Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,926   Posts: 1,585,050   Online: 948
      
Page 10 of 55 FirstFirst ... 4567891011121314151620 ... LastLast
Results 91 to 100 of 550
  1. #91

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Escondido, California, USA
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    674
    Could folks do me a favor and tell me which crop below is grainier? Even if they look the same to you, please post a note so I'll know:

    XTOL:
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	bars-xtolWide.jpg 
Views:	46 
Size:	122.6 KB 
ID:	54547
    TEA-mod:
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	bars-teaWide.jpg 
Views:	47 
Size:	121.8 KB 
ID:	54548

    The second is the concentrate with some TEA added, and I'm trying to decide if it's worth pursuing this modification. And please don't laugh about the water-spots and dust; I was casual about cleanliness because these are just test-strips. Here are the density-curves:

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	AddedTEA.jpg 
Views:	34 
Size:	43.2 KB 
ID:	54549

    From a density point of view, the modified concentrate is identical to XTOL. But I'm trying to decide about the grain. For the curious, here's the formula. In my test, I dissolved these directly into water:


    Propylene glycol .................... 22 ml
    TEA85-DEA15 ....................... 3.4 g (yes, that's grams, = 3.1 ml w/ sg=1.107)
    Sodium metaborate 4 mol ..... 3.5 g (dissolves in 3-5 minutes. let sit to dry) (4.9 to cnv AA)
    DimezoneS/Phenidone .......... 0.2/0.105 g (DimezoneS dissolves in 3-5 minutes. turns orange)
    Ascorbic acid ......................... 8 g (dissolves in 7-10 minutes; fizzes and turns clear)
    Propylene glycol to ................ 33.3 ml (final volume; should need to add little)

    Heat to 90C to dissolve everything and drive the water out of the metaborate.
    Dissolve in the order shown, and dissolve completely before adding the next chemical.
    To make one litre of developer, mix 33.3 ml of concentrate into water containing 85 grams of sodium sulfite. That's 1+29 dilution.
    Times are same as XTOL. Target pH is 8.32.
    Concentration ratio = 11.7/33.3 = 0.35

    I took the prior concentrate, reduced the ascorbic acid and sulfite a little, and substituted TEA for about half the metaborate. My first test showed that, all other things being equal, TEA gives greater density than metaborate. Alkalis are not created equal. PC likes TEA.

    The TEA, labelled "TEA85-DEA15" above, is from Photo Formulary, and their MSDS states that it's 85% TEA and 15% DEA (or slightly more TEA). I tried it a few months ago, and got frustrated because nothing about this TEA agreed with the spec's: specific gravity, pH in solution, and even the freezing point. Whatever is in there, I'm sure it's mostly TEA, but I think of it as "mystery TEA". I'd want to get another sample before recommending this formula. Actually, I'd prefer to use 99% TEA (and boost the 3.4g a little), but that's harder to get in the USA (but easier in Europe).

    @athiril: You have an interesting developer using CD-2. Please post that to a new thread where it'll get more visibility.

    @Alan Johnson: Thanks for the confirmation. I'm becoming leery of a concentration ratio over 0.35. Maybe I should mix a 0.40 to see if it crystallizes. I'm wondering what the threshold is.

    Mark Overton

  2. #92
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    23,552
    Images
    65
    Mark;

    The second strip is much less sharp than the first one for whatever reason. Thus it is hard to judge graininess.

    PE

  3. #93

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Escondido, California, USA
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    674
    Quote Originally Posted by Photo Engineer View Post
    Mark; The second strip is much less sharp than the first one for whatever reason. Thus it is hard to judge graininess. PE
    The camera was misfocussed a little in the second strip, so the boundary lines are soft. But that has no effect on graininess, and the scanner was carefully focussed in both scans, so the grain should be equally sharp in both.

    Mark Overton

  4. #94
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    23,552
    Images
    65
    I would have to say they are close, but perhaps #2 is grainier.

    PE

  5. #95

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Montreal, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,103
    While the boundaries are soft in the second exposure, I can't see a meaningful difference in graininess or acutance between the two.

    To be honest, I think you might be beyond "direct" visual comparisons at this point - which is to say they are very close. There might still be small differences in image structure between the Concentrate and XTOL, and they might influence the subjective perception of granularity (ie graininess) and acutance in photographs, but to evaluate this more objectively you're into micro densitometer territory (ie RMS granularity).

    Just my two cents.

  6. #96
    Athiril's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Melbourne, Vic, Australia
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,665
    Images
    28
    Quote Originally Posted by albada View Post

    @athiril: You have an interesting developer using CD-2. Please post that to a new thread where it'll get more visibility.
    Will do so when I get more reliable internet.

  7. #97

    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,012
    Quote Originally Posted by Rudeofus View Post
    I'll answer instead of Mark: Photo Formulary sells sodium metaborate which according to their MSDS is sodium metaborate 4 mol. This MSDS lists the formula NaBO2·2H2O [Na2B2O4·4H2O]

    Likewise there is a reference on http://www.borax.com which lists both 4 mol (NaBO2·2H2O) and 8 mol (NaBO2·4H2O) sodium metaborate. So for all practical purposes I would assume that Mark means the 4 mol compounds as defined by these references: NaBO2·2H2O

    The confusing names seem to come from the double compounds Na2B2O4·4H2O and Na2B2O4·8H2O
    Confusing naming indeed. More confusing than the usual question of the degree of water of crystallization in compounds like sodium carbonate where at least if it's labeled correctly we get only one version, e.g. monohydrate, decahydrate etc.

    So confusing, in fact, that www.borax.com have made a mistake in their product data sheet for the 4-mol. See page two, top right, where 4H2O should read 2H2O.

    I wonder which version my sodium metaborate is (bought at Vanbar Melbourne). It didn't matter much with PMK because Part_B was pretty much a saturated solution and some people varied the relative amounts of Part_A and Part_B anyway. But in this interesting concentrated Xtol-like developer I would guess that the pH would be sensitive to errors in the exact amount of metaborate.

  8. #98
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    23,552
    Images
    65
    If the pH is correct, then the developer should work properly. The major difference is the buffering capacity. If you figure out the number of moles of boron you want present, then you can make the right mix from boric acid and Sodium Hydroxide.

    PE

  9. #99

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Southern USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,143
    Quote Originally Posted by albada View Post
    Actually, I'd prefer to use 99% TEA (and boost the 3.4g a little), but that's harder to get in the USA (but easier in Europe).
    The Chemistry Store www.chemistrystore.com sells 99% TEA. Since their main clientele use it to make soaps and lotions it cannot contain any DEA or MEA. You can check out the MSDS for the chemical on their site. One gallon sells for $16.84 plus shipping.
    A rock pile ceases to be a rock pile the moment a single man contemplates it, bearing within him the image of a cathedral.

    ~Antoine de Saint-Exupery

  10. #100

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Escondido, California, USA
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    674
    Quote Originally Posted by Gerald C Koch View Post
    The Chemistry Store www.chemistrystore.com sells 99% TEA. Since their main clientele use it to make soaps and lotions it cannot contain any DEA or MEA. You can check out the MSDS for the chemical on their site. One gallon sells for $16.84 plus shipping.
    You bring up a subject I've been wondering about.
    At PhotoFormulary, one gallon of TEA (85%-15%) costs $49.95.
    At ChemistryStore, one gallon of TEA (99%) costs $16.81.
    That's a much lower price for a better product.
    So I suspect that the 99% in the ChemistryStore's MSDS is a mistake.
    Or how could they sell a high-grade product so cheaply? What do you think? Have you found that their TEA behaves like 99%? If so, I'm buying some now!

    @PE: I feel silly asking this, but is buffering capacity determined by the number of boron atoms, or by the number of molecules of borate? If it's by the number of boron atoms, we could substitute one fourth the moles of borax (vs metaborate) because one borax molecule contains four boron atoms (vs one boron atom in metaborate). Relayer would be interested in this.

    Mark Overton



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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