Microdol

[Papa Tango]

I note a lot of different developers chatted about, but no one ever seems to mention Microdol. Every so often, especially with slow, thick films I still use it with superb results. Anyone else?

 

[jim appleyard]

Oh yeah. It's a great one for fine grain and gives good tonality, but you have to deal with the speed loss. I've had folks tell me that they never had much luck with Mic-X, but they never knew you would lose 1 stop in speed. If you compensate for this, it's great.

I haven't used it 1+3 much. Apparently the speed loss isn't is great, but I'm not sure yet. Further testing is needed on my part.

 

[jim appleyard]

Too bad it's not made in liquid form anymore. That must have been sweet.

 

[Dave Swinnard]

I used Ilford's Perceptol (which has been described as their version of Microdol-X) diluted 1+3 for Acros in both 35mm and 120 sizes as my standard for several years. Great sharpness with intermittent agitation.

I have switched to Microdol-X (CDN $11 gallon package) now that Perceptol is unavailable locally (special order, full case-lot only), and am happy with the results. I don't mind the speed loss (~1/2 stop or so) as I'm typically on a tripod and tend to shoot objects moving only on a geological time-scale.

(I must admit I'm trying Pyrocat-HD now as I'm tired of having to rely on an unsure product availability)

 

[RichSBV]

It was my only developer 30+ years ago. I finally gave up on it only because I couldn't find the replenisher any more and as I remember, it likes to be replenished.

I would happily go back to it...

 

[gnashings]

I don't know about BC - but I think Henry's sells Canada -wide, and I just got a bunch of Perceptol - $3.69 CDN for a package to mix 1L. Check their website.

Peter.

 

[jim appleyard]

For those who can't get Microdol-X, there's a homebrew version on page 69 of the "Film Dev. Cookbook". I've tried it and it works quite well. You will lose about 1 stop in speed tho'.

 

[df cardwell]

Perceptol is Ilford's copy of Microdol X.

Do a search for Perceptol and you'll see quite a lot.

It's probably at its best with non t-grain films, and dilution reduces the speed loss to, say, D76.

great stuff.

 

[pnance]

I still use mostly Microdol. I even replenish. Love the negatives. Expose at EI 200. They don't make the replenisher anymore, darn. I have one more gal can to mix up when current stock is gone. Then will have to try the suggested replacement replenisher formula from Kodak.

To make 3 U.S. quarts (2.84 litres) of replenishing solution:

Start with approximately 2 U.S. quarts (2 litres) of water at 90-100°F (32-38°C).
Add the contents of one packet of KODAK MICRODOL-X Developer (size to make one U.S. gallon—CAT No. 196 9724) with sufficient stirring to keep the chemicals suspended.
Add 24 grams of photographic grade Sodium Carbonate, monohydrate.
Mix until the components are dissolved.
Add water to bring the solution volume to 3.0 U.S. quarts (2.84 litres).
Mix until the solution is uniform.

A starting point replenishment rate of 30 mL per roll of 135-36 exposure film (or equivalent) is suggested.
-- from kodak j4027

 

[Tom Hoskinson]

For those who can't get Microdol-X, there's a homebrew version on page 69 of the "Film Dev. Cookbook". I've tried it and it works quite well. You will lose about 1 stop in speed tho'.

Also, Anderson's Microdol-X Substitute Recipe is posted In the Apug Chemical Recipes.

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

 

[Papa Tango]

It was my only developer 30+ years ago. I finally gave up on it only because I couldn't find the replenisher any more and as I remember, it likes to be replenished.

I would happily go back to it...

Yup, it was about 35 years ago I started with it. Combined with Pan-X shot at about ASA 16, the outcomes were incredible! Have found it to be a good match with the Efke 25, as well as Bergger/J&C 200. Doesn't do too badly with Tri-X @ 280, but can eat out the highlights if one is not careful.

Here is the really funny thing. I have always shot most BW film at a major ISO point just below its rated speed. Better density and all. It was not until just a couple years ago in the alt.rec.photo forum that Richard Knoppow jolted me to reality in telling me about the speed drop. Serendipity in reducing speed helped to deliver properly exposed negatives for years without even getting the chemical "why". I never use it in a manner for replenishment anyway. A couple rolls or one 6 shot tank, and ditch it.

 

[bobfowler]

I use a lot of Microdol-X, mostly 1:3. I've also used Perceptol with identical results, so Ilford's "copy" is pretty damned good. Once my current supply of Microdol is used up, I'll be making the switch to Perceptol and be leaving the Great Yellow Father behind. Come to think of it, Microdol-X is the only Kodak chemical I currently use...

 

[fschifano]

I think Microdol is a bit of a dinosaur, given the advancements in fine grain films, which, ironically, seems to have favored the continued use of Rodinal, another dinosaur of a different species. Microdol costs not only speed, and lots of it, but sharpness as well. The grain produced by Xtol with most films is fine grained enough for most users, yet produces full film speed and good sharpness. Diluting Microdol helps with the sharpness and the speed to some extent, but sacrifices the fine grain, and in the end, offers no advantage over Xtol. None of the above is meant to suggest that Microdol is not capable of excellent results in capable hands, just my view on why it's not as popular as it once was.

My sentiments exactly. Thirty or so years ago, it was the thing to use. I stopped using because the speed loss was intolerable. Tri-X rated at EI 200 wasn't all that much better, speed wise, than Plus-X and the grain was certainly not finer. If I needed the speed, the Tri-X would go into D-76 and I'd live with the grain. Otherwise, Plus-X at EI of 100 to 125 would give me much better grain and sharpness with only a slight loss of speed over Tri-X in Microdol-X. Today's versions of these two classics are much better in every respect. When paired with XTOL, the results are head and shoulders above anything I was able to get in the old days.

 

[tbm]

Microdol-X is my favorite developer. I find it gives me delicious negatives and prints. I previously tried Xtol, D-76, HC110, and others and went back to Microdol-X. Here are my recommendations:

Tri-X (EI of 400): dilute 1:3, 75 degrees, 18 minutes
Tri-X (EI of 650): dilute 1:3, 75 degrees, 20-22 minutes
Delta 100 (EI of 100): dilute 1:3, 75 degrees, 18 minutes
Acros 100 (EI of 80): dilute 1:3, 75 degrees, 18 minutes

Try any of these and be dazzled by the wonderful tonal contrast, highlights control, and sharpness! I just bought and received from B&H in NYC another 10 packages of it and can't wait to develop some more film!

 

[pnance]

I investigated all the various recipes for Microdol replacements, but a wonder when they don't include sodium chloride. It's supposed to be the secret ingredient and isn't in most of the formula including the ones mentioned above.

I replenish because it works, I get about 40 rolls per liter of developer, then start again with a new batch. I can't get cheaper, or for that matter better negatives from anything else I've tried. (I haven't tried Xtol yet, and in a 5 liter package, probably not for awhile, unless I find a good formula for it)

 

[Mark Layne]

I still use Microdol and recently Perceptol 1+2 for most Roll films except TX for which I seem to like Xtol
Incidentally I was given some bottles of liquid Microdol that is over 30 years old and to my amazement it still works with about a 10% increase in time
Mark

 

[jim appleyard]

(I haven't tried Xtol yet, and in a 5 liter package, probably not for awhile, unless I find a good formula for it)

You could homebrew Mytol, an X-Tol copy. I haven't tried it yet, but lots of folks like it.

 

[jim appleyard]

(I haven't tried Xtol yet, and in a 5 liter package, probably not for awhile, unless I find a good formula for it)

You could homebrew Mytol, an X-Tol copy. I haven't tried it yet, but lots of folks like it. You could make as little as you want.

 

[Tom Hoskinson]

I investigated all the various recipes for Microdol replacements, but a wonder when they don't include sodium chloride. It's supposed to be the secret ingredient and isn't in most of the formula including the ones mentioned above.

I replenish because it works, I get about 40 rolls per liter of developer, then start again with a new batch. I can't get cheaper, or for that matter better negatives from anything else I've tried. (I haven't tried Xtol yet, and in a 5 liter package, probably not for awhile, unless I find a good formula for it)

Regarding the addition of sodium chloride to the Anderson Recipe (and BTW, NaCl was an ingredient in both Microdol-X and Perceptol).

"By Tom Hoskinson - 02:22 AM, 10-05-2004 Edit Rating: None
Pat Gainer suggests that adding 30 to 50 grams of canning salt or iodine free table salt to this recipe may result in a reduction in granularity without significantly increasing development time."

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

 

[reellis67]

I use it for all my 400 speed films, but I will be moving to Perceptol once my supply of X runs out (probably this weekend) now that it is available again. I always use it 1:3 and the results are quite nice. I tend to shoot with slower films though, so I don't use a lot of it. Still, it served as a good stand it for Perceptol when it was on hiatus.

- Randy

 

[Mark Layne]

Perceptol or Microdol diluted will give better acutance than Xtol which lacks sharpness

 

[fhovie]

Microdol has never given better accutance than xtol for me - When I magnify the negatives, I can see the edge of the grain very clearly in xtol and with Microdol they look like little smudges - not little dots. The sodium chloride and sodium sulfite in Microdol is very solvent and erodes the grain edges.

 

[Mark Layne]

Microdol has never given better accutance than xtol for me - When I magnify the negatives, I can see the edge of the grain very clearly in xtol and with Microdol they look like little smudges - not little dots. The sodium chloride and sodium sulfite in Microdol is very solvent and erodes the grain edges.

Depends on dilution. I don't like it full strength.
I find Xtol smooth but not that sharp
Mark

 

[Ronald Moravec]

In the late 1960`s up to 1975 I used it with Plus X diluted 1:3. About 12 minutes at 75 deg. I printed some of the negs a year ago or so .

The film seen to have been cheapened/changed in some fashion. The prints seemed to have a strong density with detail to them I can`t get today, although I use the same test targets to set up the development and make full tonal range prints. There is just something missing that is very hard to quantify. It is not the paper as I can see it just looking at the negs.

The 1:3 gave me full film speed as metered with the Pentax Spotmatics I used at the time.

 

[jim appleyard]

Ronald, could it be you're seeing a change because you're no longer using the Spotmatics? Perhaps it's not the film? I borrowed a Spotmatic once and got incredibly sharp negs from it. I think the Pentax lenses of that era are very underrated.