And Kodak also expects working solution X-Tol used in a replenishment regime to last indefinitely, if replenishment with sufficiently active replenisher is done sufficiently regularly.So, yes, developer changes properties even in perfect storage -- this is why it has a shelf life; this is why it's preferable (IMO) to buy powder developers or mix from raw chemicals than to buy liquid concentrates, But Kodak expects properly stored Xtol to last six months after mixing, and "opened and resealed, partly full" to last two months without deteriorating outside Kodak's original specs.
That may be what Kodak state but in the likes of winebags and this seems to apply to other reliable means of preventing oxidisation as reported by other members I get more like a year. I cannot say why Kodak states what it states but it may just be that it like other makers of chemicals is very conservative in its life of developer statementsDonald, I agree with your reasoning. However, everything you said is based on one (big) assumption that developer properties do not change over time in the absence of oxygen. I doubt it as there must be solid reasons behind Kodak's stated lifespan of full-strength Xtol as "six months in full, tightly capped bottles". And that's for fresh/clean solution. Development byproducts only complicate the picture.
@pentaxuser some people reported the need to replenish even if you don't develop, as the developer becomes less active over time. IIRC someone suggesting replenishing 70ml every two weeks even if you don't develop any film. I did not have this issue as my volume is pretty high.
yupCertainly; vitamin C developers are quite sensitive to iron impurities. Good call.
I love wine bags. I keep my replenisher in the wine bag and my working solution in a plastic 2 liter jug. While processing my film in XTOL, I dispense the replenisher and pour 70 mils/ per roll jug holding the working developer. Then I pour the used developer back into the jug until it’s topped off and I toss what’s left over. There’s no air in both the replenisher bladder and the working developer jug. As I mentioned, my developer gets weak over time.That may be what Kodak state but in the likes of winebags and this seems to apply to other reliable means of preventing oxidisation as reported by other members I get more like a year. I cannot say why Kodak states what it states but it may just be that it like other makers of chemicals is very conservative in its life of developer statements
pentaxuser
I mixed my Xtol stock in 2007 and have replenished at the rate of 90ml per standard film ever since. For many years my development time for Tmax 400 @68F has been consistent at 11min 15sec. This is definitely weaker than Kodak's recommendation of 7min 15sec but I suspect replenished Xtol activity settles to higher or lower value depending on replenishment rate.
Yep, this is a great idea.One way to check if it's actually bad replenisher (since it's the same as original working solution) is to process a strip of film in the replenisher directly. If that also comes up thin (or maybe extremely thin) then you've mixed a bad batch of replenisher (and your filtering is likely to blame for one reason or another).
Me too. Pure water, full bottles. Since I got Joboized I use mostly one shot, but I wouldn't be afraid to use replenished straight XTOL in a Jobo. It was designed to accommodate big processors. I just wonder if it's the iron thing in water? ?Modelling the chemical behavior is interesting but it does nothing to find out why a minority of people have the weakening problem. I have used replenished XTOL following the instructions exactly for over a decade and like the vast majority I have not had a problem.
My first Xtol batch ran with regular replenishment from 1998 to 2006 when it was put into storage for 18 months when I had no darkroom. On testing in 2007 it had lost half its activity so I discarded it.Maris, I read this as, you mixed your original developer in 2007 and are still running the same developer bath with replenishment, is this correct?
Mick.
My first Xtol batch ran with regular replenishment from 1998 to 2006 when it was put into storage for 18 months when I had no darkroom. On testing in 2007 it had lost half its activity so I discarded it.
The current stock bottle of Xtol was started in 2007 and has seen continuous use ever since at a replenishment rate of 90ml per standard film. The only extra process I do is to pre-wash all films to prevent antihalation dye, acutance dye, speed trimming dye, and sensitising dye accumulating in my (very) well seasoned Xtol.
The only extra process I do is to pre-wash all films to prevent antihalation dye, acutance dye, speed trimming dye, and sensitising dye accumulating in my (very) well seasoned Xtol.
Tap water only, never RO or distilled water. The company that supplies tap water here, Seqwater, reports iron content below 0.01 ppm. No problems with Xtol.@Maris: I'm curious to know if you pre-wash in distilled/RO water. A little bit of water from the pre-wash goes into the developer and over a period of time there's accumulation. If you used tap water for pre-wash and you never saw the developer deteriorating, it probably means the fear of trace iron from tap water affecting the developer is exaggerated.
About 20 roll "equivalents" a month as a mix of 8x10 sheet, 4x5 sheet, and 120 roll film.That's impressive. I've only been replenishing for a couple months, mine is a little blue because I forgot to prewash my Fomapan 400 (120 size) once, but that'll dilute away over time. About how much film (rolls per month) do you process?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?