Discussions: 60,810 | Messages: 832,890 | Members: 39,632 | Online: 569 | Chatroom: 2
User Name:  Password:
Support Doctors Without Borders in Haiti

 
APUG search    RSS MOBILE  FORUMS   SELECT LANGUAGE  
Customize Sidebar
Recent Classifieds
Go Back   APUG > Articles > Recipes > Film Dev - Non Staining > 1927 Eastman Kodak Research - Fine Grain Developer


Reply
 
Article Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old
Ian Grant's Avatar
Ian Grant Ian Grant is online now
Subscriber
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Turkey (West Midlands, UK)
Images: 32
1927 Eastman Kodak Research - Fine Grain Developer
by Ian Grant 12-06-2009, 10:11 AM

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
Reply With Quote
Views 3534 Comments 13
Total Comments 13

Comments

Old 12-06-2009, 10:28 AM   #2 (permalink)
 
BradS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: California
Posts: 3,070
interesting. I've used something like this with good results. My thoughts were to put both parts of the Stoekler two bath into one bottle.


Brad's "something like this" film dev.

Metol................................2.5g
Sodium Sulfite..................100g
Borax.........................3.0 ~ 10.0g
water to make...................1 liter.

Use d-76 times as starting points.
__________________
I'd rather laugh with the sinners
Than cry with the saints
The sinners are much more fun
BradS is offline   Reply With Quote Ignore this user Ignore this thread Ignore this forum
Old 12-06-2009, 10:37 AM   #3 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Wilmette,Illinois, USA
Posts: 603
Ian,

Would this be functionally different from D-76? To my uneducated eye it looks like D-76H. Interesting that it is from 1927.
__________________
___________________________________________

Richard Wasserman

http://www.richardwasserman.net
Richard Wasserman is online now   Reply With Quote Ignore this user Ignore this thread Ignore this forum
Old 12-06-2009, 10:51 AM   #4 (permalink)
 
Ian Grant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Turkey (West Midlands, UK)
Posts: 9,346
Images: 32
Kodak's D76h formula is quite different as it's a buffered version of D76 with 15g Boric Acid and Hydroquinoe.

Haist's version would be better called H76, it isn't a published Kodak formula and is obviously based on this early un-named EK formula and others like D103, DK76 etc. Haist would have been aware of all these variations when he suggested H76 as a Hydroquinone free version of D76.

It should behave quite similarly to D76/ID-11 when they are useed 1+1.

Ian
__________________
My APUG portfolio

Last edited by Ian Grant; 12-06-2009 at 11:00 AM.. Reason: typos
Ian Grant is online now   Reply With Quote Ignore this user Ignore this thread Ignore this forum
Old 12-06-2009, 11:27 AM   #5 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 566
Richard Knoppow wrote that D-76 was disclosed in 1927 in a booklet relating to motion picture duplicating.So it is not entirely clear the formula given pre-dates D-76?
http://www.groups.google.com/group/r...c5c468b5332b48
Alan Johnson is offline   Reply With Quote Ignore this user Ignore this thread Ignore this forum
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)

Old 12-06-2009, 11:40 AM   #6 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Wilmette,Illinois, USA
Posts: 603
Thank you!


Quote:
Originally Posted by Ian Grant View Post
Kodak's D76h formula is quite different as it's a buffered version of D76 with 15g Boric Acid and Hydroquinoe.

Haist's version would be better called H76, it isn't a published Kodak formula and is obviously based on this early un-named EK formula and others like D103, DK76 etc. Haist would have been aware of all these variations when he suggested H76 as a Hydroquinone free version of D76.

It should behave quite similarly to D76/ID-11 when they are useed 1+1.

Ian
__________________
___________________________________________

Richard Wasserman

http://www.richardwasserman.net
Richard Wasserman is online now   Reply With Quote Ignore this user Ignore this thread Ignore this forum
Old 12-06-2009, 11:41 AM   #7 (permalink)
 
Ian Grant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Turkey (West Midlands, UK)
Posts: 9,346
Images: 32
Alan, the formulae would have been from the same team and both were published around the same time, this one seems to be for stills while D76 (at that point not named) was for Cine films, I have seen a copy of the Kodak piece for D76 from 1927. It's possible they were originally in the same research paper.

Ian
__________________
My APUG portfolio
Ian Grant is online now   Reply With Quote Ignore this user Ignore this thread Ignore this forum
Old 12-06-2009, 02:32 PM   #8 (permalink)
CBG
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 613
How does the formula for D103 above relate to the formula I have for Kodak D-103??? I suspect we have one of those one more of those single name/multiple formula train wrecks here.

What I have for Kodak D-103
metol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.0 g
hydroquinone. . . . . . . . . 5.0 g
sodium sulfite anhyd. . . . 100 g
borax (decahydrate). . . . 1.0 g
boric acid (crystalline). . . 15.0 g
potassium bromide. . . . . . 0.125 g
water to. . . . . . . . . . . . 1 L
This is said to be a developer intended for small scale development of variable density sound negatives.
CBG is offline   Reply With Quote Ignore this user Ignore this thread Ignore this forum
Old 12-06-2009, 02:37 PM   #9 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Plymouth. UK.
Posts: 1,105
AFAIK, D-76 dates back to 1926.
Keith Tapscott. is offline   Reply With Quote Ignore this user Ignore this thread Ignore this forum
Old 12-06-2009, 02:58 PM   #10 (permalink)
 
Ian Grant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Turkey (West Midlands, UK)
Posts: 9,346
Images: 32
You're right Keith, but I'd guess so does this formula as it's in secondary souces by may 1927.

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
__________________
My APUG portfolio
Ian Grant is online now   Reply With Quote Ignore this user Ignore this thread Ignore this forum
Reply

Article Tools
Display Modes

 


APUG.ORG Block Ads. (APUG Subscribers have the option of closing this block)