Still using D-76/ID-11?

[DREW WILEY]

His earlier prints of Moonrise were softer because he had not yet enhanced the negative. These earlier prints also show more unevenness or development blotchiness in the sky because it isn't full black. But there is now a premium on these earlier prints because there are relatively fewer of them. The great majority of the 360 or so of them are the bold extreme contrast black-sky version printed with the altered negative.

Yes, it's fine to standardize on freshly mixed D76, as long as you consistently do that. Otherwise, you need to allow it a week or so to reach equilibrium. Choose one or the other, and stick with it. But I've never heard about or encountered that kind of issue with respect to D23, so it wouldn't worry about it in that case.

 

[gone]

For many years, all I shot was Tri-X developed in D76 full strength. Beautiful look, lots of tonality, and Leica glass meant no worries on the sharpness. Then after a long layoff from photography, I went back to that same combination, but experienced too many problems w/ Kodak's defective packaging on D76 and Dektol developers. So I made a change and bought 5 different developers, 3 different kinds of Foma films, some Ilford Delta 100 (wow, what a film), and some Tri-X, but I bought it from an individual, not from Kodak.

What I'm slowly coming to is: Tri-X and D76 is a great combination, but it's look can be changed so much by using different developers, it's almost like using several different kinds of films. Pretty neat. I didn't like this film in F76+ at all, and it's supposed to be similar to D76. As mentioned by others, always wait until the next day (at least) before using freshly mixed D76.

 

[Agulliver]

For something like 35 years my most common combination has been HP5 (later HP5+) in ID-11 stock. I am no professional but it's served me well shooting HP5+ at anything from 200 to 6400 ISO in conditions from bright sunlight to a dim jazz club. In short, an extremely versatile combination with which it is very difficult to actually go wrong.

Often people will dilute 1+1 to tame contrast, but that's a matter of preference.

 

[Film-Niko]

Nothing wrong at all with D-76 / ID-11. It is a good and trusty solution. Used it myself in the past.
It is just that first XTOL surpassed it, offering all the advantages of D-76, but surpassing it with finer grain and being more environmentally friendly.
And now ADOX XT-3 has surpassed XTOL, offering the same excellent picture quality as XTOL, but much much better solubility, no dust anymore because of Captura technology, 1L and 5L packs, and even being much more environmentally friendly because of improved buffer technology.

 

[dpurdy]

I guess I should update since I started this thread. I mixed 1.25 liters stock and then diluted it to 2.5 liters. My first roll came out perfect at 13 minutes so I did 3 more rolls in the same developer and they also came out perfect so I did 4 more rolls in the same developer but added a minute of time and they also all were perfect and matched the previous rolls density. When I contacted the 8 rolls they all needed the same time and contrast setting, which was my standard normal contrast. I was very impressed as was the client. I am now going to do some testing and see about making it my go to developer for personal work. That will include 8x10, 4x5, 120 and 35mm.

 

[Philippe-Georges]

The trouble with D-76, which is a very good developer, is that some components are a carcinogene health risk.
So the alternative is Chris Patton's E-76 Ascorbic-Phenidone based formula.
It works identically like the classic D-76 but is more health friendly.

I took the liberty to add a pdf sheet with this formula and directives made for personal use, of course you can interpret it according your personal insights.

 

[Raghu Kuvempunagar]

I mixed 1.25 liters stock and then diluted it to 2.5 liters. My first roll came out perfect at 13 minutes so I did 3 more rolls in the same developer and they also came out perfect so I did 4 more rolls in the same developer but added a minute of time and they also all were perfect and matched the previous rolls density.

Congratulations! Are you reusing D-76 1:1 and is it recommended?

 

[pentaxuser]

But I guess in Glasgow or Montreal you aren't accustomed to extreme contrast range challenges. .

I can't speak for Montreal but in Glasgow I have seen few greater contrast challenges that those I saw at the New Year's Day match between Celtic and Rangers.

Just a bit of levity to lighten what looks to be the gathering storm

pentaxuser

 

[Lachlan Young]

The trouble with D-76, which is a very good developer, is that some components are a carcinogene health risk.
So the alternative is Chris Patton's E-76 Ascorbic-Phenidone based formula.
It works identically like the classic D-76 but is more health friendly.

In the quantities used, the Borax is more of a known environmental/ personal risk than any of the other ingredients.
And a to get a meaningful ascorbate based developer with any lifespan, it needs much more serious iron sequestration than E-76 gives.
By the time you have resolved these problems, you're most of the way to Xtol/ XT-3 anyway.

But I often mix my own D-23. Should I let it stand a week like the above advice for D-76?

No. And D-76 largely reaches equilibrium in 48hrs - it seems to relate to the formation of HQMS etc.

reusing D-76 1:1 and is it recommended?

No. If you want to replenish a diluted developer you are really better off looking at DK-60a or DK-50 (their 1+1 dilutions seem to be where HC-110's Dilution B and Dilution D were aimed at respectively substituting for).

 

[Film-Niko]

In the quantities used, the Borax is more of a known environmental/ personal risk than any of the other ingredients.
And a to get a meaningful ascorbate based developer with any lifespan, it needs much more serious iron sequestration than E-76 gives.
By the time you have resolved these problems, you're most of the way to Xtol/ XT-3 anyway.

And in ADOX XT-3 even the Borax is replaced by an environmentally and health friendly substance.
With their SCALA BW reversal kit they have found a completely health and environmentally friendly solution for the bleach as well.
I have to say that I am very impressed by their efforts, considering how young and small this company is. Looks like there are working really dedicated and enthusiastic chemists.

 

[bernard_L]

I guess I should update since I started this thread. I mixed 1.25 liters stock and then diluted it to 2.5 liters. My first roll came out perfect at 13 minutes so I did 3 more rolls in the same developer and they also came out perfect so I did 4 more rolls in the same developer but added a minute of time and they also all were perfect and matched the previous rolls density. When I contacted the 8 rolls they all needed the same time and contrast setting, which was my standard normal contrast. I was very impressed as was the client. I am now going to do some testing and see about making it my go to developer for personal work. That will include 8x10, 4x5, 120 and 35mm.

Did you wait the mandated 24 hours (or whatever) before developing the first roll? I'm asking because I monitored pH for 3 days after mixing Kodak D-76 (the official stuff in a yellow package) and saw no change +/-0.02. When I posted that finding, challenging common wisdom, someone retorted like it's not just the pH, there are complex reactions affecting activity...

I also second the question by Raghu Kuvempunagar about re-use of 1+1 dilution.

 

[Raghu Kuvempunagar]

And in ADOX XT-3 even the Borax is replaced by an environmentally and health friendly substance.

Any idea what this "environmentally and health friendly substance" is? Is it a Carbonate-Bicarbonate buffer? The recently introduced Tetenal Parvofin tablet developer, which is "free of boron compounds", uses this buffer.

 

[Lachlan Young]

And in ADOX XT-3 even the Borax is replaced by an environmentally and health friendly substance.

Any idea what this "environmentally and health friendly substance" is? Is it a Carbonate-Bicarbonate buffer? The recently introduced Tetenal Parvofin tablet developer, which is "free of boron compounds", uses this buffer.

[Edited to correct error] Trilon-M.

It looks like it could be potentially used to replace metaborate in many developers - at least for single shot use.

 

[Raghu Kuvempunagar]

Trilon-C.

It looks like it could be potentially used to replace metaborate in many developers - at least for single shot use.

Thanks. Is it both an accelerator and a chelating agent?

 

[Lachlan Young]

Did you wait the mandated 24 hours (or whatever) before developing the first roll? I'm asking because I monitored pH for 3 days after mixing Kodak D-76 (the official stuff in a yellow package) and saw no change +/-0.02. When I posted that finding, challenging common wisdom, someone retorted like it's not just the pH, there are complex reactions affecting activity...

I also second the question by Raghu Kuvempunagar about re-use of 1+1 dilution.

It's to do with the formation of HQMS. Grant Haist goes into detail about it in his book - and HQMS was a research focus (relatively confidentially) for quite some time at Kodak etc - and the presence of HQMS is quite important to many of these milder alkalinity fine-grain developers, both MQ and PQ.

Thanks. Is it both an accelerator and a chelating agent?

It seems to have capacity to buffer and have some sequestration effects too. More importantly, its pH is a XT-3 does seem to use a similar further sequestrant (listed in one part of the MSDS, but not the percentages used) to tackle the Fenton reaction.

 

[dpurdy]

Did you wait the mandated 24 hours (or whatever) before developing the first roll? I'm asking because I monitored pH for 3 days after mixing Kodak D-76 (the official stuff in a yellow package) and saw no change +/-0.02. When I posted that finding, challenging common wisdom, someone retorted like it's not just the pH, there are complex reactions affecting activity...

I also second the question by Raghu Kuvempunagar about re-use of 1+1 dilution.

No I waited only a couple hours with the container tightly closed. I then processed 1 roll which might have seasoned it some.
In the 1970s I was in photography school and the only film developer they wanted us to use was D76. The idea of waiting was never addressed or mentioned or observed.

 

[Nicholas Lindan]

... D76 [in university]. The idea of waiting was never addressed or mentioned or observed.

I was under the impression the activity change only happened if you were mixing the developer from scratch. Rumor had it that Kodak had some 'magic ingredient' in their D-76 so the activity stayed constant over the life of the stock solution. I never saw any change in activity, but I confess I didn't run sensitometer strips through the developer to check.

 

[Paul Howell]

No I waited only a couple hours with the container tightly closed. I then processed 1 roll which might have seasoned it some.
In the 1970s I was in photography school and the only film developer they wanted us to use was D76. The idea of waiting was never addressed or mentioned or observed.

D76 was standard developer for most, while in the AF we would mix 5 gallon batches which were used that day without issues.
OP for large format you might want to think about DK50, I stopped using when Kodak stopped production and was too lazy to mix. I'm using Clayon F76+ but getting ready to shoot much more 4X5 this winter and thinking about DK 50 stock or 1:1 using Trix as a reference Foma 400 at 1:1 should be just shy of minutes.

 

[Roger Thoms]

D-76 1:1 1-shot is very reliable. Grain is a bit crisper, but not more prominent; I hate 'oatmeal' grain. I guess all oatmeal is made from grain, though.

You might find steel cut oat grain acceptable.

Roger

 

[Lachlan Young]

It’s actually Trilon M (MGDA) that they seem to be using as part of their environmentally friendly proprietary buffer - maybe.

DTPA (which I just realized is sometimes called Trilon C) is still present in XT-3 to deal with Fenton (same as XTOL). Hard to get around using DTPA in ascorbate developers, and standard EDTA is generally a more powerful complexing agent than Trilon M even for calcium, magnesium etc.

Yes - you're correct - I somehow got what are apparently the two Trilon chelation agents (or Dissolvine equivalent) in XT-3 back to front!

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Great! Thank you people. The first roll is in the fix. I will look at it soon. I went 1-1 68º for 13 minutes. I process in total darkness in a vertical tank which holds up to 5 liters developer and I put enough in to easily cover.

this will do fine; horizontal (rotation)-processing; one-shot is just more economical and consistent than messing with replenisher.

 

[Philippe-Georges]

In the quantities used, the Borax is more of a known environmental/ personal risk than any of the other ingredients.
And a to get a meaningful ascorbate based developer with any lifespan, it needs much more serious iron sequestration than E-76 gives.
By the time you have resolved these problems, you're most of the way to Xtol/ XT-3 anyway.



No. And D-76 largely reaches equilibrium in 48hrs - it seems to relate to the formation of HQMS etc.



No. If you want to replenish a diluted developer you are really better off looking at DK-60a or DK-50 (their 1+1 dilutions seem to be where HC-110's Dilution B and Dilution D were aimed at respectively substituting for).

To my humble opinion, the Hydroquinone is the culprit: http://www.inchem.org/documents/hsg/hsg/hsg101.htm

BTW, I keep E-76 stock for about 2 months in amber bottels and some Dust-Off sprayed on it to chase the oxygen. But most of the time it isn't necessarily as I use it faster...

 

[Nicholas Lindan]

To my humble opinion, the Hydroquinone is the culprit ... [link to who document]

People regularly slather Hydroquinone on their skin: https://www.webmd.com/drugs/2/drug-1347/hydroquinone-topical/details - usually under a dermatologist's advice and supervision/prescription. Any substance in the universe can be written up as horribly hazardous, Hydrogen Hydroxide HOH (or some other fanciful name for water) is often cited as an example: "Warning - Inhalation Hazard", and it is.

 

[Film-Niko]

[Edited to correct error] Trilon-M.

It looks like it could be potentially used to replace metaborate in many developers - at least for single shot use.

Thank you very much.
Have you found it in the MSDS? I have looked at it and did not found it, but maybe I have overlooked it, or missed it because of a different technical term used for it.......

 

[Film-Niko]

To my humble opinion, the Hydroquinone is the culprit: http://www.inchem.org/documents/hsg/hsg/hsg101.htm

Hydroquinone is used in hair dyes as dying substance. Hundreds of millions of people put it on their heads.......
In modern public waste water systems it is metabolized to not dangerous products by the bacteria used in theses systems for biological cleaning.