Microdol-X

[Krzys]

Can anyone give me the run down on this developer? I will be shooting some street scenes later this week with 35mm Delta 3200 then landscapes on the weekend with 120 PanF and Fp4. How can I use this developer for some interesting results? I have read about a loss of one stop when developing with Microdol-X stock and 1:1, but drastically different results at 1:3.

Thanks.

 

[Morry Katz]

I used to use Microdol X years ago with 35 mm Plus X, at 1:3. Nice results with good, printable negs. With Delta 3200? Don't know.
Microdol X is listed as being comparable to Ilford Perceptol, so informations should be transferable. Check with digitaltruth.com for more information.

Morry Katz - Lethbridge, Canada

 

[Denis K]

Microdol-X is like Ouzo wine. Some people love it others hate it. It's a high solvent developer and as such gives reduced grain at the expense of speed and reduced acutance. Because of the high solvent content the more you dilute it the less this characteristic is evident. If I had to guess I would say most folks use it at 1+3. Your film choices are interesting. Normally most people who use Delta 3200 like the gritty look of grain especially for street or concert photography and at the other end PanF+ already has a grain structure that leads most people to choose an acutance developer or one known for compensation instead of a low grain developer.

In my opinion Microdol-X does one thing better than any other developer and that is to render a large solid expanse as one tonal surface with no objectionable grain pattern that would make it look like a texture instead of a surface. I think a number of people like it for portraiture and architecture for this reason.

I really liked Microdol-X back when you could get the liquid form in the one quart bottles. When you were finished with the developer you ended up with a kick-ass amber bottle for storage of other working solutions. I wrote Kodak a letter one time saying that they should sell the liquid in 1-liter instead of 1-quart bottles to improve reuse and thus make the developer more popular but they never got back to me. I'll bet if they had done that Microdol-X would still be sold in liquid form. An empty 1-liter amber bottle is $4 to $5 a pop as it is.

 

[Nicholas Lindan]

Microdol-X is like a Haute Medoc. It goes best with a fine film - TMax100, PanF or the late Panatomic-X.

Despite protestations to the contrary, fine grain developers do go with fine grain films. When used with coarse grained film the high solvent action just makes for mushy grain and fuzzy pictures. Fine grain and high sharpness films have no need of sharply defined grain and (largely imaginary) edge effects and actuance to lend a false sense of detail. Microdol-X is also a low contrast developer - helping to tame the high contrast associated with very slow speed films.

Using it with high speed films is a bit of a contradiction. The speed loss with Microdol is more apparent in high speed films, and you would be better off using a slower film and a speed-enhancing developer. Most super-speed 3200 films are really 800 speed films that take well to pushing, and Microdol isn't anybody's first choice as a 'push' developer, though it has some application pushing very contrasty scenes with thick emulsion films as it limits highlight density.

I used to rather like it with Tri-X because it takes the gritty edge off this film - but you have to be very careful not to overexpose or overdevelop.

All that aside, there is no reason not to use it with any film you choose. Experiment with using it full strength or 1:3. There is no one who can tell you what you will or will not like.

 

[Christiaan Phleger]

Microdol-X 1:0 and Tmax 100 at 64 is as close as we'll ever get to the Panatomic-X/Microdol-X look. Great portrait combination.

 

[JonPorter]

I wouldn't use Microdol with Pan F or FP4+, especially for 120 or larger film. Those films are inherently fine-grained, so why sacrifice sharpness and film speed when you don't need to? My best results with Microdol (1:3) have been with 35mm Tri-X rated at 250.

 

[haclil]

Microdol acc. to Schwalberg

Back in Popular Photography's heyday--must've been the 70's--Bob Schwalberg was recommending highly dilute Microdol for contrast-control and reducing grain. As I remember, I thought he got a bit carried away with the idea. If memory serves, he recommended as much as 1:10 dilution!

Taking his advice, I found my subjects didn't need as much contrast-control as I got. Worse, they were often very thin.

Anyway, his articles on this subject were highly entertaining!

 

[haclil]

I.e....

...the negatives were thin, not the subjects!

 

[Krzys]

So no matter what dilution I will be loosing a stop? The effects are of grain/sharpness reduction just lessened at 1:3?

 

[Nicholas Lindan]

So no matter what dilution I will be loosing a stop? The effects are of grain/sharpness reduction just lessened at 1:3?

There is some speed loss at full strength. The amount varies with the film, but figure 1/2 to 1 stop with high speed films, 1/3 stop with medium speed and 1/4 stop with slow speed films.

At 1:3 there isn't any speed loss. With some films there will be an increase in grain. With TMX there isn't any grain increase worth talking about. IMO 1:3 works well with Tri-X rated at 320.

If you are using it with Delta 3200 you have to realize you will be a bit on your own. Shoot a test roll, bracket +1 and +2 stops, and develop half the roll at full strength and half at 1:3.

Then you will be the expert on D3200 in M-X and can come back and report your findings...

 

[Renato Tonelli]

I really liked Microdol-X back when you could get the liquid form in the one quart bottles. When you were finished with the developer you ended up with a kick-ass amber bottle for storage of other working solutions. I wrote Kodak a letter one time saying that they should sell the liquid in 1-liter instead of 1-quart bottles to improve reuse and thus make the developer more popular but they never got back to me. I'll bet if they had done that Microdol-X would still be sold in liquid form. An empty 1-liter amber bottle is $4 to $5 a pop as it is.[/QUOTE]

Yes, indeed! I must have about twenty of those amber bottles filled with various solutions. I still use a fair amount of Microdol-X 1:3 with Tri-X rated at 200.

 

[Rolleijoe]

I used to use it for Tri-X back in the '90s. Didn't care too much for HC-110 @ that point, and in fact still have half a case of liquid in those nifty little brown bottles.

1:3 was for me, the best way to go.

 

[VincentM]

After extensive search on the net, I was seduced by this developper, I can't wait to try it also.

 

[Rick A]

I always used Microdol-X with PanX --Beautiful combo especially for portraits. I use D-76 for everything else. I havent used MicroX in probably 20 years.
Rick