Economy, 70ml/roll. It also once replenished provides same visual advantages of 1:1. convenience, in that you can develop say a single sheet in a full liter of developer and not toss the liter.For the last 7 years XTOL has been my go to developer for pretty much everything and I've always used it as a one-shot, 1:1. I have been considering trying to go the route of using it as stock and replenishing, but I have a few questions.
1. I have heard people talk fondly of 'seasoned' XTOL, but I've never got a great answer as far as why that is better than using it diluted 1:1. So, what's the big plus of using stock XTOL and replenishing?
I topped up just what was lost for the first few rolls then started the 70 ml per roll.2. When do you start replenishing? Do you start after the very first roll or do you allow it to 'season' before beginning to replenish?
Yep3. As far as the replenisher goes, does one just use stock XTOL? From my understanding you just make up a batch and spilt it, use one as the working solution and the other as the replenisher.
I used a 1.5 liter glass bottle. Pour the 70ml of fresh or more if you are doing multiple rolls into the working solution bottle before pouring the developer in the tank back in. Doing it this way whatever old solution won't fit is discarded.4. As far as storing the working solution, do you need to store it a container that has room for the replenisher you will add down the road? I've never understood this part of replenishment, if I'm adding 70ml for every roll I process wouldn't I basically be overflowing my container the first time I replenished if I'm storing the working solution in a container with little to no head room?
When you run out of fresh Xtol just make more, the replenished working solution can be reused indefinitely.5. What do you do when you run out of replenisher? Is that when the solution gets dumped? If I say make a 5L batch and split it 50/50 for working solution and replenisher(assuming that is the correct thing to do, see question 3) once that that 2.5L replenisher is used up do I start over or do I just get more XTOL and keep replenishing? If that is the case, is there a point where the working solution needs to be dumped?
Thanks in advance and if you have any other tips or pointers for using XTOL this let me know!
It will be comparable. Perhaps slightly lower, but likely immaterial in practice.
Keep in mind when it comes to working characteristics, replenishing represents a compromise, not an improvement (as some would have you believe). It is not the same as using a developer one-shot 1+1 etc.
Replenishment works only if you process film often. It does not work as well for the occasional user. Additionally the working solution should be fairly large two liters or greater. The larger the volume the greater the consistency between uses.
There is one benefit Gerry that you overlook. That is I can use as much developer as I want for a given session. I have a Yankee 4X5 tank and gave up using it until I switched to using Xtol-R. It was far to expensive to use if I was going to dump developer down the drain after each session. Now I just add my allotted replenisher amount to my stock and top-off with spent developer. I'm happy and it works just fine.An argument can be made for an MQ developer like D-76 being used as a replenished system. Here the formation of the hydroquinone monosulphonate ion with use (a weak developing agent in itself) contributes to the look so often claimed. However such an advantage does not exist for ascorbate based developers. The oxidation products of ascorbic acid have no developer activity. In addition Dimezone is resistant to bromide unlike Metol which can benefit from the restraining effects of bromide increase in replenished developer. Remember that D-76 initially contains no bromide. One reason that fresh batches were "seasoned" with old scrap film to add bromide ion.
If you process film consistently, say at least once every week, then replenishment makes economic sense. However, I personally see no other benefits for using Xtol in this manner.
Replenishment works only if you process film often. It does not work as well for the occasional user. Additionally the working solution should be fairly large two liters or greater. The larger the volume the greater the consistency between uses.
The is one benefit Gerry that you overlook. That is I can use as much developer as I want for a given session. I have a Yankee 4X5 tank and gave up using it until I switched to using Xtol-R. It was far to expensive to use if I was going to dump developer down the drain after each session. Now I just add my allotted replenisher amount to my stock and top-off with spent developer. I'm happy and it works just fine.
I was an occasional user of Xtol, and it worked well for me never an issue. I always used 2.5 litres of working stock, I found that's a good minimum I wouldn't go less than 2 litres.
I'll qualify the occasional user, I mostly used it for 120 Tmax 400, I was using Rodinal for 35mm, 120 & LF APX100 & Tmax 100, so it might sit unised a month or two then I'd process 10-20 films replenish and so on, I found the spare Xtol used as replenisher would last at least a year.
Ian
I mentioned on another thread this same experience using Microphen with replenishment. One liter of working solution resulted in inconsistent results. In addition my developing was similarly erratic. The developer might sit idle for a few weeks between uses. Of course the solution to this is to shoot more.
If you process film consistently, say at least once every week, then replenishment makes economic sense. However, I personally see no other benefits for using Xtol in this manner.
I won't argue with you on this topic since you can do as you wish and I can do as I wish. I have used Beutler 1+8 and it's darn good and pretty darn cheap to mix, but I like the tonality of Xtol-R slightly better. Also, I don't have to mix my Xtol as often when I use the replenish regime like I would the Beutler developer. I too am a medium to low user and it works great for me. My working volume is 1 gallon so that might make a difference. Gerald, it never accomplishes anything to rain on someones parade unless that someone is made of sugar and will melt. Most of us here don't fit in that category and besides, if it doesn't work we'll soon abandon it for something better.True, but the ability you mention is not exclusive to replenished systems. Years ago when I was in school and had little discretionary money I made a few calculations and determined that the most economical developer was the Beutler formula. Anyone familiar with this developer knows just how dilute the working solution is. So replenishment with Xtol is more economical than use as a one-shot. However when other developers are considered this may not be the case. If anyone should find themselves in a similar situation then they need to make the necessary calculations themselves.
If you process film consistently, say at least once every week, then replenishment makes economic sense. However, I personally see no other benefits for using Xtol in this manner.
You keep bringing this up, and there are reasons why you indeed can and might want to try replenished Xtol, which is incredibly stable in smaller working solutions of about 2 liters. I used it almost exclusively for about 5 years, and it never skipped a beat, in bursts of high throughput (50 rolls per week), and in times of low throughput (a roll every two weeks), it just kept on working the same.
I have let my Xtol sit for months at a time without doing anything to it, pour about two films' worth of stock Xtol replenisher into the working solution, and use it just like any other processing session. It was almost six months, Gerald. It is not true that Xtol requires high volume. In low volume it is VERY robust when stored properly. Consistency has never been an issue. I just kept shooting and printing, never having to do a lot of darkroom gymnastics because I always knew what to expect. It is no less consistent than diluted Xtol.
Besides economy, which is a real benefit, the developer does present different tonality than diluted Xtol. With finer grain, added sharpness, as well as a tonality that many find more pleasing, I see zero reasons not to try it.
Would I be correct to assume that all those here who keep Xtol for extended periods are mixing it in water that is purified in some way (such as distillation or deionized)? I'm interested as I'm about to do 4x5 in a Jobo 2500 series tank with inversion not rotation so re-use is appealing.
Where I live the water out of the tap is fine for every developer that I've used, but Xtol might be more susceptible to impurities I'm led to believe.
Is stock replenished solution equal in potency to fresh solution? Say I want to start using my stock in diluted one time solutions can I get away with this?
You keep bringing this up,
Is stock replenished solution equal in potency to fresh solution? Say I want to start using my stock in diluted one time solutions can I get away with this?
For clarity, the working solution has activity that is more similar to 1 + 1, but the not yet used replenisher is itself "fresh" solution, so obviously has that potency.No. It has activity that is similar to 1+1.
Here's the info from KodakIs stock replenished solution equal in potency to fresh solution? Say I want to start using my stock in diluted one time solutions can I get away with this?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?