My XT-3 Replenishment Experience

[m00dawg]

I thought I'd switch over to here from the other post since that one was more about XT-3 availability and thought replenishment might deserve it's own thread. I left that thread off where I thought XT-3 replenishment was giving me dirty negatives due to some of the solids I found in my replenishment bottle. Of note, I would get similar (but not exact) solids with Xtol-R too. I'm not sure what either of them are but they don't seem to affect the developer performance (for either XT-3 or Xtol). Ideally I'd like to filter them out but I think I need more than just coffee filters to do that well. As they tend to settle to the bottom, I haven't seen any adverse issues apart from the grungy negatives I mentioned in the other post.

Turns out the grungyness had nothing to do with XT-3 as far as I can tell and seems to be that my tap water in my darkroom shed is chock full of nasty and sharp particulates and I was using that water for the initial pre-soak as well as the post fix rinsing (which I would follow up with a distilled water pass and then Photo-Flo). I had forgotten the hose had been used with our rain barrel which collects roof water and since our roof uses those rough looking shingles that look like just a bunch of tiny rocks, well, no wonder I'm having issues!

At least I think that's the culprit. Switching to my old bathroom darkroom dramatically improved the cleanliness of my sheets where the wash water is softened (albeit not filtered beyond that). So my plan there is to get a new hose and a 5 micron particulate filter to see how that goes. I can also simply use more distilled water for my washing - that just ends up really using a lot of distilled water of course.

So there's that. But back to XT-3 replenishment, apart from the few issues with the sludge at the bottom of my replenishment glass bottle and ignoring my wash water issue, I'm so far very pleased with replenishment. I haven't seen any real falloff and my gamma seems to be right in line. My dev times seem to be around 2 minutes shorter than where they were with my well seasoned Xtol-R and so I'm still keeping track of my film curves and comparing them to my old Xtol-R ones. I'm replenishing at a rate of 80ml per 36-exp 35mm roll (20ml per 4x5 sheet) though I'm not yet sure if that is enough or not just yet.

My stock solution seems to be stable as well at somewhere around 2 1/2 months old. I keep both the stock and the replenished solution in a small fridge set at a warmish temperature for a fridge. It's a cheap fridge so I don't know exactly what it is set to but somewhere around 12C I think. This is mostly so I can store the chemicals in my darkroom shed (which isn't always climate controlled) without the chemicals getting hot. To warm them up I use an ice chest where I mix the warm (30C) incoming water with ice to get to around 20C for developing. That same water is what I was using for washing (as noted above) and hope that I'll be able to continue to do that once I properly filter the water.

I don't have current curves for CHS ii yet (I hope to by this weekend as I'm developing some important CHS sheets from a recent vacation) but here's Fomapan 200:



Top line is Xtol-R and bottom is XT-3. Xtol-R was for 8:30 and XT-3 for 6:30. This indicates to me XT-3 is either still seasoning or my replenishment rates are such that it has ended up stronger than my Xtol (which had some of the recalled bags run through it). My gamma is 0.63 and 0.62 respectively, though I think next time I'll add maybe 30 seconds to the developing time since it does seem to have a lower slope and I expect the contrast index will be lower (I haven't done those yet but need to - I still do those on pen and paper).

So far *knocks on wood* replenishing seems to be working as it should with the only possible issue being the sludgy solids that seem to collect in my jug. I did have that with Xtol as noted but I still don't like it either way. Being 2 1/2 months in is maybe a bit soon to determine longevity but so far so good!

 

[Donald Qualls]

In the past, I used to use distilled water for washing. With an Ilford wash, I could dilute my Parodinal, mix one-shot fixer (plain hypo), and wash including fresh water for the PhotoFlo rinse with about 3 quarts for a 35 mm roll. At that time, I was paying less than a dollar for "purified drinking water" that said on the label it was purified by "steam distillation". Now I'm on a well that's clean enough I use it for everything except mixing chemicals and final rinse.

Another option that works well is a Brita or similar drinking water filter -- and they're generally cheaper than buying distilled, though you do need to establish habits to make sure you have enough filtered water ready before you start to process. An in-line filter is the next step up; more money up front, but cheaper per gallon than pitcher filters.

 

[m00dawg]

Indeed I would expect something like the Ilford wash to work well in my rotary. For my post fix washing I tend to do an initial wash/rinse for a few minutes then do a wash over 10 minutes cycling the water out at least 3 times. Doing that with distilled water wouldn't be bad though I'd expect I will use at least half of a gallon jug (the pre-wash is the worst offender since I fill the tank all the way to the top which is 1.5L and let it sit). Photo-Flo I'll tend to reuse if I'm doing several films over a few days so that's not so bad but also eats up about 1L.

I am indeed thinking something similar with a particulate filter. I hadn't though about Brita but that's a good idea! Brings me back to my college days haha. I was going to look at an in-line filter today at the hardware store. Those seem to go down to 5 microns regardless of brand, Delta even makes a special darkroom one though seems to be basically the same thing).

The nice thing is, since my results are much improved in my old bathroom-darkroom, I know I can always switch back to that whenever I think there are process issues going on.

 

[Team ADOX]

...........
Turns out the grungyness had nothing to do with XT-3 as far as I can tell and seems to be that my tap water in my darkroom shed is chock full of nasty and sharp particulates and I was using that water for the initial pre-soak as well as the post fix rinsing (which I would follow up with a distilled water pass and then Photo-Flo). I had forgotten the hose had been used with our rain barrel which collects roof water and since our roof uses those rough looking shingles that look like just a bunch of tiny rocks, well, no wonder I'm having issues!
..............

Thank you very much for your tests and reporting your results.

Meanwhile we have done and finished XT-3 replenishment test runs in-house as well. Using the original XTOL schedule. It worked very well, and so far we could not identify any significant differences in replenishment regime with XTOL and XT-3.
Therefore we would now encourage those photographers who definitely want to use replenishment with XT-3 to start their own tests and adjusting it to their own, individual workflow and equipment.

ADOX - Innovation in Analog Photography.

THE BEST THINGS IN LIFE ARE ANALOG.

 

[m00dawg]

That's absolutely wonderful news!!!!!

Did you run into the issue of "gunk" in your replenished stock? As noted, I've had this happen with Xtol as well (as have other photographers here on Photrio) so it seems to be benign. Nonetheless, if you have any recommendations on what to do (if anything) I'd love to hear them! Or if you might know what it might be, I'm rather curious. With Xtol I recall reading some folks thought it might be some sort of biological growth. Which doesn't sound amazing but as noted it doesn't seem to have any adverse affects (and that includes how clean the negatives are - I've got a plumber coming on Monday to sort out my water filtration issues on that note).

Like with my Xtol, since they settle to the bottom, I wasn't going to worry too much about it and will just periodically spend time filtering the replenished stock out through coffee filters or similar.

 

[Team ADOX]

That's absolutely wonderful news!!!!!

Did you run into the issue of "gunk" in your replenished stock?

No, not in the tests we've done so far.

ADOX - Innovation in Analog Photography.

THE BEST THINGS IN LIFE ARE ANALOG.

 

[PittP]

That's absolutely wonderful news!!!!!

Did you run into the issue of "gunk" in your replenished stock? As noted, I've had this happen with Xtol as well (as have other photographers here on Photrio) so it seems to be benign. Nonetheless, if you have any recommendations on what to do (if anything) I'd love to hear them! Or if you might know what it might be, I'm rather curious. With Xtol I recall reading some folks thought it might be some sort of biological growth. Which doesn't sound amazing but as noted it doesn't seem to have any adverse affects (and that includes how clean the negatives are - I've got a plumber coming on Monday to sort out my water filtration issues on that note).

Like with my Xtol, since they settle to the bottom, I wasn't going to worry too much about it and will just periodically spend time filtering the replenished stock out through coffee filters or similar.

Gunk: After prolonged storage fungal growth can occur in Xtol and likely in XT-3, too. Contamination is likely to come from water impurities, notably when using deionised "battery water" - the deionising beds are a wonderful substrate for all kinds of mold growth that is inconsequential for both the battery water maker and the water for the lead acid batteries. Thus, this water needs to be boiled well (sterilised) before use with Xtol/XT-3. Subsequently, the stored solution may be treated with an UV-steriliser pen from time to time. Works reliably.
We have water with a high (variable) iron content and often slightly acidic pH: This water is unfit for use with Xtol, it immediately affects developer activity and induces formation of "cloudy" stuff that will eventually (after standing 1-2 days) settle as a light greyish deposit. May be similar reactions are taking place with the above cited water in the garden shed.

 

[m00dawg]

Ah that's something to consider - I use gallon jugs of distilled water. It's from the grocery store but it's also what is recommended to use in batteries so guessing in this context it's the same stuff? That is for all my chemical mixes however since I pre-wash there's certainly some cross contamination possible that may be making its way into the replenishment stock. I've use pre-washes for quite some time (including with Xtol) which to this point has been tap water (previously soft water from my indoor bathroom and more recently the hard water from the outside faucet, along with the "roof crud" I probably added into the system by not having a particular filter and reusing hoses).

I could do a distilled water pre-wash but that's a lot of distilled water per run (and it sounds like that might not solve my problems given what you mention). I need a better way to filter 2L of chemistry then using coffee filters but it's not so bad if I have to do that from time to time. The UV route seems interesting. I was going to build, eventually, a UV box for alt processes so that's something I can try with the XT3 once I have that built.

 

[Donald Qualls]

If the water is actually distilled, it's less likely to have significant impurities, especially of biological origin. The reference to "battery water" was to resin bed deionized water, which is never significantly heated during processing.

That said, much of the "distilled water" you find in supermarkets is actually labeled as "purified water" and is in fact resin bed deionized, and is subject to this kind of fungal growth. Look for "steam distilled" instead -- it's likely to cost a little more, since you're paying for the energy to boil the water, rather than just periodic regeneration, but at similar purity levels (which are measured in a way that pretty much ignores the presence of spores and rhyzomes) it will give less trouble.

Worth noting, too, that for a couple hundred dollars, you can buy a Reverse Osmosis De-Ionized (RODI) purification system in which you can change particulate filter, resin bed, and RO membrane cartridge when needed -- and the resulting water costs only a few cents a gallon on top of what your tap water costs, when the filter costs are divided out over the amount of water it purifies. I've been using this water for mixing B&W and color chemicals since I started my darkroom back up last year; my partner bought the system to produce iron-free water for reef aquariums, so I didn't even have to make the investment (but I'm usually involved in the filter changes and did much of the plumbing and helped with the hauling for the tanks themselves).

 

[m00dawg]

Yes indeed, RO water is something I have considered (and am still thinking about). In my new darkroom I think I need a way to soften the water first. Though not required I recall reading hard water can deteriorate the RO membranes fairly quickly. I had to get a plumber out here to properly install my particulate filter and he did say there might be an option to have a small filter that removes minerals from the water which is something I think I'm gonna look further into to see if that might be sufficient to use with RO. Otherwise I'll need to run pipes out to the shed in order to get soft water.

Getting back to distilled water, yep I bet you what I'm buying isn't the steam distilled stuff so I'll look into that ASAP. Costs would be marginal if I'm only using it with XT-3.

 

[Donald Qualls]

The filter the plumber was talking about is probably a 2-stage particulate and DI resin column. Those go together with the RO membrane to make a full RODI setup.

I'm not certain of the flow path in the RODI setup we have, but the RO membrane is the longest lasting filter element. I think it goes through particulate filter (pleated paper), resin bed, and then RO membrane, but I can't swear to the order of the last two, and there's a third cartridge specific to removing chlorination (both chloramine and hypochlorite, IIRC, possibly perchlorates as well) -- which is mostly moot with well water (some wells get contaminated with perchlorate, but we don't have any rocket fuel or explosive plants near us).

 

[halfaman]

Commercial deionized water is usually admitted as "pure" for photographic solutions, In my job there is a desionized water plant and it works pretty well with very minimal intervention, and it is used to produce a solution that it is sensitive to bacteria or mold.

 

[Donald Qualls]

Commercial deionized water is usually admitted as "pure" for photographic solutions, In my job there is a desionized water plant and it works pretty well with very minimal intervention, and it is used to produce a solution that it is sensitive to bacteria or mold.

It is, but "purified water" sold for (for instance) steam irons and such has unpublished, and likely pretty low standards of purity. You can call water "purified" after it's been through the equivalent of a Brita filter or even just a particulate filter. Steam irons want water with low/no iron, but in many locations, well water meets that need.

If you don't know how the water was purified, you don't if it was purified. A home RODI setup costs hardly more than a distiller, and uses less energy (though it does consume more water, since the RO membrane only passes something like 20% of the water pushed through it, with the rest going to the drains -- no big deal if you're on a well, as you only pay for electricity to run the well pump, but potentially a concern if you're paying a water utility).