Vote: Xtol or Eco Pro LegacyPro Film Developer

tom williams

Subscriber
Joined
Jan 24, 2020
Messages
282
Location
Arizona
Format
4x5 Format

That is excellent news. Though I know nothing about metals sequestration, I'll be interested to hear your reply to Michael_r's question, and how it relates to environmental toxicity.

In a related thread, antonio_b mentioned "Besides the practical reasons I prefer to buy from Foma or Fotoimpex, they have done a lot of work in order to keep film alive. Fotoimpex was reselling Czech and Yugoslavian film, ie. Foma and Fototeknika (Efke) in the aftermath of reunification, then they bought Adox patents/name from the croats, then relaunched Rodinal when Agfa went down. They have been keeping R&D active.
It's the opposite of Kodak, that as been destroyed by the usual american financial speculation games and lack of cultural interest for small companies
."

Though there are certain notes in that statement that are bound to be disputed, ADOX seems like a very attractive company for the reasons antonio_b stated, in addition to perhaps producing a superior product. XT-III can't get to the local suppliers soon enough to suit me.
 

ADOX Fotoimpex

Partner
Partner
Joined
Nov 20, 2005
Messages
887
Location
Berlin
Format
35mm RF
How did Fotoimpex choose to deal with metal sequestration in XT-III? Are you using DTPA (as in XTOL) to sequester iron and copper to avoid the Fenton/catalyzed oxidation of ascorbate? Or something else?
That is excellent news. Though I know nothing about metals sequestration, I'll be interested to hear your reply to Michael_r's question, and how it relates to environmental toxicity.
We are using in all ADOX products which have been reformulated in the last three years a biodegradable Komplexer. DTPA has been eliminated/replaced about three years ago in the FX-39 II upgrade programm. As far as I recall it was the best biodegradability/lowest toxidity of all we could find that works similar to DTPA. Thanks for the hint. We can actually point this out in marketing as well ;-)
 
Last edited:

ADOX Fotoimpex

Partner
Partner
Joined
Nov 20, 2005
Messages
887
Location
Berlin
Format
35mm RF
I would have to consult with our chemists how they calculated it exactly. As far as I recall the complexing constant is measured against Calcium and then you can calculate the substitution amount. One thing I recall for sure though is that our new complexer had higher binding potential than the one Agfa used in Neutol ECO. So we are somewhat on the safe side and then for sure backed this up by comparison testings.
 

DMJ

Member
Joined
Nov 20, 2020
Messages
268
Location
Los Angeles
Format
Multi Format
Replying to the original question, sort of. I just received Eco-Pro and developed my first film with it. I also got their fixer. Until now I only used HC110:B with Tri-x 400 so I thought I would give a developer without hydroquinone a try.
I got really nice looking negatives and noted smaller grain and extended midtones, the pictures almost looked as if they were shot with HP5. So I don't know how it compares to the original xtol but this product seems to work great. I used it 1:1.
 

Attachments

  • scan_04_09_21286.jpg
    1.1 MB · Views: 96

Radost

Member
Joined
Jan 21, 2021
Messages
1,659
Location
USA from Ukraine
Format
Multi Format
xtol back in stock in freestylephoto
 

m00dawg

Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2018
Messages
192
Location
Earth
Format
4x5 Format
*looks at the empty space in his darkroom where his replacement bags should be*

I'm just a little salty it hit retailers before they send out replacements to folks with bad bags. That's not how they did it last time as I recall.
 
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…