Microdol X Homebrew Question

JW PHOTO

Member
Joined
May 15, 2006
Messages
1,148
Location
Lake, Michig
Format
Medium Format

Yes, sorry PE a typo! It was suppose to read, "significantly lower the rate of development? Yes, I checked the Formulary's site and it's there, but the letter are switched around a little, but as long as it's the same I'm going to order some. I was just making sure since I read an article and thought I might try it. Here's a quote:

A comparison of three commonly used antifoggants was made. Their effect on the formation of fog and image density development was studied using a rate factor of development. This rate factor is defined as the slope of the curve for density-log development time. Bromide and benzotriazole were found to have no effect on the rate of development whereas 1-phenyl-5-mercaptotetrazole was found to significantly reduce the rate of development. Bromide and benzotriazole were found to cause a suppression of image density only by increasing the time before density formation begins.

Now, the reason I looked that up is because in another article stated that stack silver halides and filaments have a color tone and phenylmercaptotetrazole was said to alter it' The shift from different color tones during development and yellow was one and a final one was brown. I thought maybe if phenylmercaptotetrazole reduce the rate of development long enough then the silver strands, halides or filament would have a long enough time to evolve to the final brownish stage. I'm going to try it to find out anyway since it won't cost much to try. Cold weather and nothing going on anyway so time to play. Thanks PE, JW
 

Nicholas Lindan

Advertiser
Advertiser
Joined
Sep 2, 2006
Messages
4,248
Location
Cleveland, Ohio
Format
Multi Format
Tom1956 said:
I'm not versed in "chatroom etiquette" or whatever you call it. Is there any such thing as original poster's prerogative to deem a thread he started as completed?
Click to expand...

Sorry, but the OP doesn't have much say (well, apart from saying something) about where a thread goes. No more than the originator of a conversation at a party has any control.

Do the same thing you would do at a party - go to another conversation. If you want to thoroughly dispose of the matter click on thread tools (upper right at the top of the page, under the 'page x of y' and select 'ignore this thread'.

The most interesting threads do quite a bit of wandering and spawn other threads.
 

Photo Engineer

Subscriber
Joined
Apr 19, 2005
Messages
29,018
Location
Rochester, NY
Format
Multi Format
No, I will have no trouble over this thread.

Mercapto phenyl triazole implies that the mercapto is on the phenyl whereas phenyl mercapto tetrazole implies that the mercapto is on the tetrazole. Having the full formula would answer that ambiguity.

True PMT is able to "tone" images by controlling silver format as it forms, but due to potential speed and contrast losses, it is seldom used unless the film or paper is foggy to start with. It is then a good antifoggant for them. It is also used as a preservative in emulsions. PMT is not used in Microdol-X.

You might close a thread by contacting a moderator.

FINALLY: Quit this finagling to get the formula. I'm not going to give it out!

PE
 
OP
OP

Tom1956

Member
Joined
May 6, 2013
Messages
1,989
Location
US
Format
Large Format
Report on results

Reporting first results, I just finished developing a little 7 exposure 35mm roll I ran off for a test. T-Max 400 dated Feb 07, which I rated at ASA 200 and developed for 21 1/4 minutes, 68 degrees homemade Microdol 1:3. The Microdol formula of 5, 100, 30g salt. Just walked around in the snow snapping various sights on the property with Nikkormat FTn, tested accurate.
I've looked at the film through a backwards 50mm camera lens, and I think I'm going to be happy with this. Shadows hold detail, highlights not blocked. The ordinary exposed portion of film leader exhibits a slightly warm tone and is not totally opaque. And even though the film is so old and has sat in my Lloyds loader through all these non-aircondition southern US summers, there was no fog. If there is any fog, it surely doesn't look like much. Surprisingly clear.
I do not see why in the world I should care I don't have the "special secret ingredient". This IS Microdol. I think I'm going to be happy. Thanks, you guys.

Edited later. Now that the film has dried, it "dried down" a bit. I think I can back off developing time a hair. Film speed looks about right. I'll try some with ASA 250 and 19-20 minutes developing, just to see what shadows can stand. No use blocking up the dense portions unnecessarily.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

JW PHOTO

Member
Joined
May 15, 2006
Messages
1,148
Location
Lake, Michig
Format
Medium Format
Tom,
That sounds good. Sounds even better since you're bringing your speed up a bit too. A while back I found a formula for a Perceptol/Microdol clone that called for 7.5-100-30, but also boric acid. I can't say how much the boric acid was in the formula since I'm at our cottage for the next week or so and no notes here. It seemed to work very well, but I didn't have any mixed Perceptol or Microdol-x to compare it to at the time. Now I have a gallon of Perceptol mixed and will try the same formula and see what happens. I do know there was no brownish tinge to the emulsion like Microdol had. Many folks don't like these developers because of the speed dropping thing, but I hear some the same folks always talking about down-rating their Tri-X or Tmy-2 to about what your getting anyway. So, what's the big deal? I'd rather have fine grain, good resolution and excellent tone quality form something like Microdol-X/Perceptol especially if my film rating is what most folks use with other developers to begin with. Not the silver bullet, but it sure works nice with Acros and PanF+. Other films too I'm sure just like Verichrome Pan.
 
OP
OP

Tom1956

Member
Joined
May 6, 2013
Messages
1,989
Location
US
Format
Large Format
As far as I'm concerned, this is the Microdol formula, and is all I need. I've decided to release myself from the encumbrance of the "exact formula", if any. chemists and engineers records could be entirely different from what the board and CEO of a company actually went to market with. Or not. Who knows? We have 5/100/30, and it's the base formula and it works. So from there I'm happy to run with that and start shooting, with the matter behind me.
I never listened to the "speed drop" crowd on TX and Microdol 1:3. The same crowd will tell somebody else on another thread and another method how accuracy isn't all that important because film latitude will cover the errs.
The "brownish tinge" is slight, and not the sole defining trait. For instance, D-76 will make the exposed film leader opaque black. Microdol will give a zone 10 and film leader density some forgiveness--the definition of "compensating developer", in my book.
And to top off the list of advantages, I made myself happy with a bag of sulfite and jar of Metol off ebay, and a tube of Jewish salt. Pretty neat, huh?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

JW PHOTO

Member
Joined
May 15, 2006
Messages
1,148
Location
Lake, Michig
Format
Medium Format

Yup, and pretty darn cheap too! Have fun, JW
 

Gerald C Koch

Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2010
Messages
8,131
Location
Southern USA
Format
Multi Format
JW PHOTO said:
Yup, and pretty darn cheap too! Have fun, JW
Click to expand...

Remember too that Kodak once supplied two versions of this developer that were slightly different in composition. There was a liquid and a powder form. So small differences between a honebrew version and the "official" version may not be that important. Certainly Kodak formulated their versions to behave in an identical manner.

IIRC, Richard Henry in his excellent book Controls in Black-And-White Photography discussed the effects of small changes in a formula. Then there are also the versions of D-76 the official and D-76H which behave alike but are different in composition. There is so much leeway (some would say slop) in the photographic process that some things do not matter that much.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Werewolfman

Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2014
Messages
55
Format
Multi Format
Apparently, near the demise of Microdol-X, I found the listing to ALL OF ITS INGREDIENTS! (Including their "little secret")
It is as follows:
p-Methylaminophenol Sulfate (55-55-0)
Sodium Sulfite (7757-83-7)
Sodium Chloride (7647-14-5)
Boric Anhydride (1303-86-2) aka Boron Trioxide
Sodium Hexametaphosphate (10124-56-8) aka Calgon

Now, the question is, how much of these individual quantities are used to make Microdol-X?
 
Last edited:

John Wiegerink

Subscriber
Joined
May 29, 2009
Messages
3,675
Location
Lake Station, MI
Format
Multi Format
So, do you think that Boric Anhydride is the secret ingredient that gave the negative that special "Microdol-X brown" color? I'd be curious to see if it was, but I'm away from my darkroom and won't be able to try until I get back. JohnW
 

Photo Engineer

Subscriber
Joined
Apr 19, 2005
Messages
29,018
Location
Rochester, NY
Format
Multi Format


Not there!
 

Werewolfman

Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2014
Messages
55
Format
Multi Format
John Wiegerink said:
So, do you think that Boric Anhydride is the secret ingredient that gave the negative that special "Microdol-X brown" color? I'd be curious to see if it was, but I'm away from my darkroom and won't be able to try until I get back. JohnW
Click to expand...
No. Just the Metol itself causes that brown image tone. However, the other two now known ingredients I think is what causes the loss in film speed, and its unusual brightness in the separation of tones producing the wide array of black and all shades of greys and whites. Going through some of my old notes, Sodium Thiocyanate and Sodium Thiosulfate was also used in the halide silver reduction in film developers. Not much were used as these salts would "fix" the film.
 

Werewolfman

Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2014
Messages
55
Format
Multi Format
When I get the opportunity, I'm going to try to mix some Potassium Thiocyanate (1 gram) and see what happens. I think that I may be onto something. The original net weight for 1 gallon of Microdol-X is 482 grams. 400 of those grams is Sodium Sulfite. I'm going with these starting points and start to break these components down.
 

John Wiegerink

Subscriber
Joined
May 29, 2009
Messages
3,675
Location
Lake Station, MI
Format
Multi Format
I tried Pot. Thiocynate, but not that much (1g) and it didn't give the brown tone. Plain Metol doesn't either. Perceptol never did invoke the brown tone to the negative either. I used Microdol-X with the old Kodak Verichrome-Pan fild and it was a match made in Heaven. Wish I could still get both Microdol-X and Verichrome-Pan, but those good old days arre long gone. Supposedly Freestyle sells Legacy Microdol-X and I might just have to try that and see if it's got that magic ingredient that PE has us treasure hunt for. If it does I'm going to give up searching and just buy that.. JohnW
 

Werewolfman

Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2014
Messages
55
Format
Multi Format
When I used the D-23 formula straight, it did produce the brown image tone, similar to both, Microdol and Microdol-X. Also, the D-25 & DK-20 did the same thing, and Elon was its only developing agent in those developers as well. The D-25 is similar to the D-23 formula, but with 15 grams of Sodium Bisulfite added to its recipe. I'm going to try out what is on Microdol-X-s package and see what I come up with first. Now, if you're interested in some REAL Microdol-X by EKC, I have some if you're interested in some. It was packaged in those newer Mylar envelopes just prior to Eastman Kodak Company discontinuing Microdol-X.
 
Last edited:

Photo Engineer

Subscriber
Joined
Apr 19, 2005
Messages
29,018
Location
Rochester, NY
Format
Multi Format
There are two ingredients that are missing above. Dick Henn, the inventor, gave me the formula one day while chatting in his office. The ingredients are considered non-listable in MSDS but are shown in a variety of patents.

PE
 

John Wiegerink

Subscriber
Joined
May 29, 2009
Messages
3,675
Location
Lake Station, MI
Format
Multi Format
Photo Engineer said:
There are two ingredients that are missing above. Dick Henn, the inventor, gave me the formula one day while chatting in his office. The ingredients are considered non-listable in MSDS but are shown in a variety of patents.

PE
Click to expand...
PE,
You sly Devil you! I guess they must be fairly common and non-hazardous. OMG, I think I got it, they are Brown sugar and molasses. Got to get some sleep now so I can be up early to mix up a batch. JohnW
 

Photo Engineer

Subscriber
Joined
Apr 19, 2005
Messages
29,018
Location
Rochester, NY
Format
Multi Format
John, what if I said one of your suggestions was correct?

Just kidding, you get zero!

One is common and non-hazardous and the other is not very nice.

PE
 

Lachlan Young

Member
Joined
Dec 2, 2005
Messages
4,947
Location
Glasgow
Format
Multi Format
Photo Engineer said:
One is common and non-hazardous and the other is not very nice.
Click to expand...

An antifogging agent? PMT or something like that?

Regarding the others, either 2,4-dihydroxybenzophenone or something in US2333766A? (if I'm reading it right, those are the more unpleasant ones you are referring to?).
 

John Wiegerink

Subscriber
Joined
May 29, 2009
Messages
3,675
Location
Lake Station, MI
Format
Multi Format
Photo Engineer said:
John, what if I said one of your suggestions was correct?

Just kidding, you get zero!

One is common and non-hazardous and the other is not very nice.

PE
Click to expand...
Shucks! It seems I always get zero PE. It was just a fun statement anyway, but I do know there were some developers with sugar added. Brown or white, cane or beet? Can't say. Glad you made it through another snowy winter PE. Saw my first Robbin last Wed. JohnW
 

Photo Engineer

Subscriber
Joined
Apr 19, 2005
Messages
29,018
Location
Rochester, NY
Format
Multi Format
Lachlan Young said:
An antifogging agent? PMT or something like that?

Regarding the others, either 2,4-dihydroxybenzophenone or something in US2333766A? (if I'm reading it right, those are the more unpleasant ones you are referring to?).
Click to expand...

Nope. Sorry. However, to be honest, both PMT and DHB were both rather useful. Just not in this developer.

PE
 

Lachlan Young

Member
Joined
Dec 2, 2005
Messages
4,947
Location
Glasgow
Format
Multi Format
Photo Engineer said:
Nope. Sorry. However, to be honest, both PMT and DHB were both rather useful. Just not in this developer.

PE
Click to expand...

So it's something intended to prevent dichroic fog & in a small enough quantity to be left off the MSDS?

Further digging into the Henn patents suggests that it's unlikely to be Chlororesorcinol, and therefore something like polyvinylpyrrolidone (which seems to be used in an extremely small quantity per litre) might be a reasonable contender?
 

John Wiegerink

Subscriber
Joined
May 29, 2009
Messages
3,675
Location
Lake Station, MI
Format
Multi Format
I looked at polyvinylpyrrolidone or a derivative. I also thought about mercaptotetrazole? I think I'll surrender and just try LegacyPro Mic-X from Freestyle since it's said to impart a brownish image tone. Might be why Ron can't say anything? He might have some connection and is sworn to secrecy. JohnW
 

Photo Engineer

Subscriber
Joined
Apr 19, 2005
Messages
29,018
Location
Rochester, NY
Format
Multi Format
Lachlan, you got one of them in your post. Now, what is it?

It is..... TA DA.... Chlororesorcinol.

Now, you got one, what is the other????

PE
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…