What are the odds (old powder developer still sealed)?

[Sirius Glass]

That's pretty equivalent to what I've done here, and your paint bucket is just about the equal of my "graduate". The PET beverage bottles are easy to squeeze to remove the air (there's a tiny bubble in each, at present, because I didn't want to spill). They're designed to hold about 120 psi (8 bar) plus a safety margin, because they're sold filled with carbonated beverages, and they're impermeable enough to keep the beverage pressurized/carbonated for literally years. Plus, the 1L ones I have are water clear, so if there's any discoloration of the solution inside, I can see it (they're stored in a cabinet, in a darkroom, so light exposure shouldn't be a problem).

Your graduate is more accurate than my bucket.

 

[Anon Ymous]

FWIW, the mixing instructions call for 18 to 30°C water (65 to 85°F). 110°F is something I would avoid and could probably lead to some oxidation.

 

[Donald Qualls]

FWIW, the mixing instructions call for 18 to 30°C water (65 to 85°F). 110°F is something I would avoid and could probably lead to some oxidation.

So I discovered, after the developer was mixed and bottled. Unfortunately, the instructions on the bag didn't specify temperature, and my prior experience has been with MQ and PQ developers, in which the Q component dissolves only very slowly below even as hot as 120F.

When i found document J-109, I was informed that room temperature mixing is a feature of XTOL (and you can process immediately after mixing is completed, no need to stand and stabilize like D-76), but the instructions explicitly confirmed that the color shifts I saw in the solution (light tan with Part A only, decoloring with Part B) were exactly what I should expect. Aside from my math error while extending the original 4L to 5L (added 25% of final volume make-up water instead of 20%, should give about 93% strength -- which won't produce as much change in contrast as differences in personal agitation technique in the same scheme, though I'll have to watch for subtle changes when I start replenishing with the next packet), everything short of processing actual film suggests my "expired 2002" XTOL should be just like a brand new packet. And given it's only $10 for 5L, I may just keep ordering the real deal and not bother with Mytol (other than to have a backup in case Kodak Alaris drops chemicals). Even Mytol was never going to be as cheap as Parodinal to use, but when I'm under twenty-five cents a roll (including stop and fixer), a penny or two either way doesn't really matter.

 

[pentaxuser]

Donald, you may get through all your stock before exhaustion in the stock is a problem but what I did notice is that towards the end of my stock Xtol ( stored in winebags) it did turn a very pale straw colour which only remained noticeable as stock. Once diluted 1+1 ( I don't use a replenishment system) the slight straw colour virtually disappeared.

The point of my story being that once the straw colour appeared I noticed that in a leader test the developed and fixed leader was not as dark as earlier leaders when the Xtol was diluted from fresh stock. The difference was only really noticeable when the two leaders were compared so for anyone using Xtol with a leader test, do keep the first leader as a comparison

pentaxuser

 

[DREW WILEY]

I recently ran into a sealed bag of Perceptol at least 30 yrs old, old packaging, price tag about one fourth as much as today, even the store long gone. The contents were as hard as stucco, and it took me a long time to pulverize each of the two packs and get them into solution. But afterwards, the developer behaved exactly like new product. If there had been discoloration indicating oxidation, I wouldn't have bothered.

 

[Donald Qualls]

Well, another data point: I processed two rolls of Fomapan 400 (branded as .EDU Ultra) in the Xtol last night -- and unlike my last rolls of this film in Df96, these look entirely normal, at least in the negative. They've been hanging to dry, I should be able to scan a few tonight. @Bormental had complained that this film never "popped" in XTOL until he tried it in stock with replenishment -- but I've never used it any other way, so I guess we'll see.

For those keeping score at home, I processed 5:30 at 20C.

 

[Bormental]

Donald, I think you're confusing two separate conversations. I never said that Fomapan 400 "never popped". If anything, it always does That was a different thread about HP5+. It never "popped" in Xtol 1+1 but worked really well in stock Xtol. I never tried HP5+ in Xtol-R.

The issue I was having with Foma 400 is that it builds density unusually slowly in Xtol-R.

 

[Donald Qualls]

Okay, you're right -- I'm conflating different threads. Anyway, last night's process counts as "XTOL stock" rather than Replenished XTOL, because it was the first time for freshly mixed XTOL.

Foma 400 might be slow building density due to the persistently reported true speed more than a stop below box speed. You have to push +1 or a little more just to get to "normal" mid-tones.