using stock dektol (no dilution)

For some reason, I missed the part of the Dektol instructions that indicated that stock Dektol needs to be diluted. I've been using it straight (Duh!) and re-using it for a few months at a time.

Can anyone tell me what the effect of this would be theoretically speaking? What changes should I anticipate from doing it the right way? I'm using Ilford MG Classic FB Glossy with a developing time of 2 minutes at 68 degrees. I've even done some tests with my step/wedge & densitometer which seem to indicate that I'm getting lower contrast at the various filters advertise, but the color temperature of the cold light head may be contributing to this as well (arista v54 bulb).

Thanks,

A

Concentration with Dektol governs contrast and development rate. It raises contrast as you go up in conc. and it lowers the required development time.

PE

PE: All this makes me nostalgic for the days of old. Just for fun, my brother and I would shoot VP 126 and develop it, when I was literally 10 years old. Since all we could afford was the Tri-Chem-Packs, we used Dektol to develop the film**

This gave me the habit of using Dektol as my only developer. I later found a combination I actually liked - shooting Panatomic-X (135) at an EI of 100, then developing it in a 1:1 dilution of Dektol at 62°F/16.7°C for five minutes. Unfortunately, it was not long after that Panatomic-X was dropped from the catalog.

I wonder if you could explain how that "happy combination" worked?

**You would not believe how many people think that since Dektol is a paper developer, it cannot be used to process film. when I tell people I used to develop film in Dektol, they tell me I'm lying, and that dipping film in Dektol would just ruin the film without processing it. Of course, Dektol is alkaline and has hydroquinone, so it will process film. It's not used for film because it (usually) delivers high contrast and coarse grain. In fact, the Tri-Chem-Pack had instructions on how to process VP in dektol.

Dektol is a fine, but grainy, developer at 1:3 or 1:7 (3 mins or 7 mins) for most films. It was used in the newpaper industry back about 50 years ago to give quick results. They dried the images using alcohol.

It is a good, but coarse grained developer for films.

PE

I remember Tri-Chem packs. Kodak never disclosed the formula for the developer but I don't think it was Dektol.

The powdered stop bath used sodium diacetate as the acidulant.

i currently use dektol as a film developer
it works great, and isn't very grainy ...

jnanian said:

i currently use dektol as a film developer
it works great, and isn't very grainy ...

Click to expand...

Watch out! You can't do that! You know, like DK-50 gives big grain. Read that somewhere, ya know!

I'll bet, without testing, that dilute Dektol will give a sharp image with little to no grain worth mentioning with 100 speed films. Like my DK-50 experience.

jnanian said:

i currently use dektol as a film developer
it works great, and isn't very grainy ...

Click to expand...

So do I occasionally. Not much grain with an 11x14 contact print!

I'll bet there would be with Royal X Pan.

Photo Engineer said:

I'll bet there would be with Royal X Pan.

Click to expand...

I have only used Royal Pan...and that was awhile back (and only in 4x5)!

I think I have 1 roll of expired 120 in the freezer. It was awful in any developer IMHO.

PE

Photo Engineer said:

I think I have 1 roll of expired 120 in the freezer. It was awful in any developer IMHO. E

Click to expand...

I used it when I first started using 4x5 (about 1978 or 79) -- probably did not know any better anyway! Used some of Super XX, too...whatever the camera store had. Developed it all in Microdol X at 1:3 (since that is what I was using for 120 film...Panatomic X). I also probably thought that since both film and developer had the "X", they must be meant for each other!

Some years ago there was a photographer who did a series of prints of people dressed as nuns and priests. His name escapes me now. The images were very atmospheric with lots of fake smoke and very grainy (and I mean lots of grain). He was said to use Royal-X Pan developed in Dektol.

Paul Verizzo said:

Watch out! You can't do that! You know, like DK-50 gives big grain. Read that somewhere, ya know!

I'll bet, without testing, that dilute Dektol will give a sharp image with little to no grain worth mentioning with 100 speed films. Like my DK-50 experience.

Click to expand...

exactly !
i had the same experience with ansco 130. beautiful negatives ..
its like anything if you don't know what you are doing ( and aren't lucky )
probably will be a mess, but if you have a clue, even a little bitty one,
things will turn out OK
the tri x 400 and tri x ortho 400 films i ran through dk50 were things of beauty too ...

I printed many prints in dektol 1:0. What I remember is that it gave warmer tones.

Film 'grain' with Dektol is a function of the amount of gamma (contrast) you are after, as it is with other (film) developers. The perception of excess grain is the result of facile over-development because of the excess carbonate in the Dektol formula.

I think that some of us, including myself, have witnessed that we can safely use diluted Dektol for normal film development and experience but normal grain characterists. Try using Dektol 1 + 9, or 1 + 11, and find development times that give normal contrast (at a given temperature.) I think that you stand an excellent chance of being delighted with the results.

There is not a huge, mysterious difference between Kodak D-72 and D-76. The alkalinity in the '72' is profound, but controllable with dilution and the possible addition of sodium bicarbonate. NO, you will not 'run out of developer capacity' with that much dilution. The fears out there are largely unfounded for such. I have used Dektol at twice those dilutions and still got extremely printable, low grain images, because I properly truncated development with time, dilultion, and (sometimes) the addition of baking soda. Adding sodium bicarbonate (experiment with 1 to 4 grams per liter) to your working solution will slow things down further at those dilutions (i.e., 1 + 9 or 1 + 11) . Your development times will be in the realm of normalcy for standard film developers.

And to echo PE: I could never understand the function of that Royal X which was, largely, a Royal Pain in the A--! - David Lyga

David Lyga said:

And to echo PE: I could never understand the function of that Royal X which was, largely, a Royal Pain in the A--! - David Lyga

Click to expand...

i exposed some a few weeks ago and processed it as well,
it was the iso 1250 ... and it processed filne in a split Dsumatranol-c and dektol
the film wasn't stored in some freezer vault, just a shelf the few years i owned it ...
and probably a shelf for 30 years before it was gifted to me ...

jnanian said:

the tri x 400 and tri x ortho 400 films i ran through dk50 were things of beauty too ...

Click to expand...

No kidding? It will be a week or two before I get to that. I have several 400 speed films, traditional and T-grain.

Paul Verizzo said:

No kidding? It will be a week or two before I get to that. I have several 400 speed films, traditional and T-grain.

Click to expand...

yup, that is all she used tri x..
we used to retouch the negatives with graphite, and enlarge them to 20x24 sometimes, often times
16x20 without a hitch ... split 5x7 for bread/butter work -- ...
( you know, promotional photographs for the local sunday paper ) as well as captains of industry
the governor we shot full 5x7 ... same with the postmaster general .. and karshesque portraits &c ...
( rhembrandt lighting &c ) no low iso films, just tri x, and LOTS of it ... tri x ortho for men to give them a ruddy complexion
make "character" portraits once in a while tri x oath with women too ( but not as often as regular old tri x ) ..
don't forget we used deep tanks, and seasoned developer -- i have no idea what your methods ( single shot and 1:x dilution ) will produce ..
hopefully the developer will make negatives as you like them .. and if things are different than you like, you can tweek your methods to work ...

@jananian: Oh, I presumed you were talked 35mm. There's never been any question as to great image quality with DK-50 and sheet or medium format films.