XTOL vs. D-76 for TMAX 100

[mike_lopez]

Could anyone please inform me as to the benefits/drawbacks of using

these developers with this film? Which would you use for

landscapes? Is one more difficult to push/pull than the other?

Thanks a lot.

[tim_atherton2]

I've always preferred TMax in D76 - although it seems to do quite well in Xtol - though I'm not a huge fan of TMax.

 

Check out T-Max Filmns - What Rochester forgot to tell us

 

http://mywebpages.comcast.net/hmpi/Misc/Bascom/bascom.htm

 

and for Xtol:

 

http://mywebpages.comcast.net/hmpi/Misc/TMY/tmy.htm

[walter_glover]

Mike,

 

My testing indicates that Xtol gives more speed and a greater

range of expansion/contraction than D-76.

 

Having said that, if you want to try something REALLY special I

suggest that you dive into a bottle of Ilford Ilfotec DD-X. I use

DD-x 1+5 with HP5+ and 1+6 with other film stocks. Even

greater speed and a no mess or mixin' liquid concentrate.

[dan_smith]

D76 does not have the problem of sudden, unexpected failure.

[tim_atherton2]

"D76 does not have the problem of sudden, unexpected failure"

 

But it does change it's characterisitcs as it ages - nor does it age well.

[dfdncithekxlbn8kaglf33]

<i>D76 does not have the problem of sudden, unexpected failure.</i> <p>

This problem with XTOL is well documented to be with the 1 litre packages, which are no longer available. The smallest size you can buy is the 5 litre package. So, it is no longer a problem, but I do wish I could get it in the 1 litre size again, without fear of failure...

[scott_jones2]

I believe the "unexpected failure problem" is a thing of the distant past on Xtol. It involved a defective 1 liter powder package that leaked air and spoiled batches. Kodak has completly abandoned that package and size and as far as I know and from what Kodak has told me, this does not happen anymore. I certainly have never had a problem with it and I use the developer exclusively. I just wonder if the "failure" story should not be perpetuated any longer. Perhaps I am wrong...

 

http:www.ScottJonesPhoto.com

[tim_atherton2]

and it's very easy to deal with the 5l package - mix it up, put it in five 1l full to the brim brown glass chemical bottles and that's it. Use them happily one at a time

[dan_smith]

"This problem with XTOL is well documented to be with the 1 litre packages"

 

I guess the three failures I had with the 5 litre packages are ignored by Kodak. Three different batches.

Xtol is finicky enough that many won't use it at all. If you are worried about D76 changing performance characteristics with time use Ilford ID11.

 

As for Xtol, The Yellow Peril must have done something to it after the inventors came up with it. Probably changed it from what the original mixture was for the sake of 'economy'. At any rate, it is finicky to work with. Very sensitive to iron, calcium, hard water & dilution. Much different than the first information sheets on it. Now The Yellow Godfather doesn't even recommend dilutions past 1+1.

 

Go ahead & use it if your negs aren't that important to you. An occasional failure will give you a nice excuse to go back & try re-shooting something again. Just hope it doesn't fail on anything important that can't be restaged.

[michael_briggs2]

Has anyone experienced D-76 increasing its activity with age? Or have you just read about it?

 

The poor keeping problem of plain D-76 has been known since a few years after the 1926 invention of D-76. Boric acid was included in the 1929 formula for D-76d to create a buffering action to fix the keeping problem. (See volume 1 of Modern Phographic Processing by Grant Haist.)

 

The MSDS of the Kodak packaged versions lists sodium tetraborate (borax) and boric anhydride (boric acid). This means that the packaged version is NOT the original D-76 formula, since D-76 lacks boric acid. It is likely very similar to the published formula of the buffered D-76d.

 

If you mix your own, for good keeping properties you can make the D-76d or D-76H versions.

[tim_atherton2]

"I guess the three failures I had with the 5 litre packages are ignored by

Kodak. Three different batches."

 

Dan, did you store it in one large container or split it up to store?

 

Xtol is susceptible to oxidation, so you need to keep the oxygen out. If you aren't using it at once, you need to split the batch up or store in a collapsing container. I've been using Xtol since it came out and never had a problem

 

"At any rate, it is finicky to work with. Very

sensitive to iron, calcium, hard water & dilution."

 

It's recommended to use distilled water - though I've never found a problem with this.

 

"Much different than the

first information sheets on it. Now The Yellow Godfather doesn't even recommend

dilutions past 1+1."

 

This change was nothing to do with the 1l failure problem or anything like that - it had to do with minimum volumes of full strength developer and people not following the instructions for distilled water. You need a minimum of 100ml full strength per 80 sq in. Trouble was many people didn't take note of that. When you get down to 1:3 that can give you a fairly high volume of developer. But folks who were doing home developing - say 35mm in a hand tank/reel set-up weren't following the instructions and were using say 300l total of 1:3 in a one reel set-up etc and having problems/sending in complaints (as well as not following the isntructions about distilled water - based on their local water). Kodak decided it was easy to cut out the 1:2 and 1:3 times, which solved the problem. But 1:2 and 1:3 still work just fine - and lots of people still use those dilutions (1:1 or 1:3 are may favourites for Bergger 200). It's not as if those dilutions suddenly don't work anymore.

 

Interestingly Xtol was also the first developer where Kodak listed extensive details for processing other brands of film, as well as doing extensive testing to determine times for rotary processing (which led to it's own confusion regarding pre-soaking and Xtol in Jobo rotary tanks - the reason Jobo says to pre-soak is to standardise all their development times for continuous agitation rotary processing - but Kodak already worked out the times for Xtol, so no pre-soak is needed...)

[jay_de_fehr]

In my experience, Xtol and Tmax are an excellent fine-grain combination. TMX is well known for it's flexibility in processing, or what some have termed "finicky", which to me sounds like flexibility without control. I haven't used a developer that responds as well to TMX as Xtol, or gives as fine of grain. TMX in undiluted Xtol is unmatched for fine grain by any other film/developer combination in it's speed. I know that grain is but one consideration among many that combine to give a film/developer combo it's look, but it is in this particular category that this combo excels. I've never experienced any problem whatsoever with Xtol, in either 5l or 1l packages, nor have I experienced the increased activity of D-76 so widely reported. Either developer is capable of excellent results with TMX, and I wouldn't hesitate to use either, but if I had my choice I'd choose Xtol every time. While I'd agree that TMX is more responsive to changes in development parameters, I hardly see that as a drawback. A Ferrari is more sensitive to input than a Cadillac, and each has it's place, but it's not very satisfying to imitate one with the other.

[nomennescio]

View Camera Magazine had an article on TMAX and XTOL about

a year/a year and a half ago. I don't remember what number. It

got me started on this combination. I do have one problem, I

process in trays in undiluted XTOL 20° C. My N-2 times are a

mere 4 minutes. I don't want to dilute because I want to be able

to reuse it. Perhaps much less agitation will solve this.

[everheul]

My favorite combo is Pyro with Tri-x, or HP5, but neither come in readyloads. For schlepping equipment into the mountians, its readyloads/quickloads and my 545i all the way.

 

For TMX I like using X-tol diluted 1:3 10.5min at 80 deg, 2 agitations every 30 sec, constant agitation for the first 30 seconds, no presoak, I use the HP combi with 4x5 sheet film at ei of 64 with my equipment. For n-1 i expose at 50, cut development 10%. for n+1 I stay at ei 64 and increase development by 10%, I increase by 15-20% for n+2.

 

I have had one episode using tap water of "X-tol failure". I seriously doubt that the chemical "decided to fail". My tap water is so high in minerals that the ascorbic acid probably reduced some of the crap that is in my tap water. Since changing to distilled water, no problems with either the 1 or 5 liter packets. Don't use if any of the developer is caked, as it's probably been oxidised.

 

I don't think you will be disappointed with either developer. Just test the film and be consistant with EVERY perameter. Meter the same way every time. Keep processing temps, times and agitations consistant and find out what works for you.

 

T-max is not forgiving in any developer, ie you have a lot of controll over it. I just wish it would stain well in pyro.

[mark_sampson]

Just for the record: the tests I made on TMX showed that XTOL 1:1 gives more sharpness than D-76 1:1, which is sharper than XTOL undiluted.

[dan_smith]

If you are looking for more on the 'dreaded Xtol failure', use the search enging and type in Xtol Failure. You will get many past discussions of the problems.

[dan_montgomery1]

XTOL and Tmax 100: My favorite combination, year after year, never a problem.

[r_hofland]

I've only used XTOL once, and indeed it was a failure. Now that the issue of "sudden failure" has become much discussed, I now recognize potential problem areas:

 

Kodak's "packaging failure" is a reasonable explanation (as would the old age of the contents), but there is another large issue which may also explain their switch to the larger volume units. Ascorbic acid and the derivative ascorbates are notorious oxygen scavengers, so the more mixing of air into the solution while dissolving the developer in water, the more rapid and complete the loss of activity. I suspect the best solution to this is to mix with a magnetic mixer set on low, but I also have another secret for you all-- degassing of the solvent prior to mixing. IF you either boil distilled water prior to mixing (allowing to cool sufficiently prior to the mixing) or use a vaccuum pump to de-gas, and then use a low setting on the mixer, you should have minimal oxygenation of the solution. De-gassing of the stored solutions would also be helpful.

 

For most photographers, this is impossible, so I think heating the water in a sturdy container (Pyrex?) either on the stove or in a microwave is the best solution, followed by mixing the XTOL in that same container. Pour the finished product very carefully into another container (glass being best) and top off with a pure nitrogen source then and every time opened.

 

I also wonder if adding iron dust (which would then "rust" into iron oxide) or other oxygen scavenging particles would be another way of removing dissolved oxygen without altering its development character. Any thoughts on this?

 

Or is it really worth this much trouble to use commercial XTOL? I'm actually interested in the Rodinal + Ascorbate developers that some have suggested elsewhere, perhaps by just adding a few premeasured ascorbate vitamins and an additional buffer (NaCl/sulfite or KCl/KBr?) to water along with Rodinal at 1:100 or 1:200. It seems worthwhile to explore a variety of such mixes and dilutions to find an happy medium or even a compendium of solutions to a variety of problems.