Capacity of Stock D76 v Xtol

Discussion in 'B&W: Film, Paper, Chemistry' started by lawrenceimpey, Feb 10, 2013.

  1. lawrenceimpey

    lawrenceimpey Member

    Messages:
    70
    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2005
    Location:
    London, Engl
    Shooter:
    35mm RF
    I like to work with stock rather than diluted developer but I'm having a problem believing that the number of films that can be put through 1 litre of Xtol is more than twice the number that can be put through the same quantity of D76.

    According to Aschell & Troop the capacity of 1 litre of D76 is seven films '...if you choose to reuse D76 without replenishment, develop a maximum of 7 rolls per litre.' (The Film Developing Cookbook, p.43). However according to Kodak 'The capacity of the full-strength developer with normal, unreplenished processing is approximately 15 rolls of 135-36 or 120 film...' (Kodak Professional Xtol Developer, March 2008. J-109).

    Any comments on the above, particularly from those who have tested the capacity of either developer, would be most welcome.
     
  2. Jim Noel

    Jim Noel Member

    Messages:
    2,156
    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2005
    Shooter:
    Large Format
    Don't believe all of what you read in Anchell.
    On the other hand, D-76 is so cheap why bother with trying to stretch it? One of the most common mistakes my students made through the years was trying to save money by pinching pennies on developer and fixer. Inevitably the developer will give poor results on the best image you have ever made.

    Jim
     
  3. tkamiya

    tkamiya Member

    Messages:
    4,252
    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2009
    Location:
    Central Flor
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    According to Kodak datasheet, a roll of film, 35mm-36 or 120, can be processed with 8 oz of D-76 or 4 oz of XTOL before extension of processing time is required. As I understand it, XTOL is more active than D-76 whatever that means....
     
  4. Ian C

    Ian C Member

    Messages:
    722
    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2009
    Shooter:
    Large Format
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 10, 2013
  5. Ian Grant

    Ian Grant Subscriber

    Messages:
    18,095
    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2004
    Location:
    West Midland
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Xtol has a far higher capacity because it doesn't contain Metol. the Bromide build up is the limiting factor with D76/ID-11. Ilford introduced Autophen a PQ variant of ID-11 as a commercial photo-finishing developer and it had a very much higher capacity.

    Ilford suggest up to 10 films per litre (35mm 36ex or 120) per litre of unreplenished ID-11. If you use Xtol then replenishment is a far better option and it's simple even on a relatively small scale.

    Ian
     
  6. Sirius Glass

    Sirius Glass Subscriber

    Messages:
    20,649
    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2007
    Location:
    Southern California
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    When all else fails, follow the manufacturer's instructions. The manufacturer is going to know more about its product than the testinistas. That includes using the film at box speed.

    I know that that fact really chaps the hides of the testinistas who pride themselves in claiming to know much more than they really know.

    These comments are about testinistas in no way reflect on the OP nor on his well considered question.:smile: Instead those comments are directed at the test-it-all-know-it-all's who publish unfounded "facts" in the internet. :tongue:
     
  7. Gerald C Koch

    Gerald C Koch Member

    Messages:
    6,337
    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2010
    Location:
    Southern USA
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Amen, Amen. Love your term testinistas!
     
  8. lawrenceimpey

    lawrenceimpey Member

    Messages:
    70
    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2005
    Location:
    London, Engl
    Shooter:
    35mm RF
    I have no intention of stretching it to the point of likely failure, thanks. I asked the question because I'm curious about finding the correct answer.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 10, 2013
  9. lawrenceimpey

    lawrenceimpey Member

    Messages:
    70
    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2005
    Location:
    London, Engl
    Shooter:
    35mm RF
    One of us is misreading J78. On page 7 they give the 'useful capacity' in litres (in brackets) in the last column. According to them the number of films is 4, which seems rather conservative to me.
     
  10. lawrenceimpey

    lawrenceimpey Member

    Messages:
    70
    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2005
    Location:
    London, Engl
    Shooter:
    35mm RF
    Many thanks, as far as I'm concerned that explains it. I might take it up to 10 for D76 (or even 11, if I'm feeling really wild).
     
  11. MattKing

    MattKing Subscriber

    Messages:
    17,045
    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2005
    Location:
    Delta, BC, Canada
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    On page 8 of J78 the capacity numbers for replenished D76 are quoted at 120/gallon.

    The numbers in J78 for straight, one-shot D76 are indeed 4/litre.

    Personally, I like using a replenishment routine.
     
  12. cliveh

    cliveh Subscriber

    Messages:
    4,783
    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2010
    Shooter:
    35mm RF
    What a strange thread. Surely the pedantics of developer usage, diluted or otherwise are of no importance when processing what you shot into a printable negative?
     
  13. Ian Grant

    Ian Grant Subscriber

    Messages:
    18,095
    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2004
    Location:
    West Midland
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    We could say what a strange reply.

    In practice it's actually extremely important to have your processing under your full control to get good consistent results.

    In the late 1960's I used the technique of increasing dev times in unreplenished developer, I soon switched to replenishment as it made sense and results where totally predictable.

    There's various development options but which ever is chosen it's important to learn to get it right that way you can concentrate on making images with confidence.

    Ian
     
  14. tony lockerbie

    tony lockerbie Subscriber

    Messages:
    2,363
    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2006
    Location:
    Merimbula NSW Australia
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Or use the DD method....dilute and discard....works for me!
     
  15. cliveh

    cliveh Subscriber

    Messages:
    4,783
    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2010
    Shooter:
    35mm RF
    I agree and that is exactly why I wonder why the OP is questioning dilution/or not and quantaties of developer.
     
  16. Smudger

    Smudger Member

    Messages:
    287
    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2004
    Location:
    Dunedin,New Zealand
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    It seems counter-intuitive to me to re-use a single batch of Xtol until it runs out of oomph.
    If you stopped after a few films,depending on your developer volume,you will have a "seasoned"batch of developer,which you can keep at a stable level of activity by replenishment.
    Xtol,being its own replenisher,makes it more amenable to this than D76.
    I first learnt about this on this forum - I'll never go back.
    Thanks folks
     
  17. lawrenceimpey

    lawrenceimpey Member

    Messages:
    70
    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2005
    Location:
    London, Engl
    Shooter:
    35mm RF
    I've tended to steer away from replenishment but maybe will try it with Xtol as it sounds rather simple, since the replenisher is the developer. However, doesn't your replenisher get stale as you decant it into the developer i.e. as the air gap at the top of the bottle of replenisher increases?

    Lawrence
     
  18. Sirius Glass

    Sirius Glass Subscriber

    Messages:
    20,649
    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2007
    Location:
    Southern California
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    No, I squeeze out the air. Hint: It is easier to do this with plastic bottles than with glass bottles.