ONE cheap, easy developer for Tri-X

[waynecrider]

Diafine. Wide range of developing temperature and works well.

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

For economy Diafine is hard to beat. You pay $15 or so when you start a batch, and as long as you're careful not to contaminate the two solutions, you could use the same batch for a very long time.

The question that the OP needs to answer is if they want something that's easy to USE (little mixing, no messy powders, etc) or something that's easy to PRINT.

If you want something easy to USE - single shot liquid concentrates AND Diafine are about as easy as it gets. Even HC-110 syrup is easy.

Easy to print? It just might be worth it to put forth the extra effort and mix up D76. It is indeed forgiving, and I think it would be easy to achieve amazing results fairly quickly and easily with this commonly available developer. To me, Diafine isn't flexible enough to fit into this category. It works pretty well in scenes with plenty of contrast. But in flat lighting I've never gotten easily printable negatives with it.

- Thomas

 

[Larry Bullis]

I meant with respect to exposing it for using Diafine.

Apparently, others must have different quality requirements than I have. I would NEVER use tri x with diafine at 1250! The neat thing about diafine, and it is truly remarkable - you can actually use tri x at 400 and get good negatives!

If I want faster film, I try to use faster film. The lottery has better odds than "pushing" film. If your livelihood depends on it, that fantasy evaporates really fast.

Of course you don't believe me.

 

[Larry Bullis]

Yeah, but with D-76, you have to mix it up ahead of time (like the previous evening), while with HC-110, you mix it up right before you develop. With HC-110, you do not need to heat up water, or mix up powers (that are fun to inhale), or get disappointed as a mixed up solution that you only used once, but that was like 5 months ago, went bad (because you mix HC-110 as a one shot as you go developer).

It is very true that HC110 is hard to beat for convenience. It's a good developer. However, if you don't happen to like it, and prefer D76, mix it in a pair of 64 ounce stainless graduates and cool it in ice water. Will take about five minutes of vigilant dipping and stirring with the thermometer. No big deal, really.

Some of my favorite images were done with D76 stock. I do think there is a migration, though, so just where these were done in its life cycle, I don't know.

 

[Larry Bullis]

o me, Diafine isn't flexible enough to fit into this category. It works pretty well in scenes with plenty of contrast. But in flat lighting I've never gotten easily printable negatives with it.
- Thomas

I think you are right about this, Thomas. I use it for high contrast scenes. However, it works well for normal ones, also. I'd just avoid it for scenes that need to be expanded.

 

[BetterSense]

Easy to print? It just might be worth it to put forth the extra effort and mix up D76. It is indeed forgiving, and I think it would be easy to achieve amazing results fairly quickly and easily with this commonly available developer.

You should be a Kodak salesman.

It's hard not to use D76 due to 'classicness'; I just worry about the stock solution changing with age. But when I mix up Dektol I don't mix up a whole gallon, only a half-gallon. Maybe I could do the same with D76.

 

[Larry Bullis]

You should be a Kodak salesman.

It's hard not to use D76 due to 'classicness'; I just worry about the stock solution changing with age. But when I mix up Dektol I don't mix up a whole gallon, only a half-gallon. Maybe I could do the same with D76.

If you compare the formulae for D76 and its replenisher, D76R, you will see that they are very different. This is done deliberately to compensate for the oxidation of some of the components, and the contribution of bromide to the developer from processed film.

I've always enjoyed the replenished stock solution and have had really fine results with it. Part of this, is, I'm sure, that I started my career (in 1963) using it, and have a lingering preference for replenished systems when they are well designed.

Give it a try. What can you lose?

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

Re: Kodak salesman... Good one!

I like Kodak's products in general, I'll admit to that. But no more than Ilford or Fuji. D76 is fabulous from the perspective that it's available everywhere, and it does very little wrong. That's what I find easy about it, plus the accumulated knowledge about D76 out there is enormous compared to most other developers. That helps too if you ever need advice. (I would definitely trust bowzart - his advice has usually proved very helpful and successful in my own questions to him).

Good luck!

- Thomas

 

[Anscojohn]

If you compare the formulae for D76 and its replenisher, D76R, you will see that they are very different. This is done deliberately to compensate for the oxidation of some of the components, and the contribution of bromide to the developer from processed film.

I've always enjoyed the replenished stock solution and have had really fine results with it. Part of this, is, I'm sure, that I started my career (in 1963) using it, and have a lingering preference for replenished systems when they are well designed.

Give it a try. What can you lose?

*********
I agree that a replenished stock solution has an awful lot going for it. As I said in my original post, I prefer D23 and have used it almost exclusively since the early 1970s. OP wanted something cheeep; and what could be cheaper than "an ounce of metol and a pound of sodium sulfite in a gallon of water?"
Replenished, that gallon will process about 100 rolls of 35mm 36ex or equivalent. For the DK25R, an ounce and a quarter of metol, a pound of sulfite, and, what, about 40 gms of 20 Mule Team Borax.
Unused, the D23 and the DK25R will last (in my experience) years in filled and stoppered brown bottles and you always have chemical ready to go. Replenished D23 gives me a gutsy negative which often prints up with an almost three dimensional tonality. Almost impossible to block up highlights. Outstanding shadow detail; Great mid-tones. D23 is the most "forgiving" film developer I have every used: plus, having only one developing agent, time/temp changes are extremely linear--great for a newbie, right? And since D23 shadow detail is absolutely outstanding, it is great for "pushing" film as well.
Need even more compensation--Adams called D23 "semi-compensating-" use fresh stock diluted 1:3. Need "sharper" grain, dilute fresh D23 1:1. Need the adjacency effects of Beutler's? Use DK25R as solution A ala Beutler's with Solution B made up from Arm and Hammer Washing Soda.
All this with two photographic chemicals and two laundry products from the supermarket--and the laundry chems can also be used as hypo clearing agents--as well as doing laundry.
How can a frugal newbie who wants easily printable negatives go wrong? KISS!!

 

[jim appleyard]

You should be a Kodak salesman.

...But when I mix up Dektol I don't mix up a whole gallon, only a half-gallon. Maybe I could do the same with D76.

No, don't do this. You will mess up the proportions and get a working solution that isn't right. Mix up the whole bag.

 

[Tim Gray]

Diafine as many have said. Keeps forever. Run your film at 800-1600 depending on what you like.

In reality, developers don't cost *that* much. I use XTOL mostly. I think its $8/5L. Let's just call it 10. I use it in one shot 1:1 mode, so each roll of film uses 4 oz. That means I get 42 rolls per pack of XTOL. That's $0.25 of developer per roll of film. I don't care what film you are shooting, the cost of the developer is going to be small.

 

[brofkand]

No, don't do this. You will mess up the proportions and get a working solution that isn't right. Mix up the whole bag.

Re: using half a bag of Dektol. Freestyle sells 1L bags of Dektol. I used to buy them before I started printing more. If you only print occasionally, it's the best way to go. Or buy the Kentmere copy of Dektol in 1G bags, and save a little bit of money each time you mix.

If you keep Dektol in a stoppered bottle with very little headroom, it should last for a good while. Maybe a year or so.

 

[BetterSense]

Re: using half a bag of Dektol. Freestyle sells 1L bags of Dektol. I used to buy them before I started printing more. If you only print occasionally, it's the best way to go. Or buy the Kentmere copy of Dektol in 1G bags, and save a little bit of money each time you mix.

If you keep Dektol in a stoppered bottle with very little headroom, it should last for a good while. Maybe a year or so.

The reason I don't mix up the whole gallon isn't so much that I'm worried about it going bad, but for less storage space. Which is similar to the reason I kindof wanted to go with an easy-to-mix one-shot developer. It's just that I live in a 500sqft apartment with another person, and do my darkroom work in a bathroom that is about the size of a phone booth. I know a gallon of stock solution doesn't seem that big of a deal but it all adds up. I didn't know about the 1L bags though; I had bought mine at a local store.

 

[Tim Gray]

Diafine can be bought in qt sizes too. It would take two quart bottles for basically an infinite supply.

 

[fred]

I'm about to get some reels and a tank and start shooting B&W. I don't have very much money or resources and definitely no experience. My 'darkroom' is a very small apartment bathroom and I have one little basket that I keep everything in. I use Dektol only because it lasts forever...I keep the working solution in peanut butter jars and use it till it is deep brown before I throw it out. Convenience and price are of paramount importance. For money and WAF reasons I really need to keep things simple. And I really don't want to have to switch variables mid-stream.

I have decided on Tri-X because it is cheap in the form of Arista Premium 400, seems classic, and is fairly fast. I hear about different developers having different grain, tonality and other characteristics, and I don't really have a preference, because I have no experience. I just don't want super wacky results or anything either though. What I want is something cheap cheap, with a stock solution that lasts forever, maybe that can be mixed one-shot so I don't have to keep working solution, can be used at room temperature, and maybe even can be stand developed.

Any ideas?

for the 400tx
ID-11 in 5 liters
400TX iso 250 ID-11 20°C 1+1 10' as starting point
Kind regards
Fred

 

[Larry Bullis]

The reason I don't mix up the whole gallon isn't so much that I'm worried about it going bad, but for less storage space. Which is similar to the reason I kindof wanted to go with an easy-to-mix one-shot developer. It's just that I live in a 500sqft apartment with another person, and do my darkroom work in a bathroom that is about the size of a phone booth. I know a gallon of stock solution doesn't seem that big of a deal but it all adds up. I didn't know about the 1L bags though; I had bought mine at a local store.

If you mix the whole gallon and store it in a wine box or similar with a mylar bladder in it, it is square, and you can use storage space much more efficiently.

Also, since you will fill the bladder and squeeze all the remaining air out of it before putting the spigot back on, it will keep not just one year, not just two years but for a very long time. I dumped out some Beutler's that I had mixed in 2000 a few months ago and mixed new, thinking it might have turned. No difference at all.

 

[df cardwell]

BetterSense

If you would like to try a liquid concentrate that gives similar results to D-76,
two developers that have YEARS of success behind them,
are Edwal FG7 and Sprint Standard.
Both are INTENDED to mix with water, straight from the bottle.
Both Sprint and Edwal mastered the craft of preparing liquid photo chemistry long ago.


I admit to giving old fashioned advice,
but I'm a pretty old fashioned photographer.
While it is fun to mess with new stuff,
it is hard to argue with D-76, Sprint, and FG7, and decades of success.

 

[Uncle Bill]

I would say either D76/ID-11 or Xtol 1+1 is the golden combo for me.

 

[BetterSense]

If you mix the whole gallon and store it in a wine box or similar with a mylar bladder in it, it is square, and you can use storage space much more efficiently.

Wow, that is completely brilliant. I have a leftover wine box right now if my wife hasn't thrown it out. I MUST do this.

 

[Larry Bullis]

Wow, that is completely brilliant. I have a leftover wine box right now if my wife hasn't thrown it out. I MUST do this.

The best kind are the ones with the silver bags and the disk like plastic spigot that opens by lifting the tab. The kind that have the plastic faucet like spigots usually are made from a different plastic that I am not sure about but don't trust because I know the others work so well. Also, the fancy spigots are nearly impossible to get off without breaking something. If you don't have one like I'm describing, these work great:

http://www.survivalsolutions.com/store/product41.html

And they are very inexpensive.

 

[Larry Bullis]

While I'm looking at this thread, I can second df cardwell's suggestion of fg7. It is a really great developer, and extremely convenient. I use it without the added sulphite.

 

[BetterSense]

Yeah mine is a Franzia, I think, and has the plastic spigot. It pulled right out and I washed it, but I didn't think about different types being better. I wonder if there's any way to test it.

 

[dancqu]

What I want is something cheap ... a stock solution that
lasts forever, .... can be mixed one-shot ... can be used
at room temperature, and ... stand developed. Any ideas?

So, a low cost long lasting concentrate, usable one-shot, with
stand developing potential. Room temperature can be taken
for granted with any of the off-the-shelf developers.

For concentration with out a penalty in quality HC-110 and
Rodinal can't be beat. Both come very concentrated so take
practically no space. Both are one-shots. Both have extremely
long after opening shelf life. Rodinal, as reported, has a very
good stand developing character. HC-110?

Either a bit more costly than some but either one good for
many many rolls of film. Which one will it be? Dan

 

[Colin Corneau]

BetterSense

I
While it is fun to mess with new stuff,
it is hard to argue with D-76, Sprint, and FG7, and decades of success.

Well said, my compliments.

 

[PHOTOTONE]

So, a low cost long lasting concentrate, usable one-shot, with
stand developing potential. Room temperature can be taken
for granted with any of the off-the-shelf developers.

For concentration with out a penalty in quality HC-110 and
Rodinal can't be beat. Both come very concentrated so take
practically no space. Both are one-shots. Both have extremely
long after opening shelf life.Which one will it be? Dan

HC-110 can be used as a one-shot, or as a replenished developer,
your choice. It is only the weakest dilutions that are not suitable
for replenishment.

The syrup in the bottle is almost immortal.