Kodak D-96A

Harold33 · Mar 18, 2012

The formula for Kodak D-96A (with ascorbic acid and without hydroquinone) is widely published on the internet. However, I never saw it in my Kodak official publications. I wonder where is the printed source ?

summicron1 · Mar 18, 2012

one of the old Dataguides probably has it -- I have a couple downstairs but am too lazy to go look, but I bet it's there -- formulae for dozens of different developers are in there.

Photo Engineer · Mar 18, 2012

Well, the formula used to be on the Kodak web site, but I cannot find it right OTOMH.

PE

cmacd123 · Mar 18, 2012

It is a MOTION Picture developer, I would guess it is in Module 15 on this page

http://motion.kodak.com/motion/uplo..._en_motion_support_processing_h2415_h2415.pdf

Photo Engineer · Mar 18, 2012

Thanks. That is where I was looking but could not find it. The formulas have been updated since I last looked at them. They had 2 sets of developers for reversal MP, one set contained KSCN as solvent and the -A formulas used DTOD as chemical fogging agent.

PE

Harold33 · Mar 19, 2012

cmacd123 said:
It is a MOTION Picture developer, I would guess it is in Module 15 on this page

http://motion.kodak.com/motion/uplo..._en_motion_support_processing_h2415_h2415.pdf

Thanks ! -- But where is D-96A ?

Photo Engineer · Mar 19, 2012

Table 15-6, page 19 by PDF count.

PE

cmacd123 · Mar 19, 2012

Photo Engineer said:
They had 2 sets of developers for reversal MP, one set contained KSCN

The "A" version seems to be a change to be compatible with the New Bleach. The older bleach contained more undesirable chemicals... Kodak Changed both the Plus-x and Tri-X reversal film, then said the older film will run OK but that Old plus-x gets a one step push with the new process. (they they canned all versions of Plus-x - go figure).

The film cans have the new process specified by just referring to the developer formula.

BTW, The lab in Toronto where I send my film just started to do reversal - and is using the new process. I innocently sent in a roll of FOMAPAN R-100 and got back 100 ft of STAIN. The lab offered me a credit for the processing and says that they can adjust the process "Next Time" But I am thinking my next movie making will be on 7222. There is still prints available with that lab, one of the few still doing 16mm prints.

Photo Engineer · Mar 19, 2012

Charles;

The change from KSCN to DTOD has nothing to do with the bleach. Sorry.

PE

CRhymer · Mar 19, 2012

Charles,

Who in Toronto is developing cine film (reversal), or anything else for that matter (besides Niagara)? I haven't used anyone there for a number of years, mostly due to shipping costs. I see that the B&W Film Factory site seems to have gone the way of all flesh.

Cheers,
Clarence

Harold33 · Mar 20, 2012

Photo Engineer said:
Table 15-6, page 19 by PDF count.
PE

I still don't see the "A" version (?)

frobozz · Mar 21, 2012

Since a previous poster referred to Plus-X and Tri-X reversal films, and they use D-94A developer, I wonder if that's where the confusion has set in. Kodak still specifies D-96 for negative camera films, but D-94A for reversal camera films. For instance:

http://motion.kodak.com/motion/uploadedFiles/US_plugins_acrobat_en_motion_products_bw_7266.pdf

vs

http://motion.kodak.com/motion/uplo...s/BW_Negative/Technical_Data/5222_techpub.pdf

(What I mean is that there is no such thing as D-96A, other than maybe some homebrewer modifying D-96 and then giving his concoction that name.)

Duncan

Photo Engineer · Mar 21, 2012

There is a D-96 modified for reversal processing. One version that I saw used KSCN as a solvent and another used DTOD. These were labeled D-96A. And now I am going crazy here trying to locate my notes on the subject.

PE

Harold33 · Mar 21, 2012

As far as I understood, Kodak D-96A has nothing to do with reversal processing. According to multiple sources on the internet, it's a variant of D-96 with L-ascorbic acid 2gr. instead of hydroquinone 1.5 gr. and nothing else.

I wonder where (and when ?) it was published. I ask the question because in an article published in the Journal of Film Preservation 64, 2002, 43ff., Johan Prijs made an interesting comparaison of D-96 and D-96A using 3 gr. of L-ascorbic acid (not 2 gr.), saying that it's the official Kodak formula.

Photo Engineer · Mar 21, 2012

I am having a hard time locating any Kodak source of D96A at all and at this time am doubtful of any source as being definitive. We may never know the correct answer. All the data I can find refers to D94 very clearly with references only to D95 and not D95A. I had one old reference to D06 and can no longer find it. I'll keep looking.

PE

Ian Grant · Mar 21, 2012

Kodak never made a developer called D96A.

I've never seen an official Kodak published version of the D96A formula however they did make a "D96 Acsorbic acid" which they also called Modified D96, this replaced the Hydroquinone in D96 with L-ascorbic acid, whether there were other slight modifications is unknown.

I think Harold's right that the D96a formula published in books and on the Internet is speculative rather than based on an official Kodak publication.

Something seems to reminds me that this variant was made for some large scale cine labs who were not permitted to discharge MQ developers because of the Hydroquinone. It was sold alongside the MQ version of D96.

Ian

nworth · Mar 21, 2012

There may be more than one D-96A. PE mentioned one modified for reversal processing - in two versions, one with KSCN and another with DTOD, for permanganate bleach. I have seen two others, both ascoribic acid based. These are probably not official Kodak formulas but rather studio or lab variations that have found favor outside their original users. I have heard of a D-96 modified for sound track development also using ascorbic acid. Since that would probably need to be a high contrast developer, it is probably not the usual D-96A. Just for discussion, here are the formulas I have. They don't include the reversal processing variants.

Kodak D-96 motion picture negative developer (the official formula)
Water (50C) 750 ml
Metol 2 g
Sodium sulfite (anh) 75 g
Hydroquinone 1.5 g
Potassium bromide 400 mg
or
Sodium bromide 350 mg
Borax (decahydrate) 4.5 g
WTM 1 l
pH at 27C =8.6
Specific gravity at 27C = 1.068

Kodak D-96A film developer
Distilled water 750 ml
Calgon 1 g
Sodium bromide 350 mg
l-ascobic acid 2 g
Metol 1.5 g
Borax pentahydrate 3.8 g (or decahydrate 5 g)
Sodium sulfite 60 g
WTM 1 l
For motion picture films

Variation (D-96A2)
Calgon 1 g
Metol 1.5 g
Sodium sulfite (anh) 75 g
L-ascorbic acid 2 g
Borax (deca) 4.5 g
Potassium bromide 400 mg
Water to make 1 l
This developer works at comparable development times to D-96, but at a lower pH. Granularity and sharpness is somewhat enhanced.
Ref: silvergrain.org

Photo Engineer · Mar 21, 2012

Some general information....

Any reversal process first developer can be the same as a negative developer, but for good cleanout it must contain a strong and controllable silver halide solvent at a moderately high level in the reversal version. This is even true of the E6 process. Sulfite and Chloride do not fit this description.

Historically, KSCN (Potassium Thiocyanate) was used. So, versions of D94 and D94A came into existence. At least that is my understanding. Then KSCN got a bad rap for many reasons and DTOD began to replace it. So, at one time, EK had 2 versions for reversal processes, one with KSCN and one with DTOD. These were used at high levels (for them) as they are very powerful.

As to KSCN and any bleach, remember that there is a wash, stop or clear step in these processes after the first developer and little KSCN would be carried over into the bleach. In fact, both Dichromate and Permanganate bleaches were used for years with KSCN before DTOD was "invented" in the 60s.

PE

Ian Grant · Mar 21, 2012

I've never seen D96 as a reversal developer that's one of the others, I can't remember which off-hand D94 or D97 maybe I have them but not to hand..

What's interesting with D96 (and the ascorbic version) is how it's related to Agfa 44/Agfa Ansco 17 and the Adox Borax MQ developer with it's reduced Sulphite compared to D76, this gives better effective EI, sharpness and finer grain.

nworth, I think the sound track variants are actually lower contrast, not higher.

Ian

Harold33 · Mar 21, 2012

Ian Grant said:
Kodak never made a developer called D96A.
I've never seen an official Kodak published version of the D96A formula however they did make a "D96 Acsorbic acid" which they also called Modified D96, this replaced the Hydroquinone in D96 with L-ascorbic acid, whether there were other slight modifications is unknown.
Ian

I suspected something like that but I wasn't sure (a nice example of internet diffusion, by the way).
Ian, do you know a printed source for "D96 Acsorbic acid" or Modified D96 ?

Ian Grant · Mar 21, 2012

Harold33 said:
I suspected something like that but I wasn't sure (a nice example of internet diffusion, by the way).
Ian, do you know a printed source for "D96 Acsorbic acid" or Modified D96 ?

Not for the formula only the MSDS sheets and other data and Google will find them I would think.

Ian

nworth · Mar 22, 2012

Ian Grant said:
...What's interesting with D96 (and the ascorbic version) is how it's related to Agfa 44/Agfa Ansco 17 and the Adox Borax MQ developer with it's reduced Sulphite compared to D76, this gives better effective EI, sharpness and finer grain....

Ian

That's not surprising. Before D-96, D-76 was the recommended negative developer for Eastman negative films. D-96 is a derivative. (D-16 was used before D-76.)

Ian Grant · Mar 22, 2012

nworth said:
That's not surprising. Before D-96, D-76 was the recommended negative developer for Eastman negative films. D-96 is a derivative. (D-16 was used before D-76.)

Way before D76 in 1918 J. Crabtree of Eastman Kodak published a Kodelon (p-Aminophenol hydrochloride) developer for Cine film processing, GEK Mees had worked on these developers in the UK while at Wratten and Wainright before loining Eastman Kodak as head of research. This early cine developer is very similar to Agfa's R10 formulated by Dr Momme Andresen (of Rodinal fame) a few years earlier.

This 1918 formula is also the first mention of Kodelon as an EK proprietary name for p-Amininophenol Hydrochloride.

Kodak Rapid pAmininophenol Cine developer (Crabtree 1918)

p-Aminophenol hydrochloride / Kodelon 7g
Sodium Sulphite (anhyd) 50g
Sodium Carbonate (anhyd0) 50g
Water to 1 litre
Time 1 min at 95°F / 35°C

By adding 10% (100g) of Sodium Sulphate the development time may be increased to 3 minutes.

Ian

nworth · Mar 22, 2012

Ian:

Your comments about the similarity of Agfa 17 to D-96 got me thinking. D-96 was introduced with the switch to thin emulsion films, at the same time XT replaced Background-X. (A mistake in my opinion. While not quite as sharp as XT, Background-X was a beautiful film.) The recommended for use of D-76 with the still film of that day and today is diluted 1+1 as a one shot. That is not suitable for motion picture lines, so D-96 was developed. Today's films are different yet, and a small controversy has developed over which produces the better quality - D-76 undiluted or D-76 1+1. Perhaps it is worth exploring Agfa 17/Ansco 44 as a possibly superior compromise.

Gerald C Koch · Mar 23, 2012

The formula given by nworth using NaBr is the correct one as published by Kodak on their motion picture film site. The Kodak formula gives NaBr as 0.35 g rather than in milligrams. Typically Kodak used sodium salts in many of their formulas. It was described as giving slightly higher granularity and sharpness than D-96. At the time the formula was released laws restricting the release of hydroquinone in ground water in Europe had become quite strict. It is listed in my notes as D-96a. I feel sure that if the name had been different then there would be a different name in my notes.

Kodak D-96A

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency