PPD for Edwal 12 developer......................where to buy????

[trendland]

The color developing agents CD-1, CD-2, CD-3, and CD-4 can all be used as substitutes for PPD in fine grain developers. CD-1 and CD-2 are chemically very similar to PPD. They are also cheaper than the other two. However, they also produce allergic reactions and cross sensitization. CD-3 and CD-4 are somewhat safer to use. Interestingly the color developing agents have also replaced developing agents that are no longer made such as Atomal.

Kodak's answer to the Sease formula was D-25. By lowering the pH of the developer development times were lengthened thereby the solvent action of the sulfite has more time to work. Same fine grain without the danger of PPD.

Yes good idea Gerald - to use CD1 or CD2 I have had the same idea some
times ago.
But looking to the chemical structure
CD1 and CD2 are very more complicate/complex than PPD.
May be that it works very simular - does
it contains PPD additional - this is not in my mind now - but yes it is within the
structure formular - you mentioned it above.

But then it is not origginaly - I would say
you can substitute it in many ways - with
the lost of the special effect.

So as D25 does.

with regards

 

[trendland]

An old friend and I were talking about film developers and he mentioned that he wished he could get his hands on Edwal's 12 film developer again. He said it was one of his favorites from years gone bye and now he wants to start doing his own developing and printing again. I told him he could mix his own with chems from Photographers Formulary or just buy their ready made Developer 12. I told him if he bought the chemicals (I gave him the recipe from the cookbook) he could use my scales and magnetic stirrer to make his batch. He emailed me a couple of days later and said you can't buy PPD (p-Phenylenediamine) at Photographers Formulary and bought the Developer 12 mix instead. I was curious and checked myself and he was right. I then started looking for a place to buy it and came up empty handed. Does anyone no where to buy PPD? Also, I remember Gerald Koch, I think, saying something about color developer CD-1 or CD-2 could be used instead of PPD. What about P-Aminophenol Hydrochloride as a substitute?

P-Aminolphenol Hydrochloride is Rodinal. As a substitute usable I would
say - but a little bit different with ist effects to Film as developer.

Instead of it you could name many substitudes - but with the work of
reformulation.

Perhaps Geralds D-25 is indeed the
nearest developer as complete substitude.
With regards

 

[Petraio Prime]

The color developing agents CD-1, CD-2, CD-3, and CD-4 can all be used as substitutes for PPD in fine grain developers. CD-1 and CD-2 are chemically very similar to PPD. They are also cheaper than the other two. However, they also produce allergic reactions and cross sensitization. CD-3 and CD-4 are somewhat safer to use. Interestingly the color developing agents have also replaced developing agents that are no longer made such as Atomal.

Kodak's answer to the Sease formula was D-25. By lowering the pH of the developer development times were lengthened thereby the solvent action of the sulfite has more time to work. Same fine grain without the danger of PPD.

Precisely! Simpler and more efficient, less dangerous chemicals.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Any PPD will work. In my comments the term PPD is meant to include the basic compound and all of its derivatives up through CD6. They all work, but need a boosting agent to achieve the true speed of the emulsion. Above posts indicate what some of them are. They work fine, but you have to understand the underlying chemistry that is working here before you come up with a suitable formula that works. It can yield outstanding results. These formulas were developed (pun unintended) in KRL but never commercialized. I have no exact formula.

PE

 

[Monday317]

Salicylic acid and similar were used with PPD many years ago, definitely before WWII so not a new approach at all.

Ian

All true, Ian, however the use of ascorbic acid is new as Jay finds it to be superadditive with PPD, opening up possibilities that were previously unknown.

That said, this is not The Last Word On Film Developers by any means. There are likely all manner of things around that may do as well, or better than anything we have to date, just waiting to be stumbled across.

I wouldn't be surprised at all if someone came up with the New Miracle Developer: Deadskunkinol...

 

[Photo Engineer]

I think that AA is not the answer if you consider the chemistry.

PE

 

[trendland]

P-Aminolphenol Hydrochloride is Rodinal. As a substitute usable I would
say - but a little bit different with ist effects to Film as developer.

Instead of it you could name many substitudes - but with the work of
reformulation.

Perhaps Geralds D-25 is indeed the
nearest developer as complete substitude.
With regards

Sorry - I made a little mistake.
Of cause P-Aminophenol Hydrochlorid
is NOT Rodinal.
Because of HCl .

Perhaps I mixed it up with
4-Hydroxyanilin - That is indeed
Rodinal (with terrible name) - nothing to
do with Hydrochlorid of cause.
Let's better say P-Aminophenol thats
quite clearer.

 

[trendland]

Any PPD will work. In my comments the term PPD is meant to include the basic compound and all of its derivatives up through CD6. They all work, but need a boosting agent to achieve the true speed of the emulsion. Above posts indicate what some of them are. They work fine, but you have to understand the underlying chemistry that is working here before you come up with a suitable formula that works. It can yield outstanding results. These formulas were developed (pun unintended) in KRL but never commercialized. I have no exact formula.

PE

Yes - thank you. Well the work of the
underlaying chemistry before coming
to a fine formular is indeed not simple
on ones hand.

I should have some of the very early formulas with PPD (long before Edwal's 12) - I just have to find them.
As I have it in mind - these formulations
comming from pre 1900 and they are in use with a "boosting agends" I mentioned it as superadditives.

Still 1900 there was a need of a "second
develloper" to make PPD usable.

It is mentioned here before as a " losy"
allone developer agend.

That should be absolute correct.

As I remember the very early formulars
I have - are with some speculations for
all of the used chemical compounds.

Because it was the work of very early
photographers - so there were formulars
in often "variations" as a secret from many.

As I understood they have the superadditives to PPD in use (from year to year )
witch were the modernest at the time.

So you have just have a look to the history of developer agends and the concerning period - and you know
whant was in use - the latest agend.

But with speculations on correct formulations. (very lots of variants).
As a result - the Asa rates comming up
from decade to decade as combination
of new emmulsion improvements and
better developer agents.

BUT in the very early years they used
PPD "allone" developer with very bad
results due to insufficient speed.

Yes - the correct working formular is
a mystery - but very interessting because
"Forgotten" !

with regards

 

[trendland]

I think that AA is not the answer if you consider the chemistry.

PE

All true, Ian, however the use of ascorbic acid is new as Jay finds it to be superadditive with PPD, opening up possibilities that were previously unknown.

That said, this is not The Last Word On Film Developers by any means. There are likely all manner of things around that may do as well, or better than anything we have to date, just waiting to be stumbled across.

I wouldn't be surprised at all if someone came up with the New Miracle Developer: Deadskunkinol...

I wouldn't be very surprised if within one
decade the market to bw developer crashed in a way as we had seen this with films.

No worry about to get D-76 in 10 years.
You should also can by some other developer like X-tol.

I am sure you will have higher pricees too.

And of cause some of us have stored ammounds of powder developer just now.

So all its doesn't matter. I am a bit pessimistic - better is to be on the safe side.

And when you have the choise of only some common developers somewere in
the future you would be glad as glad to
be able to play like a child with different
formulations and substitudes.

And the time to make ecperiences in all
ways is NOW !!!
So the question is not if someone get the
"world formular" in bw film.

Therefore yust use Xtol it works perfekt and Kodak has spend more time and
financial ressource for improvement
As anybode else could afford.

The time is NOW - because you can get the most chemicals relative easy and
cheap.

Concerning PPD you can see how future
could effect

 

[Gerald C Koch]

People are seeking the holy grail of developers once again. This has all been thrashed out before. There just isn't one. It is a futile quest, sorry.

 

[Monday317]

People are seeking the holy grail of developers once again. This has all been thrashed out before. There just isn't one. It is a futile quest, sorry.

Who said anything about grails? All I said was, here's a new spin on using PPD. I couldn't agree more; there's no one perfect film/camera/developer/paper, etc., because we all have different outlooks. You guys take this stuff waaaay too seriously! Buy some drums...

 

[Ian Grant]

People are seeking the holy grail of developers once again. This has all been thrashed out before. There just isn't one. It is a futile quest, sorry.

I'm not so sure Gerald, Johnsons made some superb developers based on Meritol, their PPD/Pyrocatechin fusion. I also think after initial interest in Ascorbic Acid in developers there was a halt until Xtol. There was a Swedish Patent for Ascorbic Acid developers that seems to have held up Kodak's Xtol which only appears after the Patent expires.

There really wasn't very much innovative research into developer by Eastman Kodak until after WWII, 1920's/30's/40's research was not outstanding in fact it's pedestrian, slow and Kodak really only reached a peak with Xtol which was years behind where it should have been..

Developers like Kodatol/DK20 were many years behind similar developers from other companies, I was looking at Patents yesterday for a similar dveloper. The bottom line is we have excellent developers today the best are without a doubt are Xtol and Pyrocat HD. Could we find something better still - probably but all developers are a compromises and it's not just the developer that's important.

We are forgetting the huge improvement in film emulsions since WWII and that things like grain are inherent in modern films like the Tmax and Delta ranges are less changeable by choice of developer.

PPD is slightly toxic, a great many women (millions) used it regularly in hair dyes for decades - and there were toxic shock deaths !!!! However we as photographers use it more carefully.

Is there a holy grail in terms of developers ? Well Kodak went looking for it with Xtol which is by far their best film developer, their comparison chart matches most peoples experience. Sandy King's Pyrocat HD is similar.

Ian

 

[Monday317]

I think that AA is not the answer if you consider the chemistry.

PE

Not to be argumentative, but bumblebees aren't supposed to be able to fly, either.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Kodak Research had two extraordinary B&W developers when that division was shut down in about 1990. The answer was not AA.

Yes, there is a Santa Claus, or at least a potential pair of magic bullets out there. No, I do not have a formula and yes it would take a lot of R&D to get one.

PE

 

[Petraio Prime]

Kodak Research had two extraordinary B&W developers when that division was shut down in about 1990. The answer was not AA.

Yes, there is a Santa Claus, or at least a potential pair of magic bullets out there. No, I do not have a formula and yes it would take a lot of R&D to get one.

PE

UFG was superb, and I used tons of it. Hardly anyone talked about it though.

 

[Monday317]

Kodak Research had two extraordinary B&W developers when that division was shut down in about 1990. The answer was not AA.

Yes, there is a Santa Claus, or at least a potential pair of magic bullets out there. No, I do not have a formula and yes it would take a lot of R&D to get one.

PE

I don't pretend ascorbic acid is any kind of miracle, but neither would I have believed coffee in an alkaline solution would reduce silver either. And I sure hope no one gets too darn serious about Urinol. But we shouldn't poo-poo something that works, yais..?