Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,524   Posts: 1,543,843   Online: 888
      
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 14 of 14
  1. #1
    Ian Grant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    West Midlands, UK, and Turkey
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    16,268
    Images
    148

    1927 Eastman Kodak Research - Fine Grain Developer

    From the 1928 British Journal Photographic Almanac, whether the unit of volume is UK or US isn't given.

    Eastman Kodak Research Fine Gran Developer 1927


    For Fine grain. - A developer recommended by the Eastman Kodak Research Laboratories for use when images of specially fine grain are required is as follows:-

    Metol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 gr (2g)
    Sodium Sulphite (anhyd) . . . . . . 400gr (100g)
    Borax . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 gr (2g)
    Water to . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 ozs *** (If US oz 1600ml - UK 1540ml)

    The developer works more slowly than those of normal formula. - A.P., May 25, p. 504.

    This seems to be one of the earliest published Fine Grain developer from Kodak.

    It's far more likely that the volume is US, particulary as the formula eminates from Rochestwe not Kodak Research, Harrow, but the difference is quite negligible. This formula pre-dates D76 and is quite similar to D103 and DK76 & DK76b, although more dilute.

    D103

    Metol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2g
    Sodium Sulphite (anhyd) . . . . . . 100g
    Borax . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1g
    Water to . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 litre

    Ian

  2. #11
    CBG
    CBG is offline

    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    894
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Grant View Post
    .... CGB that formulae you give is staed as a variant of D76a/h ( with 2g Borax) by Kodak, it has Hydroquinone, D103 has no Hydroquininone and is indeed a soft working developer for film sound tracks. Unfortunately there are a huge number of errors in US books all due to mistakes in Morgan & Morgan/Photo Lab Index publications. Only manufacturers data can be trusted. Ian
    Thanks. There are so many errors out there. So, accurate formula, completely wrong identification.

  3. #12
    Murray Kelly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Brisbane, QLD. Australia
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    418
    Ian, I'm confused.

    Is the original formula 8gr/400gr/8gr/14 fl.oz?

    My converter program leads me to a conversion of 1.25g/65g/1.25g/1L.

    Correct? Not sure why the 2/100/2/1600.
    Thanks for your patience.
    Murray

    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Grant View Post
    Metol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 gr (2g)
    Sodium Sulphite (anhyd) . . . . . . 400gr (100g)
    Borax . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 gr (2g)
    Water to . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 ozs *** (If US oz 1600ml - UK 1540ml)

    Ian

  4. #13
    Ian Grant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    West Midlands, UK, and Turkey
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    16,268
    Images
    148
    Murray, I've not converted to the 1 litre volume, rather to a more appropriate comparison with D76, D23, D25, D103 etc based on the 100g/litre Sodium Sulphite but either is valid.

    I've seen D76 published by Kodak as 1g Metol, 50g Sodium Sulphite, 2.5g Hydroquinone, 1g Borax ans Water to 500ml. Sometimes in Patents etc developers seem strange until you find a factor to divide by, then all falls into place and you find perhaps quite a simple variant of a well known formula.

    I prefer to compare developers in a spreadsheet, I'll often compare ratios of principal chemicals, which is why I chose that particular ratio.

    Interestingly this way it's possible to trace how a Wellington & Ward Buffered Borax formula was taken by Kodak and became DK50, there must have been a D50 first, and then this (D50) evolved to D76 but along the way Kodak were experimenting with the ratios of M to Q, leaving the Q out etc, Agfa and Ilford of course have their own variations.

    Ian

  5. #14
    Murray Kelly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Brisbane, QLD. Australia
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    418
    Ah! OK. I understand. The sulphite is the standard, here. Thanks.
    Murray.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin