just repackaged / relabeled xtol so that solution won't work, when Kodak stops producing developer, the clove won't be available either...

~Stone

Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1, 5DmkII / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic | Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk

MattKing · Dec 28, 2012

StoneNYC said:
After looking xtol over a bit, it seems like Ilford's ID-11.

Also, the "clone" isn't a clone it's just repackaged / relabeled xtol so that solution won't work, when Kodak stops producing developer, the clove won't be available either...

~Stone

Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1, 5DmkII / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic | Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk

ID-11 is essentially D76 - significantly different from X-Tol.

And as Kodak no longer manufactures XTol themselves (Champion does it for them) there is no reason to expect XTol to disappear.

DriesI · Dec 28, 2012

I use Ilfosol 3 with HP5 and it works really well. No problem with grain. If you don't like grain, use Delta 100.

Steve Smith · Dec 28, 2012

MattKing said:
I don't know that there is a close equivalent to XTol in the Ilford range.

I recall that LC29 is supposed to be similar - I could be wrong so it will need investigating.

EDIT: No it's not! LC29 is similar to HC110.

Steve.

markbarendt · Dec 28, 2012

HP 5 IMO is really nice once I get to MF or bigger, it is one of my staples in 4x5. For 35mm I'm not so sold. Bit grainier than I prefer. If you go with HP5 in 135, a dose of perceptol might be good but that slows it down a ways.

So to keep things simple for fast film I use Delta 400 in DD-X on both MF and in 135. Shoot this at 500 normally but works fine from 200-2000 for what I do.

The other combo I like real well is FP4 in DD-X. I shoot this at 125 normally, works fine for me from 25-250.

K-G · Dec 28, 2012

On their web-page, Ilford has equivalents charts for both Kodak, Agfa and Forte products. I enclose a link.

Karl-Gustaf

http://www.ilfordphoto.com/products/page.asp?n=10

Terry Christian · Dec 28, 2012

XTOL has no Ilford equivalent, although Mark Overton linked to Freestyle's true Arista equivalent above.

Ilford's DD-X is a completely different developer, but it will get you similar results, IMHO.

TheFlyingCamera · Dec 28, 2012

One of the beauties of doing your own black-and-white is that you have so much freedom with chemistry. Since you're switching, now would be the time to investigate some non-proprietary developer formulas (many of which you can buy pre-mixed if you're averse to home-brewing from scratch). I'd look into Rodinal (or its equivalent), or my favorite, Pyrocat HD. You can get it from Bostick & Sullivan in a two-part kit, and all you have to do is add some hot water to the bottle for part A and you're ready to go. I use it with all my films, from Tmax 400 to FP4+. Try developing film in a pyro developer sometime and I promise you it'll be a revelation.

StoneNYC · Dec 28, 2012

markbarendt said:
HP 5 IMO is really nice once I get to MF or bigger, it is one of my staples in 4x5. For 35mm I'm not so sold. Bit grainier than I prefer. If you go with HP5 in 135, a dose of perceptol might be good but that slows it down a ways.

So to keep things simple for fast film I use Delta 400 in DD-X on both MF and in 135. Shoot this at 500 normally but works fine from 200-2000 for what I do.

The other combo I like real well is FP4 in DD-X. I shoot this at 125 normally, works fine for me from 25-250.

Mark,

Why do you use DD-X with FP4 when Ilfsol 3 is the branded match? It's not.a Tgrain developer so just curious why you like DD-X over Ilfsol 3?

~Stone

Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1, 5DmkII / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic | Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk

StoneNYC · Dec 28, 2012

MattKing said:
ID-11 is essentially D76 - significantly different from X-Tol.

And as Kodak no longer manufactures XTol themselves (Champion does it for them) there is no reason to expect XTol to disappear.

whoops. I was going off descriptions there, I ou have real world experience with Ilfsol 3 and DD-X

~Stone

Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1, 5DmkII / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic | Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk

albada · Dec 28, 2012

StoneNYC said:
After looking xtol over a bit, it seems like Ilford's ID-11.
Also, the "clone" isn't a clone it's just repackaged / relabeled xtol so that solution won't work, when Kodak stops producing developer, the clove won't be available either...

What causes you to believe that this is relabelled XTOL? Please cite a reference if available. It surprises me that Kodak would permit such a thing in their contract with Champion.
Assuming this really is relabelled XTOL, then as MattKing pointed out, even if Kodak shuts down, there would be no reason for Champion to stop supplying this developer to Freestyle (unless sales-volume would be too low to bother with).

Mark Overton

StoneNYC · Dec 28, 2012

albada said:
What causes you to believe that this is relabelled XTOL? Please cite a reference if available. It surprises me that Kodak would permit such a thing in their contract with Champion.
Assuming this really is relabelled XTOL, then as MattKing pointed out, even if Kodak shuts down, there would be no reason for Champion to stop supplying this developer to Freestyle (unless sales-volume would be too low to bother with).

Mark Overton

Honesty can't cite a reference, but I remember reading a list of products that Were Arista labeled that were really Kodak, I could have sworn that was listed as well as tri-x being part of am the Arista line of film.

I have no recollection as to where I read that, it was a while ago and I don't use it so I can't compare personally.

Sorry to upset the balance here.

~Stone

Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1, 5DmkII / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic | Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk

RalphLambrecht · Dec 28, 2012

adelorenzo said:
Ilford makes Ilfostop stop bath, although AFAIK nothing but the film and developer is really critical to the final result.

tha's my understanding too.

erikg · Dec 28, 2012

StoneNYC said:
Honesty can't cite a reference, but I remember reading a list of products that Were Arista labeled that were really Kodak, I could have sworn that was listed as well as tri-x being part of am the Arista line of film.

I have no recollection as to where I read that, it was a while ago and I don't use it so I can't compare personally.

Sorry to upset the balance here.

~Stone

Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1, 5DmkII / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic | Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk

Champion does make chemistry for Freestyle, but I don't know how the arista xtol relates to the kodak branded stuff. It would be easy enough to test, and if it walks like a duck...

markbarendt · Dec 28, 2012

StoneNYC said:
Mark,

Why do you use DD-X with FP4 when Ilfsol 3 is the branded match? It's not.a Tgrain developer so just curious why you like DD-X over Ilfsol 3?

~Stone

Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1, 5DmkII / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic | Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk

I don't know where you are getting your info but according to Ilford DD-X provides; the best image quality, finest grain, and fastest speed for FP4.

http://www.ilfordphoto.com/Webfiles/2010712125850702.pdf

My personal experience with FP4 and DD-X has been really pleasing and really easy and really forgiving.

markbarendt · Dec 28, 2012

Michael R 1974 said:
Stone - actually ID-11 (D-76) is still the best overall "match" for FP4 (and virtually any other film!).

I'll grant ID-11 is a really good developer but better than DD-X, says who? Got a reference for that?

StoneNYC · Dec 28, 2012

Michael R 1974 said:
Stone - actually ID-11 (D-76) is still the best overall "match" for FP4 (and virtually any other film!). DDX is recommended by Ilford for best overall image quality with FP4 in a liquid developer (as opposed to a powder mix). DDX is not just for Delta films. And it gives a little more film speed in general than ID-11. Beyond that it's just up to each photographer to work with the combo and decide if he is happy with the tonality, and the balance of sharpness, graininess and speed.

http://www.ilfordphoto.com/products/product.asp?n=63&t=Film+Developers

That's where I read that Ilfsol 3 was the match for FP4...

~Stone

Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1, 5DmkII / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic | Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk

MattKing · Dec 28, 2012

Back to Christopher's initial plan.

It occurs to me that a 52 week project would be an ideal environment for transitioning to use of XTol in a replenishment regime.

albada · Dec 28, 2012

StoneNYC said:
Honesty can't cite a reference, but I remember reading a list of products that Were Arista labeled that were really Kodak, I could have sworn that was listed as well as tri-x being part of am the Arista line of film.
I have no recollection as to where I read that, it was a while ago and I don't use it so I can't compare personally.
Sorry to upset the balance here.

Fair enough. Sorry about challenging you. There's so much hocum on the internet that I've gotten in the habit of questioning anything that's surprising. Anyway, Kodak published an older formula for XTOL in their patent, so it wouldn't take much work to reverse-engineer the current product and make a close clone.

And speaking of patents, the XTOL patent (US5853964) is dated Dec. 29, 1998, and thus has not yet expired. So the Eco-Pro product must either be produced with Kodak's approval or Freestyle is living dangerously.

Mark Overton

Ilfords equivalents?

ChristopherCoy

MattKing

Moderator

adelorenzo

ChristopherCoy

StoneNYC

albada

StoneNYC

MattKing

Moderator

DriesI

Steve Smith

markbarendt

K-G

Terry Christian

TheFlyingCamera

Membership Council

StoneNYC

StoneNYC

albada

StoneNYC

RalphLambrecht

erikg

markbarendt

markbarendt

StoneNYC

MattKing

Moderator

albada

Ilfords equivalents?

Moderator

Moderator

Membership Council

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency