Tmax 400 and Xtol 1+3

[david b]

Looking for thoughts on this combo
as well as examples.

I'll be shooting 4x5.

Thanks.

 

[srs5694]

One word of caution: Kodak has stopped officially recommending dilutions of XTOL beyond 1+1. Although I don't recall if Kodak has ever officially said so, the supposition is that this is because dilutions beyond 1+1 may be associated with "XTOL sudden death syndrome," in which the XTOL does little or no development of the film, even when the same batch of XTOL worked fine the previous day. I've seen claims that this problem is particularly bad with T-Max films, although IIRC T-Max 100 was the most oft-cited case, not T-Max 400.

You should, however, take this all with a grain of salt. If you do a Web search on the topic, you'll find lots of discussion and speculation on various Web forums; however, Kodak has been fairly quiet on the subject. Therefore, what's really going on with XTOL sudden death syndrome is a bit of a mystery, at least to the general public. The best advice is, sadly, based on speculation.

 

[david b]

I am quite positive the sudden death was due to hard or bad water.

I've always mixed mine from distilled, and never had a problem.

 

[fschifano]

Please, let's not get that old "XTOL sudden death syndrome" argument started again. I've been using XTOL for years now and have never seen it happen. I use tap water, and my municipal water supply is quite hard. I do filter the water first because my house is old and the pipes crusty. Other than that, I take no special precautions with this developer than I do with any other. Yet, the XTOL continues to deliver the goods. I have heard that iron is the real killer of XTOL, so rusty water coming from your pipes might be your first suspect.

But getting back to the original question. I've used plenty of XTOL at 1+3 and it works just fine. I am of a mind to believe that Kodak's advice to avoid higher dilutions of the developer stem from the fact that you are likely to not use enough stock solution in a small tank sufficient to accomplish the task. Kodak recommends a minimum of 100 ml of stock solution to develop a roll of 36 exposure 35mm film. That is equivalent in area to 1 x 120 roll or 4 x 4x5 sheets of film. In a small tank, you need anywhere from 250 to 350 ml of solution just to cover a 35mm reel. Do the math and you'll see that there just isn't enough XTOL in the mix at 1+3 to get the job done. In my experience, 150 ml of stock is a safer bet and will guarantee enough stock solution to develop even heavily exposed negatives.

 

[david b]

I've been using xtol on and off for the last few years.

I've been doing a lot of 4x5 work lately and have been using FP4+ and rodinal, which is a great combo.

I am using a Jobo 2510 tank to process the film. It holds 1300 ml.

So, I am trying to use xtol to do some of the film but I am looking to conserve as much
as possible.

Using xtol 1+3 and a faster film is something I want to try.

And I agree, let's not make this a sudden death thread.

 

[radiantdarkroom]

I'm not sure since it has been a while using Xtol, but I remember getting the best results with Tmax 400 with a 1:1 dilution. But now there is a new generation of TMAx 400 so that might change results a bit with different dilutions. I've always liked TMax 400. Sudden death sounds exciting, never heard of it before. Are people sure it's not from the introduction of digital? lol

Good luck,

I agree, "War is terrorism, but with a bigger budget"

 

[waynecrider]

I think the best use for Xtol at 1:3 is when using deep tanks. It stretches the economy out a little, especially when using floating lids. In the small tanks I always use a 125-150ml minimum. I've read quite a few times where the old 100ml rule for 80 square was a minimum, not the recommended.

David, if your going to dilute that far you may as well consider diluting a little further and doing some stand development. I know there's someone around here using Xtol for it having read it. I would suspect that the range of light out in NM would be good with it.

 

[fschifano]

I've been using xtol on and off for the last few years.

I've been doing a lot of 4x5 work lately and have been using FP4+ and rodinal, which is a great combo.

I am using a Jobo 2510 tank to process the film. It holds 1300 ml.

So, I am trying to use xtol to do some of the film but I am looking to conserve as much
as possible.

Using xtol 1+3 and a faster film is something I want to try.

And I agree, let's not make this a sudden death thread.

So with that much volume to play with, there's plenty of room to use higher dilutions and still have enough stock solution in the mix to get the job done. Have at it.

 

[phaedrus]

Please, let's not get that old "XTOL sudden death syndrome" argument started again. I've been using XTOL for years now and have never seen it happen.

Then you haven't been *really* negligent. I saw it yesterday when I used a small residual amount of XTOL stock solution to make 1+1 to develop TMAX 400. Not a trace of image, not even of the lettering, barcodes and numbers exposed on the rebate in the factory. The XTOL stock dregs sat for a few months in a 5 liter gas can (hard to get gallon vessels in Europe!) without protective gas over it. So, children, don't do this at home.

 

[BetterSense]

I use xtol 1+3 in my 4x5 tanks, one-shot. I switched from D-23 because xtol gives me more shadow speed. Using it 1+3 makes it cheap enough to use one-shot despite needing 1.75 liters per batch.

 

[mesh]

Silly question perhaps... but is there any advantage of 1+3 apart from cost saving? I guess there's less environmental impact which is important... just wondering, as I've only ever tried 1+1 for TMAX (and am very happy). Thanks. SOrry if I am hijacking the thread.. my first thought was just "why?"

 

[BetterSense]

1+3 will give you longer development times. Maybe that matters to some people, like people that use daylight tanks that take a long time to fill up and empty.

 

[mesh]

Got it - that makes sense. Thanks.