Replenishment Process with Kodak Xtol - questions

[PatB]

<p>Hi All,</p>

<p>I’ve been using Xtol in 1:1 dilution so far but having read about the benefits of replenished Xtol I would like to try it myself.</p>

<p>I have just mixed a fresh batch of Xtol and I would like to end up with 1 litre working solution (fit for my Paterson tank) and even though people describe replenishment as a very straightforward process, I am still confused by some of its aspects. I should also mention that I am using Tmax100 and Tmax 400 films.</p>

<p>My understanding is that you need to season the developer first by developing about 5-6 rolls using my 1000ml stock Xtol stock solution and stock developing times. By the end of this process, the stock solution should lose its properties and I should THEN start replacing the recommended 70ml per each roll I develop, is that correct?</p>

<p>Since the tank takes 2 rolls of 120 film or 3 rolls of 135mm film, I’d need to remove 140ml (2x70ml) or 210ml (3x70ml) from my 1000ml working solution and replace it with the same amount of fresh stock developer, right? 860ml working + 140ml fresh etc.</p>

<p>Does it matter whether I add the required amount of fresh solution right after development or just before developing new rolls i.e. leaving the working solution ‘as is’ in between developments.</p>

<p>I’ve also not managed to find any guidelines as to how often you need to use/ replenish the working developer to avoid exhaustion. My worry is that I may have 2 weeks or a month when I do not shoot any black and white films. Some people suggest that you remove some working solution and add fresh Xtol if you’re not doing any film development for longer periods to prevent it from dying. Would the recommended 70ml do the trick or would I need to add more? How often? Once a week, two weeks, a month?</p>

<p>I am sure I’ll fine-tune development times throughout the process but what would be the best starting point once the developer has been seasoned. Do you think that the times for 1:1 dilution would be appropriate or should I go for slightly longer 1:2 ones?</p>

<p>Finally, a lot of people using replenished Xtol have noticed some loss in film sensitivity. Do you find that to be the case? Once seasoned, should I expose Tmax 100 and Tmax400 at 50iso and 200iso accordingly? Even now, with 1:1 dilution and the recommended times, I find that Tmax 400 needs anywhere between +½ to ¾ f stop exposure compensation. Tmax 100 appears to retain its box speed a bit better but, again, benefits from slight overexposure.</p>

<p>I hope someone will be able to clarify the process for me!</p>

<p>Thanks in advance.</p>

<p>Pat</p>

<p> </p>

[craig_shearman1]

<p>In short, if you have to ask, don't.<br /><br />We replenished when I worked at newspapers and were going through tens of gallons of developer or more every week. Once place used deep tanks that held maybe 20 gallons. In those quantities, you don't want to throw out a lot of valuable developer and the economics make replenishing worth the trouble. But for a home darkroom it just doesn't make sense. Most people are worried about using up their gallon of Dektol, D-76 or Xtol before it goes bad. You have to keep very careful track of how many rolls you done, put in exactly the right amount of replenisher (which can be another thing to buy) and if you get it wrong you'll screw up the rolls that you develop.<br /><br />Personally, I use D-76 straight, sometimes 1:1, and it goes down the drain with each roll. That's worked for 40 years without a problem.</p>

[peterbcarter]

<p>I used replenished xtol for 3 reasons, and it had nothing to do with $$.</p>

<p>1) you are using seasoned xtol all the time. This is consistency at it's best.<br>

2) I prefer the tonal qualities of 1:2, which is what you get when using it replenished<br>

3) There is some degree of protection for xtol going "off" without warning. My last replenished tub was going on 3 years old.</p>

 

[peterbcarter]

<p>FYI: I used a seasoned jug that held 2l. I developed 2-3 rolls a week, minimum.</p>

[Didier Lamy]

<p>"it goes down the drain with each roll". Idem with me, each photo is a unique experience, it will never happen again. Why risk losing it for peanuts?</p>

[PatB]

Thanks for your answers. Craig, that's the thng, my throughput is the biggest worry.

Similar to Peter, economy is not the reason. I am looking for a bit more bite and better tonality. The small grain is

fantastic with tmax films and xtol but the pictures can be a little bit flat.

So you're saying that a 1:2 dilution yields results that are similar to replenished xtol? Hmm, perhaps I should try

that first.

[john_stockdale2]

<p>Generally if the results are "a little bit flat" would not an increase in developing time rectify that? It has always works for me (except when using very dilute or fast degenerating developers like pyrogallol, when there was a limit to what the developer could do).</p>

[PatB]

Thanks for the tip, I've increased development time already. I now rate tmax 400 at 320iso and develop for at

least 9min 45sec. Losing a full stop would be too much of a loss. I need that speed for my ga645i and its f4 lens.

Perhaps 10min is the answer?

[peterbcarter]

<p>Patrick, you are not losing a stop. You just need to increase your development time. There is a difference.</p>

[craig_shearman1]

<p>If you're trying to address tonality, that's a more valid reason to replenish than cost. But I agree with others that playing with the developing time would be the first thing to try rather than replenishing. And there's a lot you can do in printing or scanning that affects the final look of an image, perhaps more so than what you do in developing the negative. When I dilute D-76 it's 1:1 not 1:2, but something I've occasionally done while experimenting, nothing to do with replenishment.<br /><br />As for "seasoned" developer, maybe I've missed something but I've been developing film for a long time and never heard of that before. Everything I've every been taught or done is based on having fresh developer and "if in doubt throw it out" in terms of re-use.</p>

[john_enea2]

<p>I finally gave replenishment a chance. I like the results much better than using XTOL 1:1 or 1:3. Tighter grain and more importantly much better tonality. Now I mainly use pyrocat-HD but XTOL and Tmax 100 are a very special combination. you can always stop replenishment and go back to single use if you want.</p>

<p>IF you dont have a lot of film to develop make sure you replenish anyway. every 3 weeks if I dont use it, I dump 100ml and replace with fresh developer. Still a very economical way to use the developer. </p>

[peterbcarter]

<p>Craig, a "seasoned" developer is a developer with developing by products in it....like the bromide from the developing film. Sometimes on commercial equipment, you will see a "starter" that is used to achieve the same thing.<br>

John, it's good to see it working for you.</p>

 

[PatB]

Thanks for all your responses! I think I'll give it a go, it's

the only way to find out.

 

John, I am glad to hear there's a good way of dealing

with periods of inactivity, very encouraging.

What about times with replenished xtol and tmax 100?

Are 1:1 times a good starting point?

[maris_rusis]

<p>My replenished Xtol is eight years old and is working superbly. The developer lives in a 1.6 litre plastic bottle that is kept fully topped up; no airspace. My replenishment rate is 90ml per film not Kodak's recommended 70ml. I use continuous agitation when developing film (mainly 4x5 and 8x10 sheet film) and this causes faster oxidation that the increased replenishment rate compensates for. </p>

<p>When replenishing I pour the required amount of fresh developer/replenisher in the stock bottle and then top up with the used developer. What doesn't fit in the stock bottle is discarded. Developer activity stabilised about six years ago at about 70% of fresh. I just extend development time to compensate. Replenished Xtol stored in a bottle with no air space keeps its activity unchanged for several months if not used. Replenished Xtol is a cheap developer: about 27 cents per film for me.</p>

[PatB]

Marris, thanks for the handy tip on the order of topping

up.

[keith_tapscott]

<p>I used to use D-76 diluted 1+1, buthave just recently have tried a different approach.<br>

I make up the 1 U.S Gallon (3.78 litres) bag to make 4 litres of stock and decant it into four 1 litre bottles.<br>

After one roll of film has been processed, I pour the developer back into it's storage bottle for reuse, but strictly for "one-shot" use from then on.<br>

I think I would exactly the same with Xtol.</p>

 

[peterbcarter]

<p>But what would be the point? It would be easier just to use xtol. It's not like it's expensive.</p>

[PatB]

<p>Right, Just developed first two rolls towards a seasoned solution. I did lose about 70-80ml during the process - the Patersons are a bit leaky during inversions so I topped up with fresh Xtol to make up the difference (which may slow down the seasoning process in the long run) before I poured it back into the storage bottle; in fact, I had to think hard about pouring it back into the bottle - I've always used one shot developers. Next time I putting the bottle right where the sink hole is to avoid a D'oh moment. <br>

I won't be developing anything important the next couple of rolls but should I even bother increasing the times until I get to the 5-6 rolls threshold? </p>

 

[PatB]

<p>Finally got to a stage where my 1l bottle of Xtol appears to be seasoned (7 rolls down the line). I developed a roll of TMAX 400 (a film I know well in stock xtol) using stock times (6m30s + 10% = around 7m15s), as recommended by Kodak, but the negative is showing underdeveloped by about a stop. On the plus side, the overall contrast has increased and the tonality is more dynamic. Oh, I thought I'd mention that I turn the tank upside down with a 90 degree twist 3 times every minute.<br>

I don't want to develop for much longer not to blow out the highlights but may need to overexpose by half a stop to add a bit more shadow detail. Consequently, I am thinking of increasing development by another 30s with my next test roll. However, replenished xtol users suggest 1:1 times, which is a massive 9min15s! (for small tanks). The times quoted for large tanks give 7min45s which seems to be more in line with what I've observed so far. Perhaps that's what they mean?<br>

I know I've asked this question before but there's a lot of conflicting and unclear information out there.<br>

<br /> Any suggestions?<br>

Thanks in advance!</p>

[PatB]

Just noticed that I described the agitation wrong.

Turn+twist sequence is done every 30 seconds not

every minute.

[peterbcarter]

<p>I always found that times relating to 1:2 are more on the money. But this really doesn't matter as you should be adjusting the times you need and taking notes.</p>

[PatB]

Hey,

Thanks for sharing your experience. Perhaps it's not yet

in its fully seasoned state and it's going to become even

slower later. I'll try to increase development by a minute

to make the changes more pronounced.

[peterbcarter]

<p>I don't know if this helps.....but I used a 2l reservoir. In any case, your development will stabilize. Mine took about 5 rolls.</p>

[PatB]

Phew, testing has been done and I've managed to

establish a reference point. For anyone out there

experimenting with replenished Xtol, don't be confused

by the suggested 10% increase - the times should be

much longer!

 

Stock time for tmax 400 is 6min 30sec and

adding 10% will get you nowhere with seasoned xtol (1l

bottle of fresh Xtol seasoned after 6-7 rolls in my case).

7min15sec gave underdeveloped negatives (by about

1.5 to 2 f stops), those tested at 9min15secs (xtol 1:1

dillution time) were still slightly underdeveloped

although looked much better and they needed between

an extra 2/3rd to 1 full stop. Developing at 10min15sec

(closer to 1:2 xtol times as Peter suggested above)

yielded very good results.

 

With my inversion (3x every 30secs) tmax 400 needs slight overexposure as well so rating it at 320 or overexposing by +0.5 stop brings out enough shadow detail without flattening the tones.

 

My next step will be to experiment with replenishment

amounts as the process stabilizes or should the developer activity starts to lessen.

 

Thanks again to all people contributing!

[peterbcarter]

<p>What I did was mark the bottle, where the top of the developer resides. After developing your roll(s), put 70ml (as suggested) per developed roll back into the repl container. Then pour the used developer up to the mark. Simple and required little brain activity.....I like that.</p>