Would I be missing anything if I use D-23 instead of D-76?

[dcy]

I've ordered a 1L kit of D-76 and I am looking forward to developing film with the gold standard developer. That will help establish a baseline of what a developed film is supposed to look like.

But... Long term, I'd rather use developers that I can mix myself or are concentrates that never go bad. That would better suit the sporadic & random nature of my photography hobby. I have Rodinal, PC-TEA, and the ingredients & tools (e.g. milligram scale) to mix D-23 in small batches. I know that Rodinal (and I think also PC-TEA?) will give a different look to D-76 because D-76 is a solvent / fine-grain developer. But D-23 is also a fine-grain developer. D-23 is apparently a lower contrast than D-76, but my understanding is that contrast is something I can learn to control with over/under exposure and push/pull processing.

Is there any reason it might not be a good idea to use D-23 as my single fine-grain developer?

 

[GregY]

I've ordered a 1L kit of D-76 and I am looking forward to developing film with the gold standard developer. That will help establish a baseline of what a developed film is supposed to look like.

But... Long term, I'd rather use developers that I can mix myself or are concentrates that never go bad. That would better suit the sporadic & random nature of my photography hobby. I have Rodinal, PC-TEA, and the ingredients & tools (e.g. milligram scale) to mix D-23 in small batches. I know that Rodinal (and I think also PC-TEA?) will give a different look to D-76 because D-76 is a solvent / fine-grain developer. But D-23 is also a fine-grain developer. D-23 is apparently a lower contrast than D-76, but my understanding is that contrast is something I can learn to control with over/under exposure and push/pull processing.

Is there any reason it might not be a good idea to use D-23 as my single fine-grain developer?

D, IMO it doesn't matter. Pick one, use it a lot (with different films if you like), under different lighting conditions......make prints and learn the nuances of of whichever developer you choose.

 

[xkaes]

Film speed. If that's not a problem, you're all set -- but with either developer, you need to get the time right for the contrast you want.

 

[Milpool]

I've ordered a 1L kit of D-76 and I am looking forward to developing film with the gold standard developer. That will help establish a baseline of what a developed film is supposed to look like.

But... Long term, I'd rather use developers that I can mix myself or are concentrates that never go bad. That would better suit the sporadic & random nature of my photography hobby. I have Rodinal, PC-TEA, and the ingredients & tools (e.g. milligram scale) to mix D-23 in small batches. I know that Rodinal (and I think also PC-TEA?) will give a different look to D-76 because D-76 is a solvent / fine-grain developer. But D-23 is also a fine-grain developer. D-23 is apparently a lower contrast than D-76, but my understanding is that contrast is something I can learn to control with over/under exposure and push/pull processing.

Is there any reason it might not be a good idea to use D-23 as my single fine-grain developer?

D-23 is functionally very similar to D-76 (it was formulated to be that way).

 

[Paul Howell]

D 23 reduces grain a bit more, finer gain, and will produce a negative with a bit less contrast. D76 is for many the standard that all others developers are judged against, good balance of film speed, contrast and grain, sort of the Goldilocks of developers, not too much not too little. Producing similar characteristics, Xtol, HC 110, Clayton F76+, ILford ID 11, Ansco later GAF 17 to name just a few. There are many D76 clones that can be had cheaper, Freestyle and Ultrafine offers in gallon size. One advantage of D 23 is that has ony 2 incredants, easy to mix in small batches if you only a few rolls a month.

 

[chuckroast]

I've ordered a 1L kit of D-76 and I am looking forward to developing film with the gold standard developer. That will help establish a baseline of what a developed film is supposed to look like.

But... Long term, I'd rather use developers that I can mix myself or are concentrates that never go bad. That would better suit the sporadic & random nature of my photography hobby. I have Rodinal, PC-TEA, and the ingredients & tools (e.g. milligram scale) to mix D-23 in small batches. I know that Rodinal (and I think also PC-TEA?) will give a different look to D-76 because D-76 is a solvent / fine-grain developer. But D-23 is also a fine-grain developer. D-23 is apparently a lower contrast than D-76, but my understanding is that contrast is something I can learn to control with over/under exposure and push/pull processing.

Is there any reason it might not be a good idea to use D-23 as my single fine-grain developer?

You can mix your own equivalent D-76 yourself - the formulas very nearly the same thing are floating around.

D-23 is a fine developer but I would not recommend it for 35mm film. It tends to have a tad more grain.

Since you're starting out, I'd say go with the D-76 diluted 1:1 for one time use and then discarded.

There is a reason D-76 is considered the gold standard of film development ...

 

[Yezishu]

This is quite subjective. I recommend considering experimental results to make a decision. For example, take some frames and develop them with D-76. Optional, take similar scene and develop them with another developer, such as D23, and place those photos on the right. Based on the samples, identify the aspects you wish to retain or improve, such as finer grain, richer shadow details, higher sharpness, or lower contrast. From these preferences, more targeted recommendations can be made—whether it's adjusting the development process, modifying the developer formula, or sometimes altering the shooting method.

If there isn't much detailed information (such as which film, which scene, or your preferences), large format photographers and 35mm users will give completely different comments when discussing 'fine grain'. They are all right!

 

[Alex Benjamin]

D-23 is apparently a lower contrast than D-76, but my understanding is that contrast is something I can learn to control with over/under exposure and push/pull processing.

True that pulling lowers the contrast, and that pushing gives more contrast, but it's not something you use to control contrast. The variations in contrast here are a side-effect of something else you're trying to control (pushing because of dealing with a low-light situation, for example).

With D-23, contrast is best controled trough development time. It is often stated that it's a low-contrast developer, but that's only if one insists on using the same development time as D-76.

 

[MattKing]

All of the general purpose developers are reasonably similar - in some cases, like HC-110, they were designed to emulate and replace other such developers.
The differences are so subtle for most users that I would make my decision on ease of acquiring and use - at least until you become sufficiently familiar with something that it has become your standard.
And by the way, if you refer to something like D-76 as a "gold standard" it is important that the word "gold" be seen to modify the right word.
The "gold" isn't in how D-76 works, it is in how much of an easily compared to and reliable standard it is.
And by the way, functionally speaking, Ilford ID-11 and D-76 are basically interchangeable. The differences being relate to the fact that ID-11 is in two pouches, and D-76 is in one - at least in the Kodak packaging.

 

[cliveh]

Sliced bread is the best thing since D76 used at 1:1. No other developer needed.

 

[Nicholas Lindan]

Is there any reason it might not be a good idea to use D-23 as my single fine-grain developer?

Add some salt (sodium chloride) to D-23 to make Microdol. Results with TMax 100 are virtually grainless (well as grainless as it gets without getting into exotics). Use it 1:3 to retain full film speed, with TMX I find grain at 1:3 and FS to be pretty identical.

Pure S. Chloride is available at the grocery store as "pickling salt." All other table salts have some additives.

I second Cliveh's suggestion to use D-76 1:1.

 

[GregY]

Add some salt (sodium chloride) to D-23 to make Microdol. Results with TMax 100 are virtually grainless (well as grainless as it gets without getting into exotics). Use it 1:3 to retain full film speed, with TMX I find grain at 1:3 and FS to be pretty identical.

Pure S. Chloride is available at the grocery store as "pickling salt." All other table salts have some additives.

I second Cliveh's suggestion to use D-76 1:1.

TMax100 is grainless pretty much anyway you'd develop it in my experience.

 

[MattKing]

D-23 is apparently a lower contrast than D-76, but my understanding is that contrast is something I can learn to control with over/under exposure and push/pull processing.

To control contrast, you can shorten or lengthen development, or lower or raise development temperature, but that doesn't necessarily mean a push or a pull.
You have to be careful if you bring up the terms "push" and "pull", because they often confuse, due to the fact that many associate use of them when referencing combinations of exposure changes and development changes, where those combinations are intended to counteract the effects of exposure changes.
So I generally recommend against using the terms "push" and "pull" unless you are explicitly dealing with adjusting development in response to exposure concerns.

 

[GregY]

To control contrast, you can shorten or lengthen development, or lower or raise development temperature, but that doesn't necessarily mean a push or a pull.
You have to be careful if you bring up the terms "push" and "pull", because they often confuse, due to the fact that many associate use them when referencing combinations of exposure changes and development changes, where those combinations are intended to counteract the effects of exposure changes.
So I generally recommend against using the terms "push" and "pull" unless you are explicitly dealing with adjusting development in response to exposure concerns.

Matt, I agree, as so much of one's personal 'exact normal development' depends on how one metered, how accurate one is with mixing the developer, the time, & how one consistent one's agitation regimen is....
Philosophically both nuanced and general characteristic results can be understood, but in the real world results can differ depending how the "rubber meets the road."

 

[xkaes]

Matt, I agree, as so much of one's personal 'exact normal development' depends on how one metered, how accurate one is with mixing the developer, the time, & how one consistent one's agitation regimen is....
Philosophically both nuanced and general characteristic results can be understood, but in the real world results can differ depending how the "rubber meets the road."

I don't refer to it as "pulling" when I shoot APX 25 at ASA/ISO 12. I just call it my personal film speed -- but it also includes my personal developer/dilution/time/temperature/method. It's the same with my "fast" films -- like HP5 -- which I shoot at different film speeds -- sometimes higher or lower than what Ilford suggests. Six of one, .....

 

[GregY]

Matt, I agree, as so much of one's personal 'proper development' depends on how one metered, how accurate one is with mixing the developer, the time, & how one consistent one's agitation regimen is....

I don't refer to it as "pulling" when I shoot APX 25 at ASA/ISO 12. I just call it my personal film speed -- but it also includes my personal developer/dilution/time/temperature/method. It's the same with my "fast" films -- like HP5 -- which I shoot at different film speeds -- sometimes higher or lower than what Ilford suggests. Six of one, .....

Agreed, but from the recent threads, I don't think the OP has that level of accumulated person experience.....

 

[xkaes]

Agreed, but from the recent threads, I don't think the OP has that level of person experience.....

That's why I suggested he run his own tests -- to get what he wants.

 

[retina_restoration]

Read what Troop & Anchell have to say about D-23 and its performance relative to D-76.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

I've ordered a 1L kit of D-76 and I am looking forward to developing film with the gold standard developer. That will help establish a baseline of what a developed film is supposed to look like.

But... Long term, I'd rather use developers that I can mix myself or are concentrates that never go bad. That would better suit the sporadic & random nature of my photography hobby. I have Rodinal, PC-TEA, and the ingredients & tools (e.g. milligram scale) to mix D-23 in small batches. I know that Rodinal (and I think also PC-TEA?) will give a different look to D-76 because D-76 is a solvent / fine-grain developer. But D-23 is also a fine-grain developer. D-23 is apparently a lower contrast than D-76, but my understanding is that contrast is something I can learn to control with over/under exposure and push/pull processing.

Is there any reason it might not be a good idea to use D-23 as my single fine-grain developer?

both developers are great and have their following. And bth can easily mixed from bulk. Pick one and get used to the ins and outs of it to get the most out of your negatives. It doesn't matter which.

 

[snusmumriken]

@dcy, in another thread you have explained that you use half-frame 35mm. I suggest you should try D-76 undiluted first to set yourself a yardstick for comparison. Both D-76 and D-23 are solvent developers, producing relatively fine grain, but you might find the results a bit mushy in half-frame. Using them dilute should help somewhat in that respect. Given that you’ve also stated that you’d like simplicity, home mixing and good keeping properties, I suspect Thornton’s 2-bath could suit you well, but I don’t want to seem to be evangelising!

Your experiments with different developers will be plagued by the fact that you have so many variables (lighting, exposure, film type, developer, dilution, temperature, agitation, …) and you will find it difficult to interpret the results. That’s the reason you’ll keep getting the recommendation to become very familiar with one film/dev combination before experimenting further.

 

[halfaman]

Don't overthink. Just pick one developer and one film.

- If you like what you get, then you are done.
- If not, try to modify one variable at a time (speed, dilution, temperature, agitation etc.).
- If you are not capable after several iterations, change developer or film.

 

[Daniel Stuefer]

As more people have said already:

1. Just pick one, doesn't matter which, and try it out.
2. See how you like it, and especially what specific things you don't like.
3. Determine how you could influence the things you didn't like:
- Shadow density too low? Give more exposure (rate your film at a lower E.I. than before)
- Too flat and/or highlights too thin? Increase development time (or temp, or agitation. But not all at once, stick with one variable)
- Highlights too dense? Reduce development.
- Both hightlights and shadows too dense? Increase your E.I. (give less exposure).
It's always best to stick with just changing one variable at a time, otherwise you won't know what did what, also sticking with the same film.
4. If what you want to change about your images is not something to do with exposure time or contrast, look further: e.g. you might want to change dilution or the developer entirely (for instance, for more perceived sharpness, you might want to dilute further or try an acutance developer), or a different film stock. Then you can start the process over again with that specific combination of film/dev.

 

[TomR55]

I've ordered a 1L kit of D-76 and I am looking forward to developing film with the gold standard developer. That will help establish a baseline of what a developed film is supposed to look like.

But... Long term, I'd rather use developers that I can mix myself or are concentrates that never go bad. That would better suit the sporadic & random nature of my photography hobby. I have Rodinal, PC-TEA, and the ingredients & tools (e.g. milligram scale) to mix D-23 in small batches. I know that Rodinal (and I think also PC-TEA?) will give a different look to D-76 because D-76 is a solvent / fine-grain developer. But D-23 is also a fine-grain developer. D-23 is apparently a lower contrast than D-76, but my understanding is that contrast is something I can learn to control with over/under exposure and push/pull processing.

Is there any reason it might not be a good idea to use D-23 as my single fine-grain developer?

You could, if you wanted a D76 equivalent that is NOT D23, make D76H, which is similar in its contents to D23:

Water 760 mL (125 F/52 C)
Metol 2g
Sodium Decahydrate 2.5g
WTM 1 L.

I believe that Borax can be used for Sodium Decahydrate—but I’m sure that the chemists on this Forum will clarify ….

The dilutions and times for using D76H are identical to those for D76—according to Troop & Anchell, The Film Developing Cookbook, Second Edition.

 

[pentaxuser]

Perhaps it might help dcy if we were to only answer the exact question he asked when deciding on the thread's title or even better he were to repeat exactly what it is he needs to know about what if anything he "loses" if he uses D23 instead of D76?

pentaxuser

 

[Daniel Stuefer]

Fair enough - in my opinion, the answer to that question is "no".
Besides the inclusion of Hydroquinone and the Borax