Mixin salt ito developer

[RalphLambrecht]

I saw a feature on Youtube where the author recommended to mix 30g/ of regular table salt to a developer solution to increase contrast and muffle grain. Has anybody tried that experience? Did it work?

 

[Arvee]

I seem to recall reading that adding about that much NaCl to D-23 equals a close relative to Microdol-X. Not sure if it's a mechanism to increase contrast but it could be.

 

[Peter Schrager]

and don't forget the pepper!

 

[removed account4]

people do with caffenol.
no clue why but they do it...
restrainer ? IDK seems like
a waste of effort ..

 

[Eric Rose]

Try it and let us know what you find.

 

[Alan Johnson]

It probably dissolves silver bromide from the emulsion, as in my fixing experiment:
https://www.photrio.com/forum/threads/fixing-in-table-salt-solution.107457/
Some of the silver is likely redeposited in finely divided form, giving the appearance of reduced granularity.
IDK who found the optimum amount for the proprietary ultra fine grain developers.

 

[trendland]

I seem to recall reading that adding about that much NaCl to D-23 equals a close relative to Microdol-X. Not sure if it's a mechanism to increase contrast but it could be.

Fred - D-23 need indeed NaCl and min.
one other formula I knew

 

[trendland]

I seem to recall reading that adding about that much NaCl to D-23 equals a close relative to Microdol-X. Not sure if it's a mechanism to increase contrast but it could be.

sorry browser and conection malfunction
......min. one other formula I know has also this need.
A general contrast increasemend /better
contrast should work caused from the adition of NaCl in lots of new build
VOODO DARKROOMS.

with regards

 

[Ian Grant]

Ilford's take on the subject 1965:

TECHNICAL INFORMATION SHEET P10

FINE GRAIN DEVELOPMENT

The graininess of images obtained with conventional developers, i.e. Metol- or Phenidone hydroquinone carbonate developers, is sufficiently fine for contact prints and moderate enlargements, but when very big enlargements are made from small negatives graininess becomes increasingly apparent.

Special developers have been formulated to produce images of reduced graininess. Many of these developers restrict grain size by dissolving some of the silver forming the image. Since this causes a reduction in density a longer exposure is needed to achieve a satisfactory density for printing. This loss of speed is characteristic of most fine grain developers but one developer which is exceptional in achieving a high speed/grain ratio, (i.e. it combines high speed with fine grain), is Ilford Microphen Fine Grain Developer. A speed increase of at least 50 per cent is possible with most materials and it has the advantages common to Phenidone based developers in that it has a long working life and it is unlikely to cause staining on fingers or clothes.

Most other fine grain developers may be described in one of four categories as follows:
Metol- or Phenidone-hydroquinone borax developers, para-phenylene diamine developers, developers containing silver halide solvents, physical developers.,

Metol- or Phenidone-hydroquinone borax developers.
These are characterised by low alkalinity and a high concentration of sodium sulphite. Ilford ID-11 and ID-68 are of this type and are based on Metol and Phenidone respectively.

The formula of ID-11 is:
Metol 2 g.
Sodium sulphite, anhyd. 100g.
Hydroquinone 5 g.
Borax 2 g.
Water to make 1,000 cc.

The formula of ID-68 is:
Sodium sulphite, anhyd. 85 g.
Hydroquinone 5 g.
Borax 7 g.
Boric acid 2 g.
Potassium bromide 1 g.
Phenidone 0.13 g.
Water to make 1,000 cc.

These formulae are for working strength solutions which are used without further dilution. One advantage of this type of formula is that no increase in exposure is necessary; another is that development times are not inconveniently long. The scope of such developers is not limited to small negatives, they are equally suitable as general negative developers.

Para-phenylene diamine developers
Developers in this group contain para-phenylene diamine and sodium sulphite with varying concentrations of glycin. They produce brownish images which show a very considerable reduction in grain compared with conventional developers but they require an increase in exposure of from 1¼ to 4 times, according to the type of developer and negative material. This loss of film speed may limit their usefulness. The developers in this group which achieve the greatest reduction in grain size are those which require the greatest increase in exposure.

The maximum contrast obtainable with these developers is rather low and development times tend to be long. They also have the disadvantage that they are toxic and stain fingers and equipment.

Developers containing silver halide solvents
Certain fine grain formulae contain silver halide solvents such as hypo and thiocyanate. These depend for their action on the fact that some of the silver dissolved during development is redeposited in a very fine form to reinforce the final image. Ilford ID-48 Developer is of this class. Such developers give considerable reduction in grain size but require 50 to 100 per cent extra exposure. Both Ilford ID-11 and ID-2 developers may be simply modified to work in this way.

ID-11: Add ammonium chloride to ID-11 in the proportion of 20 g. per 500 cc working solution.
Camera exposures should be increased by about 50 per cent and the development times are double those specified for ID-11.

ID-2: To ID-2 diluted 1 + 2 add ammonium chloride in the proportion of 5 g. per 500 cc. developer.

Physical developers
These developers contain silver in solution and the developed image consists of very finely divided silver deposited by the action of the developer on the latent image instead of being derived from the silver halides in the emulsion. They give extremely fine grained images which are to some extent independent of the nature of the negative emulsion used. Such developers have, however, found only limited application. Their activity and the fog level they produce fluctuates greatly according to the concentrations of the constituent chemicals, consequently great care is needed in making up the formulae. A high standard of cleanliness is required to avoid contamination of the developer and regular checks on activity are necessary.

Ilford, Phenidone and Microphen are trade marks
ILFORD LIMITED.
ILFORD. ESSEX
TIS/P10-5/B65. Printed in England

 

[Gerald C Koch]

Research in the addition of sodium chloride to high sulfite developers resulted in Kodak Microdol. (Note no tMicrodol X which contains other chemicals ) As Ian mentions a thiosulfate and or a thiocyanate can also be used. However there is the danger of dichroic fog if too much sulfite is used and also the problem of sludging. I see no particular advantage in it's being added to paper developers.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Try it and let us know what you find.

Try it and let us know what you find.

I'll hink about it Eric.

 

[trendland]

Research in the addition of sodium chloride to high sulfite developers resulted in Kodak Microdol. (Note no tMicrodol X which contains other chemicals ) As Ian mentions a thiosulfate and or a thiocyanate can also be used. However there is the danger of dichroic fog if too much sulfite is used and also the problem of sludging. I see no particular advantage in it's being added to paper developers.

With the exeption of homebrew formula of D23. But (as you stated) it is just One option - there is also a way to change to
theosulfate or theocyanate.
But THEN you have a diferent formulation without NaCl and an other name of your developer in the very near of Kodak Microdol (old formula).

with regards

PS : NaCl is a nice chem. because it isn't much restricted from official regulations. .....

 

[Gerald C Koch]

With the exeption of homebrew formula of D23. But (as you stated) it is just One option - there is also a way to change to
theosulfate or theocyanate.
But THEN you have a diferent formulation without NaCl and an other name of your developer in the very near of Kodak Microdol (old formula).

with regards

PS : NaCl is a nice chem. because it isn't much restricted from official regulations. .....

And it's great added to french fries.

 

[Ian Grant]

Research in the addition of sodium chloride to high sulfite developers resulted in Kodak Microdol. (Note no tMicrodol X which contains other chemicals ) As Ian mentions a thiosulfate and or a thiocyanate can also be used. However there is the danger of dichroic fog if too much sulfite is used and also the problem of sludging. I see no particular advantage in it's being added to paper developers.

The Kodak research into adding Chloride was part of the same work that resulted in Kodatol - DK20, it's in the same research paper, it was a response to solvent extra fine grain developers already release by small competitors in the photo chemistry field, Thiocyanate was the first choice leading to DK-20 but shortly after WWII there were Dichroic fogging issue with DK-20 and Eastman Kodak films, this lead to the Eastman Kodak switch to Microdol using Chloride, the dichroic fog issue became worse with newer emulsions and an additive was added to suppress it.

There wasn't the same issue with Kodak Ltd's films so DK20 and later Microdol were sold for a bit longer in the UK/European market before the switch to Microdol-X. Crawley states there was never an issue with Ilford films.

Ian

 

[trendland]

I'll hink about it Eric.

So please Ralph don't think about to much. And (much more important ) don't waste your "table salt" for that.
The Youtube experiment must have to do with some special kind of voodoo as I stated before. Sometimes YouTube is not the best source.
I have to state that there is a need of some NaCl in special formulated fine grain developers (developers from the past) For example : Today manufacturers find other ways - think about Kodak Xtol.
In the past Nacl had the task to reduce grain - with the lost of speed. AND : With the lost of speed as the price to finest grain the contrast comes bad.
The extremest efect you may have with ppd developers (as an allone developer agend) YOU will louse extreme speed (therefore the later comming second agends) and you will have the smalest contrast you'll ever see : But you also have EXTREME FINE GRAIN (With E.I ISO 1/2).
Here (in your YouTube video) it should from reality the opposite result (lower contrast).
But I could imagine the YouTuber compensated the disadvantage of his method with push development of his reformulated developer - and then he found out : higher contrasts.
So I might gave you the wrong info - then it possible has more to do with nonsense as with voodoo.
It should we allowed to say :
40% VOODOO/60%NONSENSE ?!

with regards
PS : If you remember the concrete developer it would help to varify.
PPS : As should it be so simple : just add an amound of NaCl to each developer in special volume and soon you'll have more contrast.
PPPS: May be I am total wrong - but then
the YouTube guy next will own a worldwide patent from his experiment results. At last Ilford will ask for licenses and will fire complete research department with the need of following speach : You are complete idiots, within 56 years you got millions from budget and you did not find a good chemical compound to better contrasts.
And know we have to pay for that !
NaCl !

 

[RalphLambrecht]

With the exeption of homebrew formula of D23. But (as you stated) it is just One option - there is also a way to change to
theosulfate or theocyanate.
But THEN you have a diferent formulation without NaCl and an other name of your developer in the very near of Kodak Microdol (old formula).

with regards

PS : NaCl is a nice chem. because it isn't much restricted from official regulations. .....

I'm thinking to add NaCl or sodium sulfite t clean water first and then use that solution to dilute the developer to get a working solution developer.

 

[trendland]

I'm thinking to add NaCl or sodium sulfite t clean water first and then use that solution to dilute the developer to get a working solution developer.

Good thoughts Ralph - but If you are interested try some of that old ID formulas or just mixing your D23 insread of Perceptol.
The only you need is sodium sulfite AND
metol - for the rest ask your wife :
How many table salt have we bought in supermarket last week - I'll soon buy new one.

with regards
PS : The formula is well known to you I guess - I have it in mind and remember
but I should avoid to make a mistake.

PPS : I don't care :
Metol 8g
Sodium Sulfite 100g
NaCl 30g
Better check this.....

 

[trendland]

7,5g metol....

with regards

 

[Gerald C Koch]

Table salt contains an anti caking additive that is insoluble in water and causes cloudiness. Use pickling salt to get clear solutions. You don't want anything settling on your film. As for Kosher salt check the label. It too sometimes contains insoluble susbtances and even some surprising ones like sodium ferrocyanide.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

7,5g metol....

with regards

thank you all for your help;I'll report on results after next Thursday.

 

[trendland]

Table salt contains an anti caking additive that is insoluble in water and causes cloudiness. Use pickling salt to get clear solutions. You don't want anything settling on your film. As for Kosher salt check the label. It too sometimes contains insoluble susbtances and even some surprising ones like sodium ferrocyanide.

I forget to state - but it should be quite clear. Good pure NaCl but without further intrigients like fluorine and others.

with regards

PS : Most expensive "himalaja" salt should be the next voodoo issue !

 

[RalphLambrecht]

I forget to state - but it should be quite clear. Good pure NaCl but without further intrigients like fluorine and others.

with regards

PS : Most expensive "himalaja" salt should be the next voodoo issue !

well , a 2% solution of black himalayan salt indeed makes a good substitute for a polysulphide toner.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

I saw a feature on Youtube where the author recommended to mix 30g/ of regular table salt to a developer solution to increase contrast and muffle grain. Has anybody tried that experience? Did it work?

Well, I've tried it and it worked; instead of mixing Rodinal with water,I've mixed it with his:
FilmDevBooster (FDB-1)

water 50°C / 120°F

750 ml

sodium sulfite anhydrous(as a light silver solvent)

20 g

pure sea salt(again as a light silver solvent)

35 g

sodium hexametaphosphate(FotoCalgon)*

1g

metol

1g

potassium bromide(to reduce fog)

0.5g

cold water to make

1,000 ml


working solution to dilute developer with

* add with hard water supplies to prevent calcium scum

I'm just a hobby photochemistry and probably not even a good one at that but, maybe I'm a lucky one because, under the microscope (40x),the grain is clearly smaller, the sharpness did not suffer(if any there is more detail)and there is no fog at all; next step is to have the negs scanned and the negatives enlarged to verify early findings.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Well, I've tried it and it worked; instead of mixing Rodinal with water,I've mixed it with his:
FilmDevBooster (FDB-1)

water 50°C / 120°F

750 ml

sodium sulfite anhydrous(as a light silver solvent)

20 g

pure sea salt(again as a light silver solvent)

35 g

sodium hexametaphosphate(FotoCalgon)*

1g

metol

1g

potassium bromide(to reduce fog)

0.5g

cold water to make

1,000 ml


working solution to dilute developer with

* add with hard water supplies to prevent calcium scum

I'm just a hobby photochemistry and probably not even a good one at that but, maybe I'm a lucky one because, under the microscope (40x),the grain is clearly smaller, the sharpness did not suffer(if any there is more detail)and there is no fog at all; next step is to have the negs scanned and the negatives enlarged to verify early findings.

I forgot to note that I used it with Rodinal 1:25at 20C for an Ilford FP4+;the negatives are clear and pinsharp;camera was a Nikon FM with an 50mm f/1.8 E-series.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Well, I've tried it and it worked; instead of mixing Rodinal with water,I've mixed it with his:
FilmDevBooster (FDB-1)

water 50°C / 120°F

750 ml

sodium sulfite anhydrous(as a light silver solvent)

20 g

pure sea salt(again as a light silver solvent)

35 g

sodium hexametaphosphate(FotoCalgon)*

1g

metol

1g

potassium bromide(to reduce fog)

0.5g

cold water to make

1,000 ml


working solution to dilute developer with

* add with hard water supplies to prevent calcium scum

I'm just a hobby photochemistry and probably not even a good one at that but, maybe I'm a lucky one because, under the microscope (40x),the grain is clearly smaller, the sharpness did not suffer(if any there is more detail)and there is no fog at all; next step is to have the negs scanned and the negatives enlarged to verify early findings.

the test is done now and the vote is that using the booster rather than plain water did reduce the grain slightly ; it also increased detail and sharpness but some apparently due to a contrast increase in the midtowns;in other words, the booster positively changes the tonal curve; from now on, for me, this is the way to go.