TMX in XTOL & XTOL 1+ with N+1 development

[Chuck_P]

XTOL is a new developer for me with TMX. I haven't done my testing yet for personal EI and my N, N+, and N- development times (will do it soon). However, I have three negatives (4x5) that I exposed today at box speed. All three need N+1 development. I want to develop one negative in stock XTOL and the other side of the holder duplicate negative in XTOL 1+1 for comparison. The 3rd negative I want to develop in XTOL 1+1. The time from the tech sheet that I am currently using for N with stock solution is 7.25 min (20 deg C). I'm thinking +30 to 35% more dev time for +1, any thoughts on that from the TMX/XTOL users? For 1+1 solution, I've no idea, surely something more than 30% dev time. I am mainly comparing stock versus 1+1, it's just that these negatives I exposed today really need a +1 development. If I can get the development right I feel like I may have a couple of decent negatives to work with in the darkroom.

 

[Radost]

IMHO nothing looks better than Xtol. It’s cleaner and not bad for the environment.
I switched from stock to 1+1 recently and the difference in quality, detail and tonality is striking.
The savings and especially the fact that I can develop at 75F is a huge plus.
I was thinking about going Xtol-R but decided against it because I have to guesstemate 20 rolls times till it gets seasoned. Also the replenished solution has to be filtered often.
1+1 is clean and perfect in my situation but for 4x5 I think Xtol-R is a big saving.

 

[Sirius Glass]

IMHO nothing looks better than Xtol. It’s cleaner and not bad for the environment.
I switched from stock to 1+1 recently and the difference in quality, detail and tonality is striking.
The savings and especially the fact that I can develop at 75F is a huge plus.
I was thinking about going Xtol-R but decided against it because I have to guesstemate 20 rolls times till it gets seasoned. Also the replenished solution has to be filtered often.
1+1 is clean and perfect in my situation but for 4x5 I think Xtol-R is a big saving.

There is no need to wait or guestimate 20 rolls, just use if following the Kodak instruction and it is good to use for every roll of film on the way up to 20.

 

[Chuck_P]

Since the SP45 tank that I use for my 4x5 film is agitated with inversion cycles, I just decided to consider that tank as a small tank and use the normal and 1+1 recommended developing times for roll film as given in the J-109 tech publication. So, stock solution 6.75 min and 1+1 solution 9.25 min...........at 68 deg F. I think that will be a good point of departure when I do my ZS testing for EI and N+ and N-. As far as N+1 development for the negatives I exposed yesterday, I'll add 35% time to the 1+1 solution and see how it goes. If anyone thinks differently on that I am interested and watching for a little while longer before going to the darkroom.

 

[tom williams]

Chuck, some data from the peanut gallery, for what it's worth. I tested TMax 100 a year ago, in Kodak XTOL 1:1 at 68F, Stearman SP-445. I shot a Stouffer 4x5 21-step tablet, overlaying the negatives in the holder, exposing for Zone X on a blank white sheet of bond paper in full sun. EI 80. Development included agitation for the first 30 seconds, and 3 inversions every 30 seconds thereafter.



The FB+F figures are 0.05, 0.07, 0.08, 0.09,and 0.11 for 6,8,10,13 and 18 minute curves. I measured step densities on the negatives using a Tobias TBX densitometer. Though my test setup is definitely 'home brewed', the 13 minute time for N development has worked well for me.

 

[Chuck_P]

Chuck, some data from the peanut gallery, for what it's worth. I tested TMax 100 a year ago, in Kodak XTOL 1:1 at 68F, Stearman SP-445. I shot a Stouffer 4x5 21-step tablet, overlaying the negatives in the holder, exposing for Zone X on a blank white sheet of bond paper in full sun. EI 80. Development included agitation for the first 30 seconds, and 3 inversions every 30 seconds thereafter.

View attachment 328773 View attachment 328772

The FB+F figures are 0.05, 0.07, 0.08, 0.09,and 0.11 for 6,8,10,13 and 18 minute curves. I measured step densities on the negatives using a Tobias TBX densitometer. Though my test setup is definitely 'home brewed', the 13 minute time for N development has worked well for me.

Thanks for the info. That's how I do my testing as well with a 4x5 Stouffer tablet in the holder........perhaps the one difference is that I expose a white mat board not in full sun but on a sunny or overcast day where the board does not have full sun on it. There's all kinds of opinions on that, lol.

Your 1+1 normal (13 min) is 30 sec longer than what I'm planning to develop 1+1 for N+1 development. Perhaps I should roll the dice and add 35% more developing time to your 1+1 of 13 min and see what happens.

 

[tom williams]

Thanks for the info. That's how I do my testing as well with a 4x5 Stouffer tablet in the holder........perhaps the one difference is that I expose a white mat board not in full sun but on a sunny or overcast day where the board does not have full sun on it. There's all kinds of opinions on that, lol.

Your 1+1 normal (13 min) is 30 sec longer than what I'm planning to develop 1+1 for N+1 development. Perhaps I should roll the dice and add 35% more developing time to your 1+1 of 13 min and see what happens.

During the course of this thread I realized how far from 'rigorous' my test procedure was.

At first I was surprised that the N time I came up with was so different than Kodak's (f4016_tmax_100-2018.pdf). But the 13minute N figure works for me. That's about as assertive as I can get about sharing my results.

I think that your approach - exposing your test negative in outdoor, indirect lighting - could lead to different times that my procedure gave. Never mind glare, metering, thermometers etc.

Good luck!

 

[Stephen Benskin]

This is from Kodak's Xtol datasheet. I may give you a good ballpark idea.

Kodak includes CI values. While "pushing for speed" is different than for contrast, you can work out the approximate CI needed for N+1, which, depending on how you calculate N, is about 0.68. It falls between their EI 200 and EI 400 times.