Is there a liquid alternative to Xtol?

[sidearm613]

Here you go, sourced from an article written by Sandy King about pyro developers, in particular Pyrocat:
(ehem, and I quote)
"image stain is produced in those areas of the negative where silver is being reduced, and this stain is proportional to the amount of silver: least in the shadows where there are areas of low silver density, greatest in the highlights. Since the exposing light sees the stain as increased printing density, total negative density is equal to the combined silver and stain densities. The result is that the stain masks film grain by filling in between silver grains, resulting in both increased acutance and finer tonality in the final print. This effect is seen in negatives of all sizes but the impact is particularly dramatic in 35mm and roll film formats."

and the URL, for further reading...
http://unblinkingeye.com/Articles/PCat/pcat.html

 

[Cainquixote]

I'm still trying to nail pyrocat down with how i expose, but it is probably one of the best developers on the market.

There is a subtlety and nuance in the negatives that i haven't found in any other developer.

I wish i hadn't waited so long to try it.

 

[Chazzy]

I'm still trying to nail pyrocat down with how i expose, but it is probably one of the best developers on the market.

There is a subtlety and nuance in the negatives that i haven't found in any other developer.

I wish i hadn't waited so long to try it.

I'm a happy Xtol user, but if I were going to try anything else, it would probably be one of the Pyrocats. Unfortunately, I'm confused about all the variations. For now, the Xtol is enough for me, although I will probably change to Freestyle's generic version of it.

 

[Tom Stanworth]

I believe Ilford DDX is similar to Xtol

I agree. The chemistry is quite different but the results are not dissimilar:

• Near identical speed (full box).
• Fine grain. Xtol has slightly finer grain.
• Moderate acutance. DDX seems to have a touch more bite due to slightly bigger grain.

Use DDX from 1+7 to 1+9 for greater economy and no discernible quality difference.

I use both so if one vanishes I am fully familiar with the other. I wanted one dev from each stable with similar speed and with all the films I have used them both with I have never seen any real difference in speed which means well within 1/3 stop.

 

[Jedidiah Smith]

Hi again, enjoying the further info on the Pyro stuff. Thanks David, especially for the article - that was a good read. Sounds exactly like what I'm after. I know I could shoot a larger format, and I have shot MF 6x7 and 6x 4.5 before - but I just love the challenge of getting the most out of a "postage stamp" neg, I guess.
I will definitely try some Pyro...the next thing is to figure out which variation (like Chazzy states) - there are so many, now that I start looking at them! Maybe I'll get on the computer tonight and do some reading on the nuances of each.
Jed

 

[Ronald Moravec]

DDX from Ilford.

 

[jeroldharter]

If you really want liquid, try Kodak Polymax or Ilford DDX. I used Polymax before switching to Xtol and was pleased with it but I prefer the results with Xtol (with TMY2 4x5 and 8x10).

 

[Cainquixote]

meow

I'm a happy Xtol user, but if I were going to try anything else, it would probably be one of the Pyrocats. Unfortunately, I'm confused about all the variations. For now, the Xtol is enough for me, although I will probably change to Freestyle's generic version of it.

You can't go wrong with hd.
I ordered from the formulary and had a package in hand a week later.

Pretty awesome since i'm stationed in Italy

 

[rskmd]

consider making your own vitamin c/ phenidone/ propylene glycol developer. easy to make. cheap and is quite similar to xtol.

 

[brianmquinn]

SPUR HRX-3 available at Freestyle
http://www.aphog.de/downloads/Spur/Presse-HRX-3-engl.pdf

 

[fschifano]

I'm a happy Xtol user, but if I were going to try anything else, it would probably be one of the Pyrocats. Unfortunately, I'm confused about all the variations. For now, the Xtol is enough for me, although I will probably change to Freestyle's generic version of it.

I've used Freestyle's generic XTOL, when it was marketed as Ktol and it behaved identically to the original. Choice here is really a no-brainer. For me, XTOL is easier to source and, when factoring in shipping costs, less expensive locally, so that's what I use.

 

[ntenny]

consider making your own vitamin c/ phenidone/ propylene glycol developer. easy to make. cheap and is quite similar to xtol.

That's PC-Glycol, or if you replace the glycol with triethanolamine it's PC-TEA. It's where I ended up with much the same criteria as the OP---I liked the convenience of a liquid developer, but wasn't entirely thrilled with HC-110, and I like the hack value of mixing my own chemistry. (It's nice not to have to worry about my developer being discontinued, too.) The developing agents are the same, and in much the same proportions, as Xtol.

I ended up switching from HC-110 to PC-TEA as an everyday developer, but I have to agree with some other posters that the difference isn't night and day. PC-TEA, with little or no solvent action, seems to be a little sharper, and I've convinced myself that there's a Certain Something about ascorbic acid as a developing agent that confers a different Look---but that's such a subjective judgement that I'm not confident it's based on anything concrete at all.

-NT