Rodinal-like developer from Metol

Rodinal-like developer from Metol

  1. gainer

    gainer Subscriber

    Messages:
    3,725
    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2002
    gainer submitted a new resource:

    Rodinal-like developer from Metol - Rodinal-like developer from Metol

    Read more about this resource...
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 6, 2016
  2. pyrometol

    pyrometol Member

    Messages:
    34
    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2006
    Location:
    Exmouth, Dev
    Shooter:
    Med. Format RF
    But does it keep as well as Rodinal? pyrometol
     
  3. gainer

    gainer Subscriber

    Messages:
    3,725
    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2002
    Only time will tell. I don't see any reason why it would not keep. If I'm still alive a year from now I'll let you know what it looks like and how well it works. I'll have to squirrel some away so I don't use it. It makes a good print developer also.
     
  4. eggshell

    eggshell Member

    Messages:
    155
    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2004
    Shooter:
    8x10 Format
    Hi, Can you tell me if this mixture is concentrate and that to use it, I should mix 1:25 or 1:50 with water? Thanks.
     
  5. gainer

    gainer Subscriber

    Messages:
    3,725
    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2002
    Yes, it is concentrated, and I would start with the published dilutions and times for Rodinal.
     
  6. gainer

    gainer Subscriber

    Messages:
    3,725
    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2002
    I just finished a test with HP5+. 1 + 50, 8 minutes @ 70 F, agitation 5 seconds/ minute gave better negatives than Rodinal 1 + 25, 8 minutes @ 70 F, same agitation. Better gradations, more shadow detail, no more grain. Next test will be on FP4+.
     
  7. gainer

    gainer Subscriber

    Messages:
    3,725
    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2002
    FP4+ and HP5+ can be processed together if so desired. I used the same time-temperature on both and got identical results. I used box speed with an average reading in my Canon Elan IIe. This batch of developer was made in the middle of January, stored in a clear glass bottle, and is showing no signs of age.
     
  8. Alan Johnson

    Alan Johnson Subscriber

    Messages:
    1,536
    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2004
    The present formula at 1:50 is:
    Metol base 0.8g/L ,Sodium sulfite 1.7g/L .Sodium hydroxide 0.35g/L.
    GW Crawley ,BJP Jan6 1961 suggested:
    Metol 0.5g/L ,Sodium sulfite 1g/L ,Sodium carbonate 3g/L.
    There is half a page about this,it cannot be summarized here,but notably he appeared impressed with the sharpness of it with the film of that era,Adox KB 17 etc.He noted the working solution had a short shelf life but did not suggest a concentrate.It's possible the present formula might have a better shelf life and be sharp.I wonder if it is known what is the effect of using metol base instead of metol.
     
  9. gainer

    gainer Subscriber

    Messages:
    3,725
    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2002
    As it happens, I made two batches at about the same time, one where I filtered as described and the other where I just left everything in. This is more or less comparable to making one batch with the base and the other with the hydrosulfate. The difference in the long run is just that one has more sodium sulfate in it. I cannot really tell the difference on FP4+. I am quite happy with either one. I would say that if you made up a batch by just mixing metol, sulfite and hydroxide, you would probably not be inclined to ask yourself if it could be better if you got rid of the resulting sulfate.

    There is some obvious tanning with FP4+ and HP5+ which is reputed to be a sign of desirable edge effects. All I can say about that is that I haven't seen any better results from a non-staining single solution developer. Anyway, for 10 grams of metol and a little sulfite and hydroxide you can make a quarter liter to see if I'm lying. (Don't be alarmed. We talk this way in West Virginia.)
     
  10. Igor Savchenko

    Igor Savchenko Member

    Messages:
    36
    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2006
    Location:
    Belarus
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Patrick, your earlier version of this developer had 63 g of Metol and 28.6 g of sodium hidroxide. How did you come to this latest version with decreased amount of Metol and increased amount of hidroxide. Is that to avoid a potential problem of crystallization of Metol in presence of its precipitates undissolved? Do you think that the both versions are approximately equal in activity?
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 11, 2007
  11. aligndont

    aligndont Member

    Messages:
    45
    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2004
    Qualities of rodinal like developer question

    Patrick,
    Thanks for another formula. I am eager to try it out. Your vitamin C, sodium carbonate, metol developer is excellent in my opinion. I would like to know in what way is this formula is superior.
     
  12. gainer

    gainer Subscriber

    Messages:
    3,725
    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2002
    I have had an attack of viral encephalitis and a computer brain failure since then, so I calculated that for every molecular weight of Metol there should be 4 molecular weights of hydroxide, which could of course be either sodium or potassium. 2 moles are used to change the H2SO4 to Na2SO4 and 2 more to create the sodium salt of Metol. I don't remember why I chose 68 grams before, unless it was to give the same number of moles of the Metol base as of p-aminophenol in one of the several formulas for Rodinal. In any case, the 28.6 grams of hydroxide are only enough to neutralize the H2SO4 without forming the Metol salt. I don't have any of the other formula around and am quite happy with the new one.

    Metol developers are strange creatures. So is HP5+. I developed two strips of negatives from the same roll of the same subject, one in a 1+50 solution and one in a 1+25 solution, both from thr same batch of concentrate, thinking of course that the 1+25 should give considerably more contrast than the other. I can't see much difference in the results. I seem to remember that D-23 was quite forgiving of errors in development time or temperature.
     
  13. gainer

    gainer Subscriber

    Messages:
    3,725
    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2002
    In my opinion, it's about 6 of one and half a dozen of the other. It's more convenient for a frequent user to mix from a concentrate, and there is less likelihood of the concentrate going bad for a frequent user. Some may not like to use caustic alkalis. Some may not even be able to get the hydroxides these days. There is something to be said for consistency of results when using a concentrate, but not much. I would say try it with a quarter recipe, which may develop as many as 50 rolls of film depending on dilution. It won't cost you much to throw it away if you don't like it.
     
  14. Sponsored Ad
  15. paulgray

    paulgray Member

    Messages:
    7
    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2007
    Shooter:
    35mm
    What to do with the filtered metol base?
     
  16. dancqu

    dancqu Member

    Messages:
    3,676
    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2002
    Location:
    Willamette V
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    I think that is an important point. A good film
    developer which is also a good print developer.
    Any additions you would suggest and a dilution
    ratio for paper use? Dan
     
  17. gainer

    gainer Subscriber

    Messages:
    3,725
    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2002
    I don't remember what I used. I think 1+20 will work well. It depends on how long you want to wait for the black to maximize. You may need a dash of bromide. You're probably familiar with that technique. Just enough to keep whites white.
     
  18. gainer

    gainer Subscriber

    Messages:
    3,725
    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2002
    Refer to the instructions on the first page. The ones at the top of this page are incomplete.
     
  19. Bruce Osgood

    Bruce Osgood Membership Council Council

    Messages:
    2,612
    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2002
    Location:
    Brooklyn, N.Y.
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    RE: Originally Posted by paulgray
    What to do with the filtered metol base?

    My computer only shows one page for this thread. The post at the top is the original one. It does mention what to do with the filtered metol base. I think it is a legitimate question. I suspect it is to be discarded.
     
  20. gainer

    gainer Subscriber

    Messages:
    3,725
    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2002
    Didn't mean to brush you off. My computer shows at the top of the second page part of the recipe that ends with a series of dots and a message telling where to click to get the full recipe. In point of fact, you do not really have to filter the stuff. Do the following:
    Mix 40 grams of Metol with 85 grams of sodium sulfite in 750 ml of water. Add slowly 38 grams of sodium hydroxide while stirring. Bring the volume to 1 liter. Store it and use as you would Rodinal. I have found that the sulfate created by the neutralizatiion of the H2SO4 on Metol's tail has no photographic effect on the solution.
     
  21. gainer

    gainer Subscriber

    Messages:
    3,725
    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2002
    If you have already filtered it and are wondering which is to be used in the developer, the liquid that goes through the filter is discarded and the solid retained by the filter goes into the developer where the additional hydroxide will dissolve it. As I said above, if you have not filtered it, don't bother. Just add the extra hydroxide and sulfite and you're ready to go.

    By the way, 1 + 20 makes a paper developer that works in 2 minutes or less on most papers.
     
  22. Alan Johnson

    Alan Johnson Subscriber

    Messages:
    1,536
    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2004
    I made some by the all-in method,no filtering. With T-max 100 it needs longer development than Rodinal 1:50. Results are very similar to Rodinal on 11x enlargement,gritty grain,sharply defined edges.For sun/shade landscapes I get EI 64 for this developer, EI 40 for Rodinal,a useful gain.
    Do you care to suggest an abbreviation as to how this developer could be referred to without typing in the full name every time?
     
  23. gainer

    gainer Subscriber

    Messages:
    3,725
    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2002
    I call it Metolal. I haven't tried it with Tmax films, but I would take your word for it. My experience with HP-5+ and FP-4+ is probably giving about the same relative results. My test scene is a bookshelf illuminated by a picture window with a lace curtain on one side, so has a wide brightness range. I find that Metolal gives lower contrast than Rodinal. If I develop in Rodinal to get that contrast, I lose shadow speed. I really like it with FP-4+.

    I also found I could double the concentration of the stock solution. It's pretty hard sometimes to measure as it is when I want to use an 8 oz tank on 35 mm, so the best I can say about more concentration is that it's the way to go if you want to store lots of it.
     
  24. dancqu

    dancqu Member

    Messages:
    3,676
    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2002
    Location:
    Willamette V
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Twice as concentrated. So 2 times 40 metol, 85 sodium
    sulfite, and 38 sodium hydroxide; 80, 170, and 76 grams.
    Is that correct? That's a hell-of-lot of chemistry.

    BTW, have you any idea of the ph of working strength?
    I'm just wondering if a tamer finer grain version using
    sodium carbonate might be possible and still call it a
    concentrate. Dan
     
  25. gainer

    gainer Subscriber

    Messages:
    3,725
    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2002
    50 ml of the concentrate in a liter of 5% sulfite solution should come fairly close to D-23 1:1. I haven't tried it yet. You might need a little bisulfite to slow it down.
    I don't have a proper pH meter. I haven't even tried my swimming pool pH kit. I will if I can remember where I put it.
    I think it would be better to add the sulfite to the working solution than to try to incorporate it in the concentrate. I doubt it would have to be accurately weighed. 2 tablespoons of sulfite per liter would probably be close enough. I'm going to try it and see what happens. See you later.
     
  26. gainer

    gainer Subscriber

    Messages:
    3,725
    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2002
    I tried the sulfite. The print made me want to clean my glasses where they weren't dirty. I tried this once several years ago with Rodinal and the results were published in Photo Techniques. I didn't like it then. I thought 4 grams of sodium ascorbate in a liter of 1+50 Rodinal were better than 100 grams of sulfite. Salt helps a bit in rather massive amounts. It takes about 100 grams of canning salt or non-iodized table salt per liter of working solution. I have not used it since because I didn't think it was worth the trouble, and it isn't really much trouble.

    My test just a while ago was with HP5+ which is fundamentally low in contrast. I found once upon a time that the highest CI i could get in Rodinal was about 0.65. Metolal seems to be even more resistent to high contrast with HP5+, though it certainly keeps detail the shadows even at less than normal contrast.

    But don't take my word. Play with it yourself.