X-TOL, Microphen, or Acufine for long shelf life pushing developers?

[otto.f]

When you say ADOX XT-3 has a longer shelf life than Kodak XTOL, can you tell me please, what are you basing that on?

see ADOX website

 

[runswithsizzers]

see ADOX website

Their English website page for XT-3 does say, "with improved storage capacities compared to earlier ascorbic-acid developer recipes." And, "Better keeping properties" compared to "similar working recipes like Xtol, Excel or LegacyPro Eco."

However, when we move from the general product description to specific recommendations, Adox says,
"Once mixed XT-3 should be filled in dark glass bottles filled to the top or topped up with protective gas (alternatively throw in clean glass marbles to taise the level of liquid). Prepared like this the stock solution should keep at least 6 weeks and up to 6 months depending on storage conditions and depletion of the solution."

The most recent data sheet I can find for Kodak XTOL is from Alaris, Publication J-109 dated Feb 2018. And that data sheet gives the shelf life of stock XTOL "in full, tightly closed containers" as "6 months."

So really, both manufacturers are claiming the same shelf life for the mixed stock solution -- six months -- right?

Actually, the exact wording used suggests Adox XT-3 is good "up to 6 months" (a maximum of 6 months), and Kodak just says "6 months" suggesting a minimum of 6 months?

 

[runswithsizzers]

It's funny, when I go to the Fotoimpex page product page for Adox XT-3 and click on this link for "PDF datasheet" it opens the Kodak Alaris Data Sheet J-109 for XTOL. In some places ADOX is saying XT-3 is "better" than XTOL, but in other places, they seem to be saying, "There is no practical difference"?

 

[mshchem]

Sorry then I had misunderstood you, I thought that by electronic photography you meant hybrid nah no &€ital cameras for me: no light, no pictures

The no light no pictures is a sound plan! I'm so fond of film. I've been known to go for a stop even two, but as others have said all that's really changed is contrast.

I'm a XTOL fan, have been since it debuted. Keeps for a long time in full bottles. It's all about proper laboratory practices. Pure water, full bottles, properly maintained replenished solutions.

 

[mshchem]

Adox makes fabulous chemistry.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Store the developer in StopLossBagsTM using their funnel for filling he bags. www.StopLossBags.com. I have stored XTOL and replenished XTOL for years with problems. Always test the developer with a a strip of film.

 

[npl]

It's funny, when I go to the Fotoimpex page product page for Adox XT-3 and click on this link for "PDF datasheet" it opens the Kodak Alaris Data Sheet J-109 for XTOL. In some places ADOX is saying XT-3 is "better" than XTOL, but in other places, they seem to be saying, "There is no practical difference"?

View attachment 409680

There's no practical difference regarding how the film is developped.

It's a better product because it come as 1L package (5L too), for now it's reliable and consistent (unlike Kodak chemistries..), and the captura thing is on paper better for our lungs.

 

[John Wiegerink]

Store the developer in StopLossBagsTM using their funnel for filling he bags. www.StopLossBags.com. I have stored XTOL and replenished XTOL for years with problems. Always test the developer with a a strip of film.

When I couldn't get mylar wine bags here anymore I had a member from Aus. send me some from there. Then I found these and have been using them ever since with great results and ease of use. They are from a company called AstraPouch.

 

[Trask]

Store the developer in StopLossBagsTM using their funnel for filling he bags. www.StopLossBags.com. I have stored XTOL and replenished XTOL for years with problems. Always test the developer with a a strip of film.

I'm sure you meant to type "I have stored XTOL and replenished XTOL for years without problems." Just for the long-term record.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I'm sure you meant to type "I have stored XTOL and replenished XTOL for years without problems." Just for the long-term record.

Yes, I left out the word "out".

 

[loccdor]

I'm assuming the OP is using a hybrid process if they like their results from a 5 stop push.

Anyone who hasn't liked their results from a 5-stop push (most or all of us?) is going to have completely different criteria for what they want out of their image. Without the poster sharing the results that they like, we are dancing in the dark.

 

[farpointer]

With modern emulsions, Xtol and (even better) DD-X are your best choices for push processing. Microphen and Acufine aren’t worth messing around with anymore, especially for roll film

 

[Sidd]

Karl Matthias's ( relistan here) PC-512 Borax is also good for pushing. I have tried 1 stop push with it and got good results. OP may visit this post by Karl for reference.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Either mix your own from scratch, like PC-512 (really long shelf life). It pushes really well, HP5, Kentmere 400 (that I've tested). Or use XTol-R, as Matt recommended.

 

[pentaxuser]

Without wishing to deliberately cause a row of create animosity it seems no-one has really answered runwithsizzers post about XT-3 having extra longevity compared to Xtol

Might I conclude from what from has been said that in fact there is no difference once either has been processed into a liquíd stock ?

pentaxuser

 

[otto.f]

Without wishing to deliberately cause a row of create animosity it seems no-one has really answered runwithsizzers post about XT-3 having extra longevity compared to Xtol

Might I conclude from what from has been said that in fact there is no difference once either has been processed into a liquíd stock ?

pentaxuser

I did and followed what ADOX says on their website about it and I don’t see why it should be doubted as has been done here. My main reason to prefer it above the Kodak version though is that there’s no fine dust when making the liquid