Multiple Kodak recommendations for T-Max 400 roll film in D-76 1+1

[Tom Kershaw]

Just starting to work with T-Max 400 processed in D-76 1+1; earlier today I processed a roll of 35mm TMY-2 in a Paterson tank based on a time given by Kodak of 12 1/2 minutes @ 20ºC / 68ºF. However, after reviewing the processed film and making a print and contact sheet, that development time seems excessive. Searching on the Kodak site I see they give another recommendation of 10 1/4 minutes for a small tank with intermittent agitation and I suspect the shorter development would be much closer to correct.

While I'm entirely aware of the usual warnings about establishing your own process times, which I've done in the past for other films, I'm curious to know what development times have worked well for others.

Tom

 

[Tom Kershaw]

I'm curious where you got a Kodak published time of 12.5 minutes. All the documentation I have states 10.25 minutes at 20°C, and I have found that to be correct in terms of contrast, but just slightly too thin in shadow detail.

Greg,

This Kodak PDF: http://www.kodak.com:80/global/en/professional/support/techPubs/f4016/f4016.pdf

Tom

 

[kevin_c]

Oh yeah. That's the old information for TMY. The new one is F-4043.

You beat me to it!

They still list the old time in the D76 pdf though.

Massive dev chart shows 10 1/4 mins also

 

[pacman1213]

I had the exact same problem when looking for dev times for Tmax 100 and did the same thing, the film was over developed.

I got my times from the same PDF and got the same times from the Darkroom cookbook.

 

[MattKing]

If you look at the first pdf (f4016) near the beginning, it even tells you to use the second pdf (f4043) if you have the newer version. The second pdf tells you to go back to the old pdf, if you have the older version.

Clearly a more obvious warning wouldn't hurt.

 

[Tom Kershaw]

Greg,

The F-4043 document is dated October 2007 so at first glances appears concurrent with F-4016.

Tom

 

[fjpod]

Here I am 8 years later struggling with tmax 400 developing times with d76. Those Kodak bulletins no longer appear. MDC has the time at 11:15 for 1+1 while Kodak is now recommending 10:15.

I realize everyone's mileage may vary.....

But this is my situation. I develop in a small tank by hand. In keeping with the recommended minimum of 100 ml of stock per roll of 35 mm, I thought I would try 1+2. (Using 1+1requires at least 150 ml of stock). 1+2 would give me a little more sharpness while avoiding some grain and a total of 300 ml of working solution which is perfect for a small tank.

Here's the problem... MDC gives a 1+2 time as 11:45 which is only 30 second more than at 1+1. Sounded strange to me from the get go. But alas, This is what I used at 68 degrees, one minute agitations, yada, yada...and my negatives were thin.

Doing a quick calculation from the seat of my pants and looking at MDC recommended times for 1:3, I figure the time for1+2 should be more like 13.

Of course Kodak does not publish anything for a greater dilution than 1+1. And the MDC seems to have a major flaw in the 1+2 time.

Am I the only nut here pondering this question? All help appreciated but at the moment I'm not switching to tri x, I'm not switching to rodinol, I'm not trying pyro. I'd like to stick to tmax 400 and d76 until I get it right. Lol.

 

[fjpod]

not sure how to edit above...but when I said ...soavoiding some grain, I meant compared to 1+3.

How do you edit your posts? Never mind. One question at a time.

 

[Lachlan Young]

Here I am 8 years later struggling with tmax 400 developing times with d76. Those Kodak bulletins no longer appear. MDC has the time at 11:15 for 1+1 while Kodak is now recommending 10:15.

I realize everyone's mileage may vary.....

But this is my situation. I develop in a small tank by hand. In keeping with the recommended minimum of 100 ml of stock per roll of 35 mm, I thought I would try 1+2. (Using 1+1requires at least 150 ml of stock). 1+2 would give me a little more sharpness while avoiding some grain and a total of 300 ml of working solution which is perfect for a small tank.

Here's the problem... MDC gives a 1+2 time as 11:45 which is only 30 second more than at 1+1. Sounded strange to me from the get go. But alas, This is what I used at 68 degrees, one minute agitations, yada, yada...and my negatives were thin.

Doing a quick calculation from the seat of my pants and looking at MDC recommended times for 1:3, I figure the time for1+2 should be more like 13.

Of course Kodak does not publish anything for a greater dilution than 1+1. And the MDC seems to have a major flaw in the 1+2 time.

Am I the only nut here pondering this question? All help appreciated but at the moment I'm not switching to tri x, I'm not switching to rodinol, I'm not trying pyro. I'd like to stick to tmax 400 and d76 until I get it right. Lol.

Kodak in D-76's info sheet recommend that you use a minimum of 237.5ml (8 fl oz) of stock developer per 135/120/80 sq in of film - ie 1+1 is 237.5+237.5 = 475ml/ 16fl oz for one film. You may be underdeveloping by 10-15% otherwise. Use the time in the current data sheet for small tanks (aka the 10m 15s one). That should be all that is necessary to achieve a baseline idea of whether you want to alter your development time or exposure index on any subsequent rolls.

The massive development chart is rather laden with errors of transcription & outdated information & pet theories. Use the data sheet from the manufacturer of the film as a starting point unless there is exceptional evidence to the contrary.

 

[fjpod]

Kodak in D-76's info sheet recommend that you use a minimum of 237.5ml (8 fl oz) of stock developer per 135/120/80 sq in of film - ie 1+1 is 237.5+237.5 = 475ml/ 16fl oz for one film. You may be underdeveloping by 10-15% otherwise. Use the time in the current data sheet for small tanks (aka the 10m 15s one). That should be all that is necessary to achieve a baseline idea of whether you want to alter your development time or exposure index on any subsequent rolls.

The massive development chart is rather laden with errors of transcription & outdated information & pet theories. Use the data sheet from the manufacturer of the film as a starting point unless there is exceptional evidence to the contrary.

Boy, am I off. I thought I read somewhere, on here in fact, that you need a minimum of 100 ml for a roll. I am using way under what Kodak recommends. I guess I have made the incorrect assumption that just because the bottom of the tank says 135- 325 ml, that any dilution that comes out to that amount should be ok.

I use a Patterson type tank that holds2 reels of 135. Using the 247 ml stock per roll with formula for 1+1, I won't be able to fit enough working solution in the tank for 2 rolls, which I sometimes do.

So at even 1+1, 250 ml is a lot more than I have been using. My negatives are not THAT thin.

There must be s happy medium somewhere.

 

[Lachlan Young]

Boy, am I off. I thought I read somewhere, on here in fact, that you need a minimum of 100 ml for a roll. I am using way under what Kodak recommends. I guess I have made the incorrect assumption that just because the bottom of the tank says 135- 325 ml, that any dilution that comes out to that amount should be ok.

I use a Patterson type tank that holds2 reels of 135. Using the 247 ml stock per roll with formula for 1+1, I won't be able to fit enough working solution in the tank for 2 rolls, which I sometimes do.

So at even 1+1, 250 ml is a lot more than I have been using. My negatives are not THAT thin.

There must be s happy medium somewhere.

XTOL is 100ml/roll by design, all the other powder devs are probably not & explicitly not (going by Kodak's recommendations) for D-76 (ID-11) & Microdol-X (Perceptol). Real world, it might add up to a grade of difference or so.

 

[MattKing]

The current D76 datasheet ( see the end of page two: http://imaging.kodakalaris.com/sites/uat/files/wysiwyg/pro/chemistry/j78.pdf ) states that if you wish to develop one 135-36 roll in an 8 ounce (237 ml) tank of 1+1 diluted D76, you will need to increase the recommended time by 10% compared to the times for developing in D76 stock.
My sense is that D76 , compared to some other developers, is much less likely to abruptly reach capacity limits.
Capacity questions are challenging, because there usually isn't a simple yes/no answer. They are also affected by the variability of films and subjects - a roll filled with pictures of high key subjects will exhaust developer faster than a roll filled with pictures of dark, shadowy scenes.
And of course a manufacturer's recommendations need to be conservative if they are to be depended upon by commercial labs and large numbers of photographers.

 

[fjpod]

So the seemingly generous minimum Kodak volume of 247 ml would be enough to cover negatives of polar bears in the snow. But in real life, 150 to 200 ml (per roll) would probably be enough even without lengthening development time. I know from my mistake 100 ml per roll is not enough. I'm thinking of increasing my minimum to 150 ml per roll and go with the slightly longer time Kodak recommends.

 

[MattKing]

So the seemingly generous minimum Kodak volume of 247 ml would be enough to cover negatives of polar bears in the snow. But in real life, 150 to 200 ml (per roll) would probably be enough even without lengthening development time. I know from my mistake 100 ml per roll is not enough. I'm thinking of increasing my minimum to 150 ml per roll and go with the slightly longer time Kodak recommends.

Essentially you need to come up with your own set of developing numbers, when you use D76 1+1 and that slightly lower amount of D76 stock in your diluted developer. The Kodak recommendation for a 10% increase in the Kodak described circumstances gives you an excellent place to start.

 

[fjpod]

Thanks for all the help.

When I get d76 down, I may try x-tol.

 

[GarageBoy]

I like how kodak updated the d76 datasheet and still has the TMY instead of TMY2 times

For the times in f4043 for d76 1:1 - I should still use the 10% extension when developing 2 135-36 in one 16oz tank, correct? (I.e. take the time listen in f4043 for d76 1:1 and add 10%?)
Thanks

 

[MattKing]

I like how kodak updated the d76 datasheet and still has the TMY instead of TMY2 times

??? J-78 specifies the same times for both versions.

 

[GarageBoy]

J78 and f4043 conflict

 

[MattKing]

J78 and f4043 conflict

To be accurate, the old J-78 conflicts with the current F-4043.
Kodak Alaris doesn't offer a current J-78.

 

[GarageBoy]

Ahh, I took them rebranding it with alaris on top as an update...

 

[MattKing]

Ahh, I took them rebranding it with alaris on top as an update...

In most cases all they did initially was strip out references to older products and options that were no longer available.
They have actually updated further some of the datasheets. They are stretched pretty thin though with respect to resources/numbers of people.