Not Recommended...But I'm Trying It...

[Down Under]

My spoon recipe for D-72

Water at 110°F ------------------- 750ml
(pinch of sodium sulfite added first to help the Metol dissolve)
Metol -------------------------------- 1/3 tsp (just estimate - if you've got a 1/4 tsp measure then that heaping)
Sodium sulfite -------------------- 4 tsp (1 Tbsp + 1 tsp is easiest; 1 Tbsp = 3 tsp)
Hydroquinone -------------------- 1 1/2 tsp light (i.e., just a smidge less; really doesn't matter)
Sodium carbonate, mono. --- 1 1/2 Tbsp
Potassium bromide ------------ 1/8 tsp
Water to make ------------------ 1 liter

I usually double this and make 2 liters of working solution at a time.

There's lots of leeway in D-72. You can vary the proportions by quite a bit and still have a great print developer. If you want more active, add a bit more carbonate. I'll often at BTA to this as well during printing to clear whites a bit if I need. As long as you are relatively consistent, you'll have a developer that mixes easily and acts the same every time. I've got balance beam scales and digital scales for more precise things, but I don't need them for mixing D-72 or ID-62.

Hope this helps,

Doremus

+1000. To my mind D72 was Kodak's best kept hidden secret (along with their much-maligned film developer, the infamous DK60a) and several of my fellow darkroom enthusiasts who also mix their own at home agree with this.

D72 is easily whipped up and bending a few rules in the mix can produce some interesting results. After years of aiming for high contrast with shadow details I finally gave up on this and decided to go entirely the way of printing for mid-tones, which should have been obvious to me back in the 1970s but hey, I'm a slow learner.

Fiddling a bit with the metol-hydroquinone mix can give you some interesting results in the mid greys. Keep notes of what you do and experiment - my method is to brew up a liter of normal stock D72, decant it into 200 ml bottles, and then add bits and pieces in small amounts to mix up 600 ml of 'finished' developer.

Going easy or heavy on the pot-brom (potassium bromide to most of you) will also show immediate results. As one who still has a fair stock of outdated printing paper in my darkroom, I've also learned how to use 'benzo' (-triazole) along with the bromide, but a word of caution here, these two when put together don't always make a good partnership. I've found it best to err on the side of heavy with the benzo, light with the pot-brom. Again, experiment and keep detailed notes along with sample prints.

Then there was the time I added a bit of sodium hydroxide to one bottle of my stock mixture... try it and see.

I could say more but a lot of the fun is in the experimenting, so just go for it.

(As an afterthought) Doremus, have you ever worked with Kodak DK60a? A few friends still use it, and say if mixed with a little care, it's the closest thing to Kodak's HC-110 for mid tones. I'm still on my last stocks of HC-110 concentrate and I was a Thornton's Two Bath developer fan (some would say fanatic) for a long time, but DK60a was my preferred film brew in Canada back in the 1960s and I'm thinking about returning to it for nostalgia's sake - how will it work with 21st century T-grain films?

 

[Wayne]

My spoon recipe for D-72

Water at 110°F ------------------- 750ml
(pinch of sodium sulfite added first to help the Metol dissolve)
Metol -------------------------------- 1/3 tsp (just estimate - if you've got a 1/4 tsp measure then that heaping)
Sodium sulfite -------------------- 4 tsp (1 Tbsp + 1 tsp is easiest; 1 Tbsp = 3 tsp)
Hydroquinone -------------------- 1 1/2 tsp light (i.e., just a smidge less; really doesn't matter)
Sodium carbonate, mono. --- 1 1/2 Tbsp
Potassium bromide ------------ 1/8 tsp
Water to make ------------------ 1 liter

I usually double this and make 2 liters of working solution at a time.

There's lots of leeway in D-72. You can vary the proportions by quite a bit and still have a great print developer. If you want more active, add a bit more carbonate. I'll often at BTA to this as well during printing to clear whites a bit if I need. As long as you are relatively consistent, you'll have a developer that mixes easily and acts the same every time. I've got balance beam scales and digital scales for more precise things, but I don't need them for mixing D-72 or ID-62.

Hope this helps,

Doremus

I think I see what you did now, except for the sulfite. This is presumably to directly make a 1:2 working solution, not a stock solution. The numbers work out a lot more well rounded than they do for a liter of stock. But why so much sulfite? That's more than half the sulfite of the stock solution, for what is essentially a 1/3 strength solution.

 

[Doremus Scudder]

That isn't even remotely close to the formula I come up with using the Darkroom Cookbook and its weight to volume conversions. Is this a working solution? I should have clarified that mine was for stock, to be mixed 1:2 or as you prefer

Yes, for a working-strength solution. There's no point in making stock (and having it sit around and go bad) when it's this easy to make what you need, fresh, on the spot.

It's easy to make a double batch and dilute it less if you want a stronger dilution, but the reasons for tweaking developer activity and strength have largely disappeared with modern VC papers...

Doremus

 

[Doremus Scudder]

I think I see what you did now, except for the sulfite. This is presumably to directly make a 1:2 working solution, not a stock solution. The numbers work out a lot more well rounded than they do for a liter of stock. But why so much sulfite? That's more than half the sulfite of the stock solution, for what is essentially a 1/3 strength solution.

Oops! I have double the amount of sulfite needed for one liter here!! My original post has been corrected. Sorry for the confusion; I was halving the amounts in my 2-liter recipe and neglected to do so for the sulfite.

Too bad my quoted formula in subsequent messages can't be corrected... Moderators? Those that quoted me?

Doremus

 

[Doremus Scudder]

... (As an afterthought) Doremus, have you ever worked with Kodak DK60a? A few friends still use it, and say if mixed with a little care, it's the closest thing to Kodak's HC-110 for mid tones. I'm still on my last stocks of HC-110 concentrate and I was a Thornton's Two Bath developer fan (some would say fanatic) for a long time, but DK60a was my preferred film brew in Canada back in the 1960s and I'm thinking about returning to it for nostalgia's sake - how will it work with 21st century T-grain films?

I've never used DK60a. I switched from D-76 and HC-110 to PMK years ago and have never looked back, so I don't know how it'll work with modern films. The formula is similar enough to D-76 with added Kodalk that I believe it should work similarly, but have more activity than regular D-76.

Doremus

 

[MattKing]

Too bad my quoted formula in subsequent messages can't be corrected... Moderators? Those that quoted me?

I used the Report Post function to draw the moderator's attention to your request.

 

[Down Under]

I've never used DK60a. I switched from D-76 and HC-110 to PMK years ago and have never looked back, so I don't know how it'll work with modern films. The formula is similar enough to D-76 with added Kodalk that I believe it should work similarly, but have more activity than regular D-76.

Doremus

Thanks! I've since had the thought that my memories of DK60a may be more nostalgia than useful in this age of modern T-grain films - my surviving 120 roll film negatives from that era show an 'interesting' grain pattern and surprisingly good mid tones which we all took for granted in those halcyon days of high silver content in films, but back then I was using films like Kodak's Verichrome Pan, Ansco and even DuPont, all of which are now almost prehistoric.

As regards DK60a and modern emulsions, I'll take my own oft-quoted advice - mix up a batch of developer and experiment. Something to do over the Christmas-New Year period when a sort of funereal silence descends on our small country town here in Australia. Backyard barbecue parties, good red wine and film processing, the way to go!

If results show promise, I'll post something in the new year.

 

[tezzasmall]

My spoon recipe for D-72

Water at 110°F ------------------- 750ml
(pinch of sodium sulfite added first to help the Metol dissolve)
Metol -------------------------------- 1/3 tsp (just estimate - if you've got a 1/4 tsp measure then that heaping)
Sodium sulfite -------------------- 2 tsp (Note: this is an edit and correction as per Wayne's post below*)
Hydroquinone -------------------- 1 1/2 tsp light (i.e., just a smidge less; really doesn't matter)
Sodium carbonate, mono. --- 1 1/2 Tbsp
Potassium bromide ------------ 1/8 tsp
Water to make ------------------ 1 liter


There's lots of leeway in D-72. You can vary the proportions by quite a bit and still have a great print developer. I've got balance beam scales and digital scales for more precise things, but I don't need them for mixing D-72 or ID-62.

Doremus

That isn't even remotely close to the formula I come up with using the Darkroom Cookbook and its weight to volume conversions. Is this a working solution? I should have clarified that mine was for stock, to be mixed 1:2 or as you prefer

I don't know about your recipe Wayne, but this is the one that I've been using and it works brilliantly!

But as said by many, one can be a bit casual almost, with varying amounts of the chemicals and still get good results.

Terry S

Kodak D-72 Print Developer
Metric Spoons and Ounces
Water (125 deg. F) 500 ml. 16 oz.
(Pinch of sodium sulfite added first)
Metol (or "Elon") 3 gm. 1 teaspoon
Sodium sulfite, anhydrous 45 gm. 2 tablespoons
Hydroquinone 12 gm. 1 tablespoon plus 1 teaspoon
Sodium carbonate, monohydrated 80 gm. 4 tablespoons plus + 1 & 1/4 teaspoon
Potassium bromide, anhydrous 2 gm. 1/2 teaspoon
Cold water to make 1 liter 1 quart

Dilute 1 part D-72 to 2 parts water for use. This formula makes a print developer similar to Dektol. Be sure to mix chemicals in the order listed. Metol doesn't dissolve readily if other chemicals are already present.

==========================================================================

 

[ic-racer]

So, then to come full circle, anyone mixing all the powders together in a jar and making the working solution from a single scoop of powder?

 

[Wayne]

So, then to come full circle, anyone mixing all the powders together in a jar and making the working solution from a single scoop of powder?

It doesn't make a lot of sense to do that, so I doubt anyone has done it. Donald has shown you can mix D-72 at 2x strength stock solution, so just mix a large batch at 2x and use a couple of wine bladders or other containers of your choice and you should be good for a long time. That's if your goal is to mix as infrequently as possible. Maybe you can achieve your goals just by storing your stock from packaged powder better, like in wine bladders maybe? I just dumped a liter of stock that I mixed 2 years ago, and it wasn't even dark. I just needed to be 100% sure I had fresh for a test I was doing. It was stored in full PETE water bottles over 2 unheated winters where it very likely froze.

 

[ic-racer]

What sense does it make to add the water before it is time to use it?

 

[Donald Qualls]

What sense does it make to add the water before it is time to use it?

Ensures that every time you pour some to dilute, it's the same. Solutions tend to even themselves out (unless there are huge density differences); powders tend to sort themselves by species.

 

[MattKing]

What sense does it make to add the water before it is time to use it?

With respect to a powder that has been mixed by others, it makes it easier to obtain uniform results, and it is a bit easier to accurately measure partial quantities.
If you are making it up yourself, the only reason is ease of measurement.
Some recipes require very precise measurements of very small quantities. For others, teaspoons are fine.

 

[relistan]

I can sympathize with wanting to split up the powder. If it works out, great! I mixed Dektol a few times and it was such a huge pain to have to mix so much at once and then have it around in bottles and I don't print all that often so just generally in the way. I tried a few other liquid developers and in the end I switched to Ilford Multigrade Developer which gives me—to my eye—pretty close to the same results as Dektol but is liquid, lasts a really long time in a partially full bottle and can be mixed up whenever I get around to printing.

 

[ic-racer]

Thanks for all the great replies. A lot of good information in the thread.

 

[removed account4]

So, then to come full circle, anyone mixing all the powders together in a jar and making the working solution from a single scoop of powder?

I put all sorts of powers together in a container that I use a coffee scoop to scoop out. its black as soot and mixes OK. I've had it in a container for IDK 2 years? works about the same as it did the day I mixed it.. I give the container a big shake before I scoop anything out.

 

[revdoc]

What I used to do: put the bulk powder into a container and shake it for a minute. Leave it sit so any dust settles, then scoop it out into X piles, one scoop per pile. Repeat until it's all divided into X more-or-less equal piles. Put each pile into its own airtight container.

The idea behind this was to ensure, as far as possible, that the composition of the subdivided developer is consistent. As far as that goes, it succeeded, but the powder also went brown due to exposure to air. It still worked, but it was annoying.

These days I mix E72 fresh from raw ingredients for every session. Takes two minutes and costs almost nothing.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I always mix bags of chemical for the complete package for numerous reasons such as chemicals settling out instead of staying homogeneously mixed. I talked to PE about this and he agreed that one should mix complete packages and store in sealed bottles. I always test all developers before developing film or starting a print session. I always keep a spare bag besides the cost of a bag of chemicals is not going to financially break me.

 

[ic-racer]

I have gone through two bags of Dektol with this technique so far. No issues at this time.

 

[Doremus Scudder]

I have gone through two bags of Dektol with this technique so far. No issues at this time.

Dektol is fairly forgiving; even if you don't get a completely homogeneous mix of powders when you scoop, you're still likely to have a print developer that will work just fine. And, since we adjust contrast and exposure as we zero in on a fine print, the precise characteristics of the developer are not all that important as long as the other parameters in the mix can be varied to compensate. So, if you're getting good results this way, go for it.

I would be hesitant to do this with a powdered film developer (e.g., D-76) since repeatability and precision are much more important in that context (unless, of course, you develop by inspection).

Best,

Doremus

 

[ic-racer]

I would be hesitant to do this with a powdered film developer (e.g., D-76) since repeatability and precision are much more important in that context (unless, of course, you develop by inspection).

Best,

Doremus

Yes indeed.

 

[Patrick Robert James]

You can get away with all kinds of stuff with paper developers. They aren't that critical.

If you want your Dektol to last longer you can saturate it with Sodium Sulfite. That might work. I've done that before but not with Dektol. 100g/l works.

Also, when you store it displace the oxygen in the bottle with something inert. I use Butane since it is easy to get. Once tiny spritz works. You can use the stuff designed to preserve paint or wine too. I also use the Butane to keep my rapid fix from going bad, both stock and mixed.

Hope that helps you.

 

[Vaughn]

Dektol is fairly forgiving; even if you don't get a completely homogeneous mix of powders when you scoop, you're still likely to have a print developer that will work just fine. ...
Doremus

Upon reading the formulas of various paper developers, I read on one that changing the amount of Potassium bromide would allow one to slightly change print color. It might apply to just that formula, but it seems that a chemical that is in the amount of 2 gm/liter (compared to about 140 grams of other chemicals that would go into that liter) would be very difficult to spread so little evenly in big mix.

Granted, any color change would be minor and could be masked by toning, but if one had a series of high-key images on the wall, for example, a slight color shift might be noticeable.

 

[Doremus Scudder]

... I read on one that changing the amount of Potassium bromide would allow one to slightly change print color. It might apply to just that formula, but it seems that a chemical that is in the amount of 2 gm/liter (compared to about 140 grams of other chemicals that would go into that liter) would be very difficult to spread so little evenly in big mix.
Granted, any color change would be minor and could be masked by toning, but if one had a series of high-key images on the wall, for example, a slight color shift might be noticeable.

True, but likely no different than using a few different developers with differing amounts of bromide.

Plus, modern papers don't seem to change image tone that much with changes in the bromide concentration.

FWIW, one can play around with what image-tone change there is by adding more bromide to warm the image a bit or adding BTA to cool it somewhat (this latter comes with an activity change too).

Best,

Doremus

 

[Vaughn]

Thanks. When I was silver gelatin printing with Portriga Rapid and after a specific color from selenium toning, I found that by being careful with Developer and fixing regime and keep it the same, that I could better time and get predictable results when selenium toning. There was a dramatic color shifts during toning.