New D76

David Lingham

Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2006
Messages
408
Location
Cardiff St Wales UK
Format
Medium Format
In common with many people I recently bought D76 because of the current unavailability of ID11. I did use D76 for a number of years before switching to Ilford products when Kodak became hard to obtain here in the UK. This present incarnation of Kodak D76 doesn’t seem to perform as I remember it did. When comparing 35mm FP4 from my archive that have been processed in an earlier version of D76, they appear to have more density. I’ve found that with a roll of recently processed 35mm FP4, in the latest version of D76 and using the same times and dilutions as I always have done, in comparison the pre exposed numbers are not as solid, neither is the leader as dense, which does suggest underdevelopment. Making me question if it is the same product as it was ten years ago. Just wondering if anyone else has noticed this.
 

Ian Grant

Subscriber
Joined
Aug 2, 2004
Messages
23,234
Location
West Midland
Format
Multi Format
In a thread earlier today. #93, I mentioned the D-76 that was roughly half-way between the original formula and D-76d.

But look at the 2015 D-76 MSDS, no Borax or Boric Acid. listed.

Safety Data Sheet
Revision Date: 09/28/2015
Z17000000084/Version: 5.0
Print Date: 11/05/2015
Page: 3/14

85 - 90 Sodium sulphite (7757-83-7)
1 - 5 Hydroquinone (123-31-9)
1 - 5 Bis(4-hydroxy-N-methylanilinium) sulphate (55-55-0)
0.1 - < 1 Pentetic acid, pentasodium salt (140-01-2)
0.1 - < 1 Boric anhydride (1303-86-2)


This is from the latest MSDS updated 27 Feb 2024


Sodium Sulfite CAS No.: 7757-83-7
hydroquinone CAS No.: 123-31-9 3-5%
Borax Pentahydrate CAS No.: 12179-04-3 1-3%
bis(4-hydroxy-N-methylanilinium) sulphate CAS No.: 55-55-0 1-3%
diboron trioxide CAS No.: 1303-86-2 1-3%
Diethylenetriaminepenta acetic acid CAS No.: 67-43-6 <1% Eye Irrit. 2, H319

So still using Borax but not Boric Acid


Ian
 
Last edited:

Milpool

Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2023
Messages
589
Location
51st state
Format
4x5 Format
I think there are too many variables involved to draw any conclusions. You’d really need to have done a controlled comparison (obviously impossible in this case). Otherwise I don’t think much can be said. Who knows, it could even be the film. While it is unlikely D-76 would have changed that much, anything is possible.
 

xkaes

Subscriber
Joined
Mar 25, 2006
Messages
4,516
Location
Colorado
Format
Multi Format
Whether it's a change in the D-76 or the film or both, simply run your own tests. It's always the best approach -- since all your other gear & method is specific to you.
 

Dali

Member
Joined
Jun 17, 2009
Messages
1,831
Location
Philadelphia
Format
Multi Format
Cannot tell you. My D76 is home made, so I avoid this kind of inconvenience.
 

brian steinberger

Subscriber
Joined
Jan 5, 2007
Messages
2,987
Location
Pennsylvania
Format
Med. Format RF
I recently discovered the same thing as I reported in the ID-11 alternative thread. Current D-76 seems to be weaker than previously available ID-11. That’s my experience. I’m sure more exposure and longer development times would possibly equal my previous results but I’m not interested in losing film speed so I’m holding out for ID-11.
 

pentaxuser

Member
Joined
May 9, 2005
Messages
19,633
Location
Daventry, No
Format
35mm
You'd have thought that the maker of the latest D76 would have mentioned what effect, if any, changes to it had affected development times. Hardly makes sense to herald a "new" D76 knowing it will cause former users or even new users to stick to the original times and then saying nothing?

I am assuming that before releasing it tests were carried out so if longer dev times were needed this would have been discovered

pentaxuser
 
OP
OP

David Lingham

Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2006
Messages
408
Location
Cardiff St Wales UK
Format
Medium Format

Go back 10yrs, using 35mm FP4 and D76, mixed as per instructions and processing to the Kodak suggested time and dilution. Fast forward to the present day, same film, same developer (allegedly), same mixing and development procedure, different result. That’s about as scientific as I can get. I’ve been processing film for nearly 50yrs and when returning to a product, which I have done several times, it usually works in the same way.
 
OP
OP

David Lingham

Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2006
Messages
408
Location
Cardiff St Wales UK
Format
Medium Format


I’m inclined to wait for ID11 now myself.
 

brian steinberger

Subscriber
Joined
Jan 5, 2007
Messages
2,987
Location
Pennsylvania
Format
Med. Format RF
David Lingham said:
I’m inclined to wait for ID11 now myself.
Click to expand...

I’m no expert on Kodaks D-76. Hardly at all. I, like you just bought a package to help me get by without ID-11 and noticed the same as you. Others maybe haven’t noticed any difference. Im not interested in experimenting anymore. Hopefully the new ID-11 is same as the old and I can move on. The rolls of film are piling up. I have two boxes of ID-11 I pre ordered from B&H months ago. Hopefully they’ll be here in the next two weeks.
 

cliveh

Subscriber
Joined
Oct 9, 2010
Messages
7,489
Format
35mm RF
I would have thought D76 would be highly consistent and have never had a problem. Perhaps you are still developing the film as you would in ID11 and have not adjusted for what is best time/temp in D76?
 

xkaes

Subscriber
Joined
Mar 25, 2006
Messages
4,516
Location
Colorado
Format
Multi Format
brian steinberger said:
Im not interested in experimenting anymore. Hopefully the new ID-11 is same as the old and I can move on.
Click to expand...

That apparently is a big IF. There's no need to "experiment", but apparently it is a good idea to "test" -- or as commonly heard, "Trust, but verify".
 
OP
OP

David Lingham

Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2006
Messages
408
Location
Cardiff St Wales UK
Format
Medium Format
cliveh said:
I would have thought D76 would be highly consistent and have never had a problem. Perhaps you are still developing the film as you would in ID11 and have not adjusted for what is best time/temp in D76?
Click to expand...

I used the same time, temp and dilutions as I did when I previously used D76, and now I get different results.
 

Don_ih

Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2021
Messages
7,400
Location
Ontario
Format
35mm RF
If you buy a new pack of D76, mix it according to instructions, and it behaves differently than any old pack of D76 or ID11, for that matter, there's something wrong with your new pack.

David Lingham said:
neither is the leader as dense
Click to expand...

Should not happen in good developer. The leader should be at maximum density well before the development of the film is done.
 

Ian Grant

Subscriber
Joined
Aug 2, 2004
Messages
23,234
Location
West Midland
Format
Multi Format
xkaes said:
That apparently is a big IF. There's no need to "experiment", but apparently it is a good idea to "test" -- or as commonly heard, "Trust, but verify".
Click to expand...

Ilford has stated that the only differences you will notice with ID-11, Microphen, Perceptol,& Bromophem, will be the newly designed packaging.

There's absolutely no reason why there would be any changes in terms of use and results.

Ian
 

cliveh

Subscriber
Joined
Oct 9, 2010
Messages
7,489
Format
35mm RF
David Lingham said:
I used the same time, temp and dilutions as I did when I previously used D76, and now I get different results.
Click to expand...

Are you mixing it up in the same way? Has the pH of your water changed?
 

retina_restoration

Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2023
Messages
958
Location
Wilammette Valley, Oregon
Format
35mm RF
Dali said:
Cannot tell you. My D76 is home made, so I avoid this kind of inconvenience.
Click to expand...

+1
I won't buy Kodak D-76 anymore because the Kodak chemistry has been so unreliable in the past decade. They seem to think tweaking the recipe for D-76 is a perfectly reasonable thing to do. No thanks. I will make my own at home, from the published recipe (Darkroom Cookbook)
 

Doremus Scudder

Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2002
Messages
3,565
Location
Eugene, Oregon
Format
4x5 Format
Kodak seems to be actively destroying whatever reputation they have left. If D-76 indeed has problems, then there's nothing left to trust... Any word from Kodak regarding this? (Whoever "Kodak" is these days.)

Doremus
 

MattKing

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
51,992
Location
Delta, BC Canada
Format
Medium Format
How close is your time and temperature to the time and temperature recommendation attached to the product?
Is there a possibility that the newest version is actually closer to those recommendations?
I ask, because all the Kodak darkroom chemicals have gone through a myriad of changes - constituent component suppliers, manufacturers, packaging, distribution entities - during those very tumultuous years.
The current product was probably designed to respond the same way as the old specifications set out, but they would have been required to design around all sorts of modern changes to make that happen.
 

MattKing

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
51,992
Location
Delta, BC Canada
Format
Medium Format
David Lingham said:
As close as I can be, I’m fairly attentive to details like thst.
Click to expand...

Just for clarity.
Ten years ago, you found that the recommended time and temperature combinations were suitable for you, and that you had no need back then to customize them to your preferences?
Were you working back then at or near 20C, and are you still working at or near 20C?
 

cliveh

Subscriber
Joined
Oct 9, 2010
Messages
7,489
Format
35mm RF
David Lingham said:
Mixing the same way, same water supply. If there’s any change in the mains water it hasn’t affected the consistency of Ilford products in the last 10yrs.
Click to expand...

Could you have made a dilution error you are unaware of?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…