Self-Replenishing developers

[Donald Qualls]

We all know about Xtol being its own replenisher (at least, if we've been paying attention). T-Max RS has this quality as well, but T-Max RS is no longer available in smaller packages than "makes 25 L" size -- impractically large for an amateur who might process anywhere from zero to four or five rolls a week, with an average of two or three, and need a few ml of replenishment for each roll. Xtol, in the "makes 5L" size, works very well for this, but there have been a number of quality issues recently, and others over a longer term.

I just Googled for "self replenishing developer" and near the bottom of the first page of hits, I found this link, to a PDF spec sheet for a universal (film and paper) developer listed as self-replenishing, neutral tone (on fiber and RC papers), and a PQ formula (which implies "full film speed"). The file resides on www.champiophotochemistry.com, and the PDF gives a location in Kuala Lumpur.

is there a US source for this developer, or are there other self-replenishing developers around that could replace Xtol in the "easy and economical" class of self-replenishing developers suitable for amateur use? Just in case?

 

[Raghu Kuvempunagar]

@Paul Howell has been using MCM100 in self-replenished mode for several years IIRC.

 

[MattKing]

The file resides on www.champiophotochemistry.com, and the PDF gives a location in Kuala Lumpur.

You are missing an "n" in that URL. It is www.championphotochemistry.com
This is the site for Champion. That company started in Canada and, for a while, made much of Kodak's photo chemistry, after Kodak divested itself of much of its chemical manufacturing capacity. That capacity, and the employees involved, became Eastman Chemicals.
Champion has a fair bit of Kodak in its DNA: http://www.championphotochemistry.com/milestones-asia.php

 

[mshchem]

You are missing an "n" in that URL. It is www.championphotochemistry.com
This is the site for Champion. That company started in Canada and, for a while, made much of Kodak's photo chemistry, after Kodak divested itself of much of its chemical manufacturing capacity. That capacity, and the employees involved, became Eastman Chemicals.
Champion has a fair bit of Kodak in its DNA: http://www.championphotochemistry.com/milestones-asia.php

So not the same as Eastman Chemical the Tennessee plant that old George started to make cellulose acetate. They are still alive and well, selling billions of pounds of polyester resins that are deemed to be BPA free.
I used to buy Silver Nitrate 20 lbs (I think the best price I negotiated was 88 usd/lb) at a time from the Eastman Chemicals folks, that and a liquid we used in the lab referred to as Decalin, came in beautiful 1 qt brown glass bottles with Poly Seal lids, I would use company time to scrub out the bottles and caps that I took home to my humble darkroom. We bought several things (lanthanum oxide) from the fine chemical division of Eastman, I wonder who swallowed up that group? This was the mid 80's. I don't know where the stuff came from. I'm sure it was possible that some of these chemicals still came from Rochester, but probably the silver salts most likely.
Man Kodak was a behemoth, makes you wonder if Apple will still be around in 30 years.

 

[mshchem]

So it looks like Champion is still in Ontario, do they still have photo chemicals? I suppose it's like everything else in graphic arts something I won't understand.

 

[MattKing]

So it looks like Champion is still in Ontario, do they still have photo chemicals? I suppose it's like everything else in graphic arts something I won't understand.

Their website is five years out of date, and only lists high quantity packaging for C41 and RA-4 substitutes - all in quantities that would be too large for all but the busiest mini-lab.
The Ontario office, if it still exists, appears to be only related to marketing and distribution.
The 2012 auction of their equipment in Rochester is still available online.
The sites that list employee reviews talk about employees in Rochester losing their jobs as the company closed down.

 

[Mainecoonmaniac]

We all know about Xtol being its own replenisher (at least, if we've been paying attention). T-Max RS has this quality as well, but T-Max RS is no longer available in smaller packages than "makes 25 L" size -- impractically large for an amateur who might process anywhere from zero to four or five rolls a week, with an average of two or three, and need a few ml of replenishment for each roll. Xtol, in the "makes 5L" size, works very well for this, but there have been a number of quality issues recently, and others over a longer term.

I just Googled for "self replenishing developer" and near the bottom of the first page of hits, I found this link, to a PDF spec sheet for a universal (film and paper) developer listed as self-replenishing, neutral tone (on fiber and RC papers), and a PQ formula (which implies "full film speed"). The file resides on www.champiophotochemistry.com, and the PDF gives a location in Kuala Lumpur.

is there a US source for this developer, or are there other self-replenishing developers around that could replace Xtol in the "easy and economical" class of self-replenishing developers suitable for amateur use? Just in case?

Self-replenishing developers are worth it for me. I use XTOL replenished because I like the look is seasoned developers. XTOL will tend drift weaker over time. XTOL is fine to replenish over the recommended rate because the developer is the replenisher. At some point, you’ll have to dump the working solution due to excessive bromide buildup.

 

[halfaman]

I think all commercial developers are replenishable somehow, but the replenishment rate could so large in some cases that makes no sense. I remember a friend of mine replenishing Rodinal, I can't recall how but it worked for him.

 

[foc]

I don't know if the Champion Suprol Universal developer is available in USA but I know it is available in UK.
https://www.firstcall-photographic.co.uk/champion-suprol-universal-film-print-developer-1-litre/p500
From looking at the datasheet, have you thought of Ilford PQ Universal as a substitute?

 

[juan]

What about the xtol substitutes - mytol or Gainer’s PC-Tea? Are they self replenishing?

 

[Paul Howell]

I just tossed out my batch of MCM 100, this last tank I've had going past 3 to 4 years, I have a kit to make another liter, if I mix it I will use it as one shot then toss as I'm moving on to other developers, reason is cost. At $48.00 a gallon just has gotten too expensive. Thinking about ANSCO 17, or standard D 76, I also have R09, and R09 special, so maybe Iflord version of HC110 so I can mix and dump.

 

[osella]

What about the xtol substitutes - mytol or Gainer’s PC-Tea? Are they self replenishing?

I don’t know about mytol, but I don’t see PC-TEA working as it doesn’t last very long as a working solution.

I believe you can make a replenisher with ascorbic acid in TEA if you wanted to develop multiple films in the same working solution, but it probably won’t keep for more than a day.

 

[John Wiegerink]

I just tossed out my batch of MCM 100, this last tank I've had going past 3 to 4 years, I have a kit to make another liter, if I mix it I will use it as one shot then toss as I'm moving on to other developers, reason is cost. At $48.00 a gallon just has gotten too expensive. Thinking about ANSCO 17, or standard D 76, I also have R09, and R09 special, so maybe Iflord version of HC110 so I can mix and dump.

Paul,
For smaller formats replenishment is less important for me, but sheet film is a different story. As for MCM100? I used it years ago on my Tri-X 35mm films and really liked it. I'm pretty much stuck on Xtol-R and Pyrocat-HDC now, but if I were to get the urge to try MCM100 again I would buy my own chems and mix my own. I already have most of the needed chemicals in my stockpile. Two developers I really want to try later this Summer are FX-39II and Ilfords Ilfosol-3, which I already have a bottle of. I wonder if Ilfosol-3 could be used replenished? JohnW

 

[Paul Howell]

I did buy the chemistry for MCM 100, taking into account the sizes available and what is needed for mixing with the left overs not much of a savings so I returned to the kits. I just checked the price it has gone up, now 60 a gallon. Years, now many years ago I got a case of ANSCO 17 at an estate sale, took a couple of years to use it all, pretty much followed the times for D76. A little softer working than D76, scaled nicely to grade 2 paper. Bulk chemistry is much reasonable than for MCM 100. I have to find my Kodak scales and get an order in next week.

 

[halfaman]

I wonder if Ilfosol-3 could be used replenished? JohnW

llford states that Ilfosol-3 is a one-shot developer. Use and discard.

 

[Auer]

What about the Eco Pro stuff?

 

[Donald Qualls]

Self-replenishing developers are worth it for me. I use XTOL replenished because I like the look is seasoned developers. XTOL will tend drift weaker over time. XTOL is fine to replenish over the recommended rate because the developer is the replenisher. At some point, you’ll have to dump the working solution due to excessive bromide buildup.

Tell that to people on Photrio/APUG who've been running the same replenished Xtol for multiple years. If it drifts weaker, you can increase replenishment a little to maintain activity, but bromide build-up should reach a plateau around the time you've used up the first 5L batch. From there on, it ought to remain essentially unchanged with pH monitoring and/or test strip densitomietry as a control. The issue is because of multiple recent recalls seemingly related to outsource production or packaging.

What about the xtol substitutes - mytol or Gainer’s PC-Tea? Are they self replenishing?

Last I looked, there was a strong recommendation not to run Mytol replenished (though it has been done) because it doesn't contain an iron/copper sequestrant, so (even if mixed with DI water) may be subject to Fenton reaction (which kills the ascorbate almost literally overnight, without warning) due to iron or copper contamination of the chemicals used to mix the developer. It's great if you're using Xtol one-shot and prefer to mix your own -- there's a "just in time Mytol" formula up for mixing half a liter straight to working solution strength (I think it's 1+1 dilution equivalent) -- but not very safe (or cost effective, if it does fail) for replenishment, and the iron sequestrant is fairly hard to obtain (hence why it's not in the Mytol formula).

With PC-TEA, there's no stock solution that can reasonably be replenished. The concentrate keeps for (apparently) the same reason old HC-110 did -- it's waterless, so the the phenidone and ascorbate don't oxidize in storage. Mix it into a stock solution, however, and the complete lack of sodium sulfite or other preservative would cause it to fail before you could run a hypothetical replenishment long enough to test whether you've kept the activity level constant.

What about the Eco Pro stuff?

From what I've read, Eco Pro is essentially identical to Xtol. I'd be cautious of replenishing an existing Xtol replenished stock with Eco Pro stock, but if you're mixing from fresh, there's apparently no difference. Another thread, however, has raised the question whether it's packaged by the same supplier, thus potentially subject to the same quality control issues (and the same question has been applied to Foma Excel, another Xtol clone).

I like the idea of self-replenishing Ilford PQ Universal, given Champion Suprol was supposed to be a replacement for it. Phenidone and sulfite give access to full film speed, if not a touch more, non-ascorbate formula makes it immune to Fenton reaction. I'd have to try it, though, first to see if I like the developer, and second (over considerable time, given the low rate at which I shoot film) to work up a replenishment rate (I'd obviously start with the rate for Suprol). It's got some big shoes to fill as a replacement for replenished Xtol.

 

[relistan]

Hey Donald why not a one shot like PC-Glycol, HC-110, PC-TEA, etc? I even use XTOL one shot. Then it always works the same each time. With XTOL I use it up in a few months. My PC-glycol batch is from 2017 and works great.

I’ve never used a replenished developer so maybe I’m missing that there is something more awesome about it?

 

[radiant]

Hey Donald why not a one shot like PC-Glycol, HC-110, PC-TEA, etc? I even use XTOL one shot. Then it always works the same each time. With XTOL I use it up in a few months. My PC-glycol batch is from 2017 and works great.

I’ve never used a replenished developer so maybe I’m missing that there is something more awesome about it?

This has been asked quite many times, here is some discussion: https://www.photrio.com/forum/threa...-development-times.178358/page-2#post-2326056

 

[halfaman]

I’ve never used a replenished developer so maybe I’m missing that there is something more awesome about it?

Using replenishment you can consider always XTOL solution as (seasoned) fresh according to Kodak. No time compensation needed and excellent shelf life compared to unreplenished solution, so you can expect higher consistency.

 

[radiant]

Using replenishment you can consider always XTOL solution as (seasoned) fresh according to Kodak. No time compensation needed and excellent shelf life compared to unreplenished solution, so you can expect higher consistency.

Do you mean stock solution loses it's power by time and therefore consistency is worse?

Replenisher is just stock Xtol, it will expire. By calling it replenisher it doesn't change it's expiration time

 

[halfaman]

Do you mean stock solution loses it's power by time and therefore consistency is worse?

No, that is not what I meant. With "unreplenish" I tried to say "partially exhausted", used unreplenished working solution but not totally exhausted (up to 15 rolls per liter according to Kodak)

 

[relistan]

Using replenishment you can consider always XTOL solution as (seasoned) fresh according to Kodak. No time compensation needed and excellent shelf life compared to unreplenished solution, so you can expect higher consistency.

Right but using it one shot I get that same consistency. Replenished costs less but is there any photographic reason to do it?

anyway maybe I’ll try it on the next batch

 

[radiant]

Right but using it one shot I get that same consistency. Replenished costs less but is there any photographic reason to do it?

anyway maybe I’ll try it on the next batch

As you didn't bother to open my link, here is a quote from there:

"Better economy, subtly different tonality and speed, slightly better sharpness, less environmental impact, markedly advantageous workflow with large format (much less waste with many tanks), ease of use with varying ambient temperatures.
As the developer ripens - reaches a steady state balance of byproduct build-up and activity - it gives me a result I prefer. And I really like the workflow. "

(posted by MattKing)

 

[relistan]

This has been asked quite many times, here is some discussion: https://www.photrio.com/forum/threa...-development-times.178358/page-2#post-2326056

But this Currentthread is about finding something to replace XTOL so was trying to understand why replacing it required the new developer to also be replenished.