The air-evac bottles I got several decades ago sucked in air past the seal from the start. You should also consider what it's like to try and assure that you have the bellows creases all thoroughly cleaned. I haven't used mine in years, although I guess they could still hold water.
Lee
Paul,
I posted more to confirm the warnings against the air-evacs than to request help.
I've been using brown glass and straight sided brown plastic bottles for a long time, with marbles for the oxygen sensitive stuff. About 20 years ago the local mom & mom pharmacy (two women pharmacists owned it) sold out to a chain, and I collected their remaining amber glass flask style bottles for free. I also ordered some Boston rounds a few years ago in sizes to break liters into smaller units to prevent oxidation.
Lee
It means that if you expose two films identical and develop the first in D76 (the standard) and the second in XTOL for the same contrast the second film will have more shadow details.
Or, vice versa, you can set a (slightly) higher film speed when using XTOL and get the same shadow detail as with D76.
And if I understand correctly, reducing recommended development times (i.e., under-developing) would also reduce film speed and it would reduce contrast, right?
I guess that just goes to show me that what's on paper doesn't necessarily mean anything in real life.
... but I am so surprised by the consistently poor results I've been getting with XTOL compared with the datasheets. I though it was just the T-Max films perhaps, but I've tried it with Plus-X and Tri-X and it made them look flat, lifeless and solid gray as well. There are no blacks when I use XTOL. It is all one mass of gray.
I just did some BTZS testing of my own with TMAX 100 and TMY-2 and Xtol 1:1.
One advantage I have seen so far (on testing) is that it manages a wider scene brightness range than my TMAX RS developer on both ends of the spectrum. For plus development, it does maintain and even increase film speed above the rated speed. But with minus development the film speed quickly drops off. Also, Xtol does not do well with short development time. Generally speaking, my 4 minute development tests were unusable because the negative was too thin (@ 68 degrees).
jerold: Not that I recommend 4 minute dev times in any soup, but how many rolls did you actually do @ 4 mins?
Just to clear up my confusion since I'm just learning about film developing:
When you mix the initial powder packets with 5L of water, that makes the stock solution, right?
And once that's finished, from there you can add an additional 5L of water and mix it in to make 1+1 solution (i.e., 10L in all)?
And everyone usually adds it to storage containers, or bottles, after that?
Thanks in advance.
Yes. I store the 5 liters of stock solution in five 1 liter bottles and then mix one shot developer. I use 1:1 dilution (so yes that makes 10 liters total) but others use 1:3. You can test to see what you like best. Don't mix working solution from stock until you are ready to use it.
Just to clear up my confusion since I'm just learning about film developing:
When you mix the initial powder packets with 5L of water, that makes the stock solution, right?
And once that's finished, from there you can add an additional 5L of water and mix it in to make 1+1 solution (i.e., 10L in all)?
Don't dilute the stock solution all at once. Only dilute the amount of developer which you are actually going to use at a given time.
So for the time being, what I plan to do is divide the stock solution into 8oz. bottles (i.e., equivalent to 236ml per bottle) which will be sufficient for developing two rolls. That way, I can use the whole bottle 8oz. bottle each time I develop two rolls.
I won't be making prints. For a while. That's just not an option. I understand the results would be different but the end result I am working with right now is the scan. I know it's not the same as a hard print, but it's the best I can do right now.
Even though it may not be the traditional way, one can see the differences of developers through scanning. I'm not moving from developer to developer to developer; I use the developers I use for their different characteristics and I get fantastic results. XTOL is the only one I've gotten consistently poor results with. People can say it's the scanning and not the developer, but I know I get good results from the other developers. What it looks like on a print is irrelevant to me because I won't be doing any printing. My final product is a scan and then a LightJet RA4 print on Fuji Crystal Archive paper, and I've been getting incredible results with Rodinal and HC-110 especially. I also get great results with TMAX when pushing. Maybe I just don't like XTOL, or maybe XTOL is only good with wet prints.
I understand many people think you can't tell anything about a developer until you make a print in a darkroom, but it's just not true. Maybe you can see more on a print, but all of us don't have the capability to do them. I will be very happy when I don't have to mess with scanning anymore, but for now it's what I have to do.
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?