Thoughts on Xtol and Fomadon Excel

[braxus]

Im thinking of getting back into developing my own B&W film. Im currently looking into getting a Paterson 2 and 3 reel tanks.

Since I've done a lot of B&W in Xtol at labs in the past, I really want to stick with this developer for my own uses. Cost of using Xtol is not concerning me. Foma sells their version in 1L packets. Is their developer basically exactly the same or are there variants in it, during its use or the results you get?

Has Kodak ironed out their problems with their 5L packets of Xtol lately? Or is it still a cause for concern? I might grab some if I know the problems have been resolved.

Anyone use the Fomadon Excel and comment on their results from it? Are the times between it and Xtol exactly the same?

 

[Sirius Glass]

I have used replenished Kodak XTOL for over a decade and never had a problem.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

I have never had any issues with Xtol 5L developer.

 

[Donald Qualls]

Legacy Eco-Pro is supposed to be similar to Xtol as well -- identical times and reputedly identical results, including ability to self-replenish. Same 5L package size, too...

I have no experience with Fomadon Excel.

 

[Helge]

Use it 1:1 one shot. It’s still cheap, gives a small speed increase and you’ll quickly get through 5 liters, when you see the results.

Rodinal and XTOL are really the only developers you’d ever need for B&W. They perfectly complement each other and are both easy to use, and keep well.
Incidentally probably the oldest and newest mass produced developers.

 

[braxus]

When would one want to use Rodinal over Xtol with certain films? I could always get a bottle of that for the sake of it. But really all the films I have used look really good in Xtol.

 

[Donald Qualls]

I answered this on the other thread to some extent, but what Rodinal delivers that Xtol doesn't (even diluted) is crispness. You'll see grain, but that grain will be clean; when you use the 1:50 dilution, you'll get the most sharpness you'll ever get, and if you cut agitation to every 3rd minute and then add 40% to your development time, you'll gain about 1/3 stop in the shadows even though Rodinal is normally a speed losing developer.

 

[PhotoJim]

Rodinal is pretty special on slow films. I still use it occasionally on Pan-F Plus (although I really like how it develops in PMK; the stain isn't really obvious like it is with FP4 and HP5 but the negatives print beautifully). I used to develop Agfapan 25 exclusively in Rodinal.

 

[braxus]

I noticed APX 25 is on the obsolete list on the Massive Dev Chart. They list Agfa APX 25 at 4.75 mins at 25 ISO stock dilution Xtol. Rodinal is 7 mins at 1:25, 14 mins at 1:100, and 10 mins at 1:50.

Again what does increasing the dilution do for the film for Rodinal?

 

[randyB]

Many years ago I tried Fomadon Excel, very poor quality, hugh grain. This was during the time that Kodak had the problem with Xtol sudden death. Maybe Fomadon improved Excel or I could have just gotten a bad batch.

 

[Donald Qualls]

I noticed APX 25 is on the obsolete list on the Massive Dev Chart. They list Agfa APX 25 at 4.75 mins at 25 ISO stock dilution. Rodinal is 7 mins at 1:25, 14 mins at 1:100, and 10 mins at 1:50.

Again what does increasing the dilution do for the film for Rodinal?

After scanning the MDC for other ISO 25 films, I'd suggest a starting time of 8 minutes a 1:50 (or 11 with agitation every 3rd minute) for APX 25 in Rodinal. But if the obsolete list shows 10, I'd probably give 14 with agitation every 3rd minute. Start with a test roll...

What increasing dilution does with Rodinal is increase compensation and acutance. The developer is more able to locally exhaust, preventing blown highlights while allowing the shadows to develop more. Reduced agitation enhances this effect.

 

[albireo]

I have never used Xtol, but use Fomadon Excel on a regular basis. It gives incredible results on a range of film stocks. Wouldn't be without it.