Xtol stock v 1:1 v 1:2 v 1:3 and Acros 100

[sperera]

can anyone tel me the characteristics of the using stock v 1:1 v 1:2 v 1:3 dilutiins....in particular i want to try Acros 100 120 rolls with this developer....times for these would be appreciated too. Digital Truth has limited info for this combo.

THANKS FOR ANY HELP RECEIVED

 

[gary mulder]

X-Tol 24 degrees in a Jobo 1:2 8.30 min for normal contrast.

I prefer 1 : 2 slightly sharper then 1 + 1

 

[K-G]

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

Perhaps this thread can give you some more advise. Good luck !

Karl-Gustaf

 

[Ian Grant]

I'd add using Xtol replenished, by far the best method it gives all the benefits of using the developer dilute once seasoned and is the most cost efficient way to use it.

IAn

 

[sperera]

....thanks everyone......but i still don't see what times i need for different temperatures of Xtol to process Acros 100...I only see 20 degrees.....I live in a hot country and normally waters like 22-28 degrees out of the tap

 

[markbarendt]

When in doubt ask the people who made it.

http://fujifilmusa.com/shared/bin/ProfessionalFilmDataGuide.pdf

 

[sperera]

When in doubt ask the people who made it.

http://fujifilmusa.com/shared/bin/ProfessionalFilmDataGuide.pdf

THANKS MAN APPRECIATE IT.....gonna have a read and see

 

[Ian Grant]

Sperera, I use a timer program on my PC, Wlab/Dlab and it has a conversion facility, so I just type in the old temperature/time and the new temperature and it gives the new time It's accurate enough for Xtol/D76/Id-11//Pyrocat etc. Like you I have water temperatures up to 26/27°C in the summer.

Ian

 

[Lee L]

Here's a formula that puts you in the correct range for Fuji's data sheet on Acros with full strength Xtol:

developing time in minutes = a * degrees Celsius ^ b

where a = 2148.484
and b = -1.872
---------------------------------
for dilutions of

1:1 multiply time by 1.3
1:2 multiply time by 1.6
1:3 multiply time by 1.9

These are based on Kodak's older recommendations for similar films at higher dilutions. This will get you close, but you'll need to test for your own conditions.

Lee

 

[Bruce Watson]

Can anyone tell me the characteristics of the stock v 1:1 v 1:2 v 1:3 dilutions.

As you dilute the stock solution, you'll see a slight increase in graininess, and a slight increase in sharpness. By slight I mean you might start to see it in a print if you are making an enlargement of 12x or bigger. Depends on your image, etc.

The main reason to dilute is to control developer times IMHO.

Can't help you with times for Acros. I'm using TMY-2, but I am using XTOL 1:3 with it. An excellent combination, but it doesn't help you any. Sorry.

 

[sperera]

hey Bruce, the 'galleries' link at the bottom of the page of your AchromaticArts.com goes nowhere....the side index 'galleries' link is fine.....similarly links dont work inside the galleries....get it fixed brother.....Im also a drum scanner by the way....I use a Scanmate Scanview 5000 if you remember from my posts in hybridphoto.com

 

[Bruce Watson]

hey Bruce, the 'galleries' link at the bottom of the page of your AchromaticArts.com goes nowhere....the side index 'galleries' link is fine.....similarly links dont work inside the galleries....get it fixed brother.....Im also a drum scanner by the way....I use a Scanmate Scanview 5000 if you remember from my posts in hybridphoto.com

I know it's broke. Lost my website admin. Haven't felt like climbing yet another set of learning curves lately. Not like there's a lot of point in this economy. More interested in photography than computers, which is probably a shock to so many here.

 

[pentaxuser]

Here's a formula that puts you in the correct range for Fuji's data sheet on Acros with full strength Xtol:

developing time in minutes = a * degrees Celsius ^ b

where a = 2148.484
and b = -1.872
---------------------------------
for dilutions of

1:1 multiply time by 1.3
1:2 multiply time by 1.6
1:3 multiply time by 1.9

These are based on Kodak's older recommendations for similar films at higher dilutions. This will get you close, but you'll need to test for your own conditions.

Lee

I was doing a search as I had a 120 Acros to develop in Xtol and came across your post. I think that * is the symbol for "multiply" but what is ^ the symbol for and can you confirm that the figures are: 2148.484 and -1.872? Maybe you can give an example of how this calculation works with Xtol and Acros.

Thanks

pentaxuser

 

[tkamiya]

^ is a symbol for "raised to the power of".

 

[Lee L]

tkamiya is correct. These are standard spreadsheet mathematical notation, and even the higher end TI graphing calculators have changed from standard superscript 'x raised to the power y' notation to a 'power' key sporting only the ^ symbol. That confused my wife, a heavy user of spreadsheets for 28 years, to the point that she couldn't spot the calculator power key recently.

Treat * as multiplication and ^ as raising to a power and you're good with the formula and coefficient and exponent values as given for full strength. Multiply full strength times by the appropriate factors given for each dilution. Make yourself a spreadsheet, enter a column of Celsius temps, then use the formula to calculate a column of corresponding times for full strength and other columns for any dilutions you're interested in. Post it on your darkroom wall or in your notebook and you're good.

If you don't have a spreadsheet, download openoffice/LibreOffice from thedocumentfoundation.org. It's free for any platform. Use NeoOffice if you're on a Mac.

For 20C:

2148.484*20^-1.872=7.88

That's 7.88 minutes or 7 minutes 53 seconds.

Lee

 

[pentaxuser]

tkamiya is correct. These are standard spreadsheet mathematical notation, and even the higher end TI graphing calculators have changed from standard superscript 'x raised to the power y' notation to a 'power' key sporting only the ^ symbol. That confused my wife, a heavy user of spreadsheets for 28 years, to the point that she couldn't spot the calculator power key recently.

Treat * as multiplication and ^ as raising to a power and you're good with the formula and coefficient and exponent values as given for full strength. Multiply full strength times by the appropriate factors given for each dilution. Make yourself a spreadsheet, enter a column of Celsius temps, then use the formula to calculate a column of corresponding times for full strength and other columns for any dilutions you're interested in. Post it on your darkroom wall or in your notebook and you're good.

If you don't have a spreadsheet, download openoffice/LibreOffice from thedocumentfoundation.org. It's free for any platform. Use NeoOffice if you're on a Mac.

For 20C:

2148.484*20^-1.872=7.88

That's 7.88 minutes or 7 minutes 53 seconds.

Lee

Thanks. 2 more things if I may.

1. As I do not have a scientific calculator with the ^ key I ran the programme tonight and at the end was warned against running it as there is no valid signature against which it can be verified. I found this surprising. I'd have thought that a signature would have bee added as such warnings must put potential users of which is not in the interests of Open Office.

Can you comment on this? Should I be concerned?

2. My maths ended many years ago and I may not be able to follow whatever explanation you care to give but is it possible to give me a little background to how the numbers such as 2148.484 and -1.872 were arrived at? I am presuming that that these numbers are only applicable to Xtol and Fuji Acros.

Many thanks

pentaxuser

 

[BetterSense]

I'd add using Xtol replenished, by far the best method it gives all the benefits of using the developer dilute once seasoned and is the most cost efficient way to use it.

Kodak says that replenished gives lower shadow speed than using diluted. This does not agree with your statement that replenished "gives all the benefits" of dilute.

 

[Lee L]

Thanks. 2 more things if I may.

1. As I do not have a scientific calculator with the ^ key I ran the programme tonight and at the end was warned against running it as there is no valid signature against which it can be verified. I found this surprising. I'd have thought that a signature would have bee added as such warnings must put potential users of which is not in the interests of Open Office.

Can you comment on this? Should I be concerned?

2. My maths ended many years ago and I may not be able to follow whatever explanation you care to give but is it possible to give me a little background to how the numbers such as 2148.484 and -1.872 were arrived at? I am presuming that that these numbers are only applicable to Xtol and Fuji Acros.

Many thanks

pentaxuser

If you're on a computer, the built in calculator program should have a scientific mode. Look for a key with an 'x' with a superscript 'y' and it will do the exponential function identically to '^'. Unfortunately most forum software won't format mathematical expressions well.

With regard to question #1:

I haven't seen openoffice throw a 'signature' warning in linux. That sounds like it might be your OS. Are you running a Microsoft or Apple OS? I haven't run Windows in years and never ran an Apple OS, so I can't help you much with those kinds of warnings. Unfortunately Windows allows applications and even things like spreadsheets so much operating system privilege that it has to watch for trojans, viruses, and worms embedded in things like spreadsheets, and so will get frightened and throw warnings if it doesn't see a 'signature' that says 'no virus here' in WindowsSpeak. Can't help you with Microsoft stuff, or most of Apple, even though OS-X is a custom version of BSD Unix, which is operationally very close to linux, but Apple uses a locked-down custom graphical interface and other proprietary modifications for hardware, etc.

I found the exponent and coefficients through fitting against a general formula of the form y=a*x^b, which provides an excellent fit for this particular data. I do this with openoffice and a 'trend line' from clicking on a data point or line in a graph of the data and choosing the form of equation to use for fitting a line. You can choose whether or not to show the equation for the fit and a number for the quality of the fit.

The other program I use for this is SciDAVis, and the data taken from manufacturers' technical publications. SciDAVis is "Scientific Data Analysis and Visualization", and is open source and GPL license (free to use, modify, and redistribute as long as you give back modifications to the public and provide your modified source code), and is available for Windows, Mac, and linux. You can find it with google and download it. SciDAVis is fundamentally a spreadsheet into which you enter your data, then test the fit and find parameters for the variables using built-in or user-defined mathematical formulae. Doing that is called regression analysis. (My last math class was first semester calculus at university in 1973.)

And yes, you're correct that these numbers apply specifically to the combination of Xtol and Acros.

Lee

 

[Sirius Glass]

Stock XTOL replenished. The best results. Much better than diluted or even stock.

Try it and see.

Steve

 

[pentaxuser]

Thanks Lee but it was as I suspected. I understood very little of what you said and I suspect that shortof enrolling on a course and/or a very extensive correspondence between us I never will.

However there are I think a couple of things we can clear up. I think you are saying that within Openoffice there is a ^ function which once placed on a spreadsheet will automatically do the functions of calculating the ^ once the 42969.68( 2148.484 *20) has been calculated. Have I got this right?

Might still be a problem for me as my knowledge of Excel spreadsheets was very limited and what little I knew has been lost in my retirement. Anyway that's my problem and not yours.

However turning back to handheld calculators I have found my son's Casio but instructions for a Texas Instruments calculator :

Anyway I then found the key, I think, for X with superscript y and discovered that with following the Texas instrument instructions for the universal power key in the example in the book and modifying it for a Casio by adding the 1/x key I could get to the exact answer in the Texas example. So I tried the same sequence for your figures and got an answer which didn't get me anywhere near to 7.88.

So to summarise I worked out 2148.484 multiplied by 20 and got 42969.68. I then pressed X superscript y then entered - 1.872 and got an answer then pressed the 1/x for which the answer was quite different form 7.88 mins.

So the sequence with the Casio that got me to the right answer with the Texas Instruments example somehow failed to do so with the Casio.

Any ideas why this might be? Of course getting the right answer withthe Texas Instruments example may have been just a coincidence but this seems unlikely.

I remain totally confused. Any ideas will be gratefully received.Thanks

pentaxuser

 

[Lee L]

pentaxuser,

Read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order_of_operations

Exponentiation is always done before addition if there are no parentheses to indicate otherwise.

You should probably get a local helper with math. It's hard to do over an internet forum.

Lee

 

[bvy]

Stock XTOL replenished. The best results. Much better than diluted or even stock.

Okay, I'll bite. How can replenished XTOL be better than stock?

ETA: Guessing it has to do with building up a seasoned developer. My inclination is to use it one shot at 1:1 as I like consistency.

 

[Gerald C Koch]

Sometime prior to 2001 Kodak stopped recommending any dilution greater than 1+1 saying that higher dilutions might lead to unpredictable results. You will still see higher dilutions quoted. However I would suggest following Kodak's recommendation. You may find the following site helpful.

http://www.covingtoninnovations.com/xtol/

 

[Sirius Glass]

Stock XTOL replenished. The best results. Much better than diluted or even stock.

Try it and see.

Steve

Okay, I'll bite. How can replenished XTOL be better than stock?

ETA: Guessing it has to do with building up a seasoned developer. My inclination is to use it one shot at 1:1 as I like consistency.

I am not a photographic chemist, but I know it works and that is all I need to know.

 

[MattKing]

Stock XTOL replenished. The best results. Much better than diluted or even stock.

Try it and see.

Steve

Okay, I'll bite. How can replenished XTOL be better than stock?

ETA: Guessing it has to do with building up a seasoned developer. My inclination is to use it one shot at 1:1 as I like consistency.

I'll agree with Sirius on this.

However, instead of saying "The best results" I would say "Lots of benefits".

Those benefits, beyond the improved quality that Sirius references, include the benefits inherent in replenishment regimes - low cost, consistent results, opportunity to always develop at ambient room temperature, no concerns about wasting developer due to tanks that require large amounts of liquid in order to develop small amounts of film.