Atomal Formula

Discussion in 'B&W: Film, Paper, Chemistry' started by craigclu, Aug 9, 2005.

  1. craigclu

    craigclu Subscriber

    Messages:
    815
    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2002
    Location:
    NW Wisconsin
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    This was posted in Usenet from some formulas translated from a German source.

    Calgon 1
    N-hydroxyethyl-o-aminophenol 6
    Pyrocatechin 10
    Hydroquinone 4
    Sodium sulfite anh 100
    sodium carbonate anh 25
    potassium bromide 1
    water to 1 L

    I was surprised to see the Pyrocatechin listed. I recall using this many, many years back after getting a Porter's grab bag or something. I remember not being very enthused about my results at the time and found no reason to ever return to tuning it in. I hadn't thought about it having any stain at the time (but I wasn't at all aware of pyro/tanning solution back then, either).
     
  2. john_s

    john_s Member

    Messages:
    1,094
    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2002
    Location:
    Melbourne, A
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    I'm under the impression that Agfa Atomal and Agfa Atomal-FF are/were completely different developers. The latter was in Agfa's list until very recently and was a speed reducing/fine grain type, perhaps like Perceptol or Microdol-X.
     
  3. Keith Tapscott.

    Keith Tapscott. Member

    Messages:
    1,416
    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2005
    Location:
    Plymouth. UK
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    It`s probably from the thread that I started on a darkroom newsgroup forum.
    I am starting to collect photographic B&W chemical formulae for personal reference, provided that the formula can be authenticated.
    I have checked this formula out with a qualified photo chemist, who describes the formula to be complicated to the point of being bleedin` stupid,
    (His words, not mine). On the same link, there is a formula which is claimed to be the Tetenal Emofin two-bath developer formula, the first bath contains Potassium Metabisulphite as the preservative and is unlikely to work because it is too acidic, the second bath is equally daft as it contains only 10 grams of Sodium Sulphite and 2 grams of Potassium Bromide with no mention of Borax, Kodalk or Sodium Carbonate as an accelerator. For this bath to work, the developing tank probably needs to be put in the airing cupboard over night and that`s if the acid from the first bath hasn`t already neutralized it.
    Some formula`s are best taken with a proverbial pinch of Sodium Chloride,(Oops, shouldn`t that be Microdol/Perceptol).
    The developing component for the alleged Atomal formula (if authentic), is not readily available in any chemical catalogue that the chemist has seen and may be unique to Agfa. The same component was also used in the now obsolete May and Baker Promicrol developer along with Glycin.
     
  4. Ian Grant

    Ian Grant Subscriber

    Messages:
    17,520
    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2004
    Location:
    West Midland
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    May & Baker stopped manufacturing the original Promicrol because the developing agent was too costly to produce. It had also been used for some non photographic purpose and when that ceased it was uneconomic to manufacture it just for Promicrol.

    A reformulated Promicrol is manufactured using different developing agents.

    The Developing agent mentioned by Craig in the formula is Atomal, and was a proprietary Agfa product. May and Baker used 2 (beta-hydroxyethyl) aminophenol sulphate which is no longer made anywhere.

    Ian

     
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 10, 2005
  5. Gerald Koch

    Gerald Koch Member

    Messages:
    1,670
    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2004
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    The naming of organic chemicals can be confusing because a compound may have more than one name. 2 (beta-hydroxyethyl) aminophenol and N-hydroxyethyl-o-aminophenol are the same compound. Agfa has always been unclear as to whether their trademarked Atomal is the free base or the sulfate.
     
  6. Helen B

    Helen B Member

    Messages:
    1,557
    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2004
    Location:
    Hell's Kitch
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Also 2-hydroxyethylamino-1-hydroxybenzene, which is what Agfa called it, as far as I know. I think that the 'raw ingredient' was always the sulphate.

    Best,
    Helen
     
  7. Ian Grant

    Ian Grant Subscriber

    Messages:
    17,520
    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2004
    Location:
    West Midland
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    No confusion to me, but I appreciate others might not realise the base compounds are the same.

    All referances I've seen for Atomal (the dev agent) have shown it to be the base, and attributed to Reddelein & Muller, of Agfa 1930. But as in the case of Para-aminophenol used as the hydrochloride form in Rodinal there's no reason why they might not have used a salt of the free base.

    Unfortunately it's all a bit academic now as the Sulphate form May & Baker used is no longer in production anywhere, and I think the former East German version of Atomal (Developer) - Calbe A49 was also re-formulated some time ago.

    Ian
     
  8. Paul Howell

    Paul Howell Member

    Messages:
    2,442
    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2004
    Location:
    Phoeinx Ariz
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I don't have any information about the formulas, but I used Afga Atomal when I lived in Europe in the early to mid 80s and I thought it to be very similar to Microdol X, last year I tired A49 and did not like at all, tones and grain seemed to be different and I had to double the development times, I thought I had a bad batch, mixed up a new batch same issues.
     
  9. Keith Tapscott.

    Keith Tapscott. Member

    Messages:
    1,416
    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2005
    Location:
    Plymouth. UK
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Atomal, or Atomal FF?
     
  10. Paul Howell

    Paul Howell Member

    Messages:
    2,442
    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2004
    Location:
    Phoeinx Ariz
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Atomal, I dont recall using or even seeing the Atomal FF, I lived in Southern Italy.
     
  11. Dr.Kollig

    Dr.Kollig Member

    Messages:
    107
    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2004
    Location:
    Rhine valley
    Shooter:
    35mm RF
    A 49 vs. Atomal

    Calbe A 49 is based on HQ and CD 2 (derivate of paradiaminophenylene). Undiluted usually 10 mins. I use this stuff 1:2 diluted on TMZ @ 3200, 30 mins. Gives fine grain, one of the best developers for the old Forte 400, or other grainny films where resolution is rather limited by grain size.

    I used the Craigclu formel replaced that secret ingriedient with p-Diamino-phenylen. Strong stuff, something like 7 mins diluted 1:1 or 10 mins diluted 1:2 on 400 ASA film. Not bad, I guess I will clean out the MCM 100 bottle and prepare some "Atomal". Original Atomal seems to be less strong, as Agfapan film take 10-12 mins undiluted.

    Like Rodinal - Rodinal Spezial, Atomal - Atomal FF is a different chemistry. Atomal FF being fine grain, one could get fine grain from Tri-X (Version of 1998) at 250 ASA - it just did not look like TX anymore! On the package it says B contains HQ, the total weight is 303 g chemistry for 5 litres. Developing time 6-8 mins at 20°C.

    Kind regards,

    Wolfram
     
  12. Keith Tapscott.

    Keith Tapscott. Member

    Messages:
    1,416
    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2005
    Location:
    Plymouth. UK
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
  13. gainer

    gainer Subscriber

    Messages:
    3,726
    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2002
    Craig, there's too much sulfite in that formula to allow the stain to form. Pyrocatechin AKA catechol or pyrocatechol, is closely related to hydroquinone, which will also stain under the same conditions as catechol. I have heard that HC110 at one time or another used catechol in place of hydroquinne. It doesn't take a lot of sulfite to prevent staining. Pyrogallol is much less affected by sulfite.
     
  14. nworth

    nworth Subscriber

    Messages:
    2,157
    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2005
    Location:
    Los Alamos,
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
     
  15. Ian Grant

    Ian Grant Subscriber

    Messages:
    17,520
    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2004
    Location:
    West Midland
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Checking their current MSDS sheet for A 49 Calbe list N,N-Diethyl-1,4-phenylendiammoniumsulfat as a major ingredient.

    This appears to probably be CD-1 N,N-Diethy1-1,4-Phenylene Diamine Sulfate or something very similar rather than CD-2 2-amino-5diethylamino-toluene hydrochloride.

    I should add that in a variety of Patents Kodak list CD-2 as 2-amino-5diethylamino-toluene hydrochloride, the Minnesota Mining and Mineral Company do the same. But in other Patents Kodak call N,N-Diethy1-1,4-Phenylene Diamine Sulfate CD-2, 3M call it CD1 !!!!.

    Checking my notes I found:

    Trade names:
    CD1 (Kodak)
    Activol No. 6 (Johnsons)
    Mol Wt. 200.7

    Systematic names:
    N,N-Diethyl-p-phenylenediamine hydrochloride (CA)
    Diethyl-p-phenylenediamine hydrochloride
    p-Aminodiethylaniline hydrochloride

    Trade names:
    CD2 (Kodak)
    Activol No. 2 (Johnsons)
    Tolochrome (May and Baker)
    Mol Wt. 214.7

    Systematic names:
    N5, N5-Diethyl-toluene-2,5-diamine hydrochloride (CA)
    Diethylamino-o-toluidine hydrochloride
    2-Amino-5-diethylaminotoluene hydrochloride

    and then this:

    Trade names:
    Activol No. 7 (Johnsons)
    Mol Wt 213.3

    Systematic names:
    N,N-Diethyl-p-phenylenediamine hemisulfate
    Diethyl-p-phenylenediamine hemisulfate
    p-Aminodiethylaniline hemisulfate


    Which all adds to the confusion.

    The MSDS also mentions Borax which is not in the Atomal formula Craig listed at the start of the thread.

    Ian
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 6, 2007