Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,523   Posts: 1,572,257   Online: 752
      
Page 26 of 55 FirstFirst ... 162021222324252627282930313236 ... LastLast
Results 251 to 260 of 550
  1. #251

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Escondido, California, USA
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    674
    Quote Originally Posted by Rafal Lukawiecki View Post
    Mark, thank you for working on this developer. I have been following your discoveries with great interest, as XTol 1+1 is the only film developer I use. I was wondering if you had any data, by now, about the keeping properties of the concentrate, since quite some time has passed since you begun.
    Many thanks, and good luck.
    Firstly: Alan: Thanks for doing the D-316 testing, and for the link about storage. I hadn't seen those postings.

    Rafal, I have no results from long term tests yet. But I have some short term failures. For example, in one experiment, a concentration-ratio of 0.46 resulted in crystallization after a couple of weeks. I'm now testing a ratio of 0.40. The purpose of these ratio-experiments is to see how high concentration can be.

    The concentrate (and sodium sulfite) will last longer if stored in the refrigerator or freezer. A few months ago, I put some concentrate in the freezer, and got no precipitation. If frozen, I would expect it to last for many years. Of course, you must remember to take the two bottles out of the freezer a few hours before you need them.

    Mark Overton

  2. #252

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Escondido, California, USA
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    674
    Here's one of my favourite shots from the wedding, following my policy of "be there at the wrong time." I caught the tear-down:

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	3-0000-Teardown.jpg 
Views:	67 
Size:	330.9 KB 
ID:	58444

    Do you see any grain? Me neither. This is why I'm eager to create a clone of XTOL, and I hope this photo shows that the concentrate succeeded.

    Mark Overton

  3. #253

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Escondido, California, USA
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    674
    Here's a question that perhaps only PE can answer (but anyone is welcome to try):

    The curves below show two XTOL strips averaged together (red), and two strips from the formula used for the wedding (green and blue):
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Curve11.6-16-XTOL.jpg 
Views:	30 
Size:	45.5 KB 
ID:	58501

    Note the right quarter of the graphs. The red XTOL graph rises only slighly in the right quarter, but the two wedding graphs have a more pronounced rise there. My earlier developers with less buffering (and AA) don't do this. But I do see it in one earlier dev with more buffering (and AA), as well as the latest two strips. So I think that right-rise is real. I'm guessing it's caused by either (1) boosted buffering, or (2) boosted ascorbic acid (AA) which is a secondary developer. This developer is rather dilute, so I'm surprised to see a boost in highlights instead of compensation that one normally expects with dilution.

    Any idea why boosting buffering or AA would cause highlights to have higher slope than shadows and midtones?
    Can the curve be linearized?
    I was thinking of adding KBr, but that's not soluble in PG. Maybe benzoic acid? Other ideas?

    I know the right-rise is small, but I'm a perfectionist who'll go for linear if possible.

    Thanks,

    Mark Overton

  4. #254
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    23,382
    Images
    65
    Mark;

    If you are at the limit of the buffer's capacity (which can take place at the densest part of the negative) then you can get a downdurn. This may be a case of film and developer being built together to give the proper curve and image quality and therefore your developer here is overdoing some aspect that should be more restrained.

    If that is the case, then I would expect some degradation in the image structure in your developer wrt the XTOL.

    That is what I am guessing at this stage. Your developer is overdoing things and should have less buffer. In its present state, your developer will suffer in grain or sharpness or both wrt XTOL.

    PE

  5. #255

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Escondido, California, USA
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    674
    Quote Originally Posted by Photo Engineer View Post
    Your developer is overdoing things and should have less buffer.
    Thanks for the response. That dev has both high buffering and a large AA/Phenidone ratio, so I'm thinking of running experiments (evenings...) to separate those two factors. "Overdoing things". The purpose of that was to tolerate errors in volumemetric sulfite-measurement, and that made me think of...

    ----- Here's an idea for measurement -----

    I thought of a way to accurately measure sodium sulfite by volume, using a typical little beaker or medicine cup:

    Step 1: Pour the correct amount of liquid concentrate into the cup (up to a fill-line).
    Step 2: Add sulfite until the liquid reaches a second higher fill-line.
    Step 3: Pour the cup into the main beaker containing water and mix.

    This works because the liquid drives out the air between the sulfite particles, so you're only measuring the volume of solid. I tried this using only propylene glycol (PG) in a graduated beaker. I first poured in some PG, then added a known weight of sulfite, and measured the level. This let me measure the specific gravity of sulfite, and it was accurate within 1%! Success! Except...
    The problem with this method is the sodium sulfite becomes a sticky glob in the bottom of the cup, perhaps due to trace water in the PG. It won't pour out, and must be helped with a popsicle-stick or somesuch. To get it all out, the little cup should then be rinsed in the beaker (dipped a few times). Would folks be willing to do this?

    ----- Here's a 2-bath idea -----

    Since these developers consist of concentrate and separate sulfite, I realized they could also do double-duty as two-bath developers. A normal A-then-B development would be too thin, so you'd cycle back and forth between A-bath and B-bath a few times, spending 2-3 minutes in each bath. You should get compensating development typical of two-baths.

    Cycling back and forth will contaminate each bath a little, but that won't matter because these developers are one-shot. Also, you'll need to mix say 50% more dev in each bath, and develop using the A-B cycling for a longer total time.
    It would be appealing to have one developer that can be used either as a conventional single-bath or as a two-bath.

    I've got more ideas than time to experiment with them. Retirement is sounding good!
    Comments on all this are encouraged.

    Mark Overton

  6. #256

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Escondido, California, USA
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    674
    The wedding formula has much ascorbic acid, and much metaborate for buffering. I decided to eliminate these variables separately. Following PE's rule of "never do one test", I ran two strips with a formula having less ascorbic acid. Here are their graphs:

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Curve11.7-XTOL.jpg 
Views:	13 
Size:	43.7 KB 
ID:	58621 and Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Curve11.15-XTOL.jpg 
Views:	14 
Size:	43.3 KB 
ID:	58622

    Here's the formula. Note the addition of citric acid to maintain pH:
    Sodium sulfite .................. 45 g
    Sodium metaborate .......... 5.4 g (very high to give strong buffering)
    Ascorbic acid .................. 4.5 g (a normal amount; AA/Phen ratio=90)
    Citric acid ....................... 1 g (brings pH back down to 8.16)
    Phenidone ...................... 0.05 g (developer)
    Propylene glycol ............. 23.5 ml (amount needed in a concentrate for 30 ml/L)

    The good news is the right-side rise seems to be gone. But I notice that both graphs have a bit lower EI and a bit higher contrast compared to XTOL and compared to what I was getting with earlier formulas. These differences are probably too small for folks to notice, but I'd like to know why this is happening. I'm mixing propylene glycol into the water to simulate a concentrate, and I'm wondering if PG reduces EI slightly, or if that's due to the very strong buffering, or if the citric acid could do this. So I'll try reducing metaborate and eliminating the citric acid, unless you have a better idea.

    Mark Overton

  7. #257
    Rudeofus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,780
    Images
    10
    Quote Originally Posted by albada View Post
    The good news is the right-side rise seems to be gone. But I notice that both graphs have a bit lower EI and a bit higher contrast compared to XTOL and compared to what I was getting with earlier formulas. These differences are probably too small for folks to notice, but I'd like to know why this is happening. I'm mixing propylene glycol into the water to simulate a concentrate, and I'm wondering if PG reduces EI slightly, or if that's due to the very strong buffering, or if the citric acid could do this. So I'll try reducing metaborate and eliminating the citric acid, unless you have a better idea.
    Again, the graphs show less difference than slight variations in temperature, agitation or other processing parameters will give you. If you want to lower pH without adding a new ion (citrate) to the mix, you could replace some of the sulfite with metabisulfite. Not sure it makes a big difference, but it should reduce complexity. If you reduce amount of metaborate, you also reduce buffer strength, i.e. you turn more knobs at once.
    Trying to be the best of whatever I am, even if what I am is no good.

  8. #258

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Escondido, California, USA
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    674
    Quote Originally Posted by Rudeofus View Post
    Again, the graphs show less difference than slight variations in temperature, agitation or other processing parameters will give you. If you want to lower pH without adding a new ion (citrate) to the mix, you could replace some of the sulfite with metabisulfite. Not sure it makes a big difference, but it should reduce complexity. If you reduce amount of metaborate, you also reduce buffer strength, i.e. you turn more knobs at once.
    You are correct. But don't forget that I am a perfectionist trying to tame that variability. That approach works well for software I write, but I'm finding that this is a different animal. I have another motive for adding citric acid: chelation. Though PE says there are better chelators out there, citric acid is easy to obtain and will hopefully extend the 45-minute limit after mixing in hard water.

    Today, I tried something different: I replaced the metaborate with TEA. The results look great. The density-curve is a nearly perfect match to XTOL:

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Curve11.17-XTOL.jpg 
Views:	8 
Size:	43.0 KB 
ID:	58674

    And the grain and sharpness look the same as well, and JPEG sizes are within 1%:

    TEA soup: Click image for larger version. 

Name:	11-17-b8.jpg 
Views:	7 
Size:	106.7 KB 
ID:	58675 XTOL: Click image for larger version. 

Name:	11-29-b8-XTOL.jpg 
Views:	7 
Size:	106.1 KB 
ID:	58676

    Here's the formula for the concentrate:

    TEA (99%) ...................... 20 ml (22.5 g)
    Propylene glycol .............. 5 ml
    Ascorbic acid ................... 4.5 g
    Citric acid ........................ 4.2 g
    Phenidone ...................... 0.05 g
    Propylene glycol to make 30 ml

    Target pH = 8.16-8.18.
    For TMY-2: 11:30 minutes at 20C.
    A litre of developer contains 30 ml of concentrate and 45 g of sodium sulfite.

    TEA has a number of advantages:
    • Stronger buffering due to large quantity (helps with variable sulfite-measurement).
    • Concentrate will hopefully not crystallize.
    • Phenidone can be replaced with Dimezone S (try 0.1g in the above formula).
    • With TEA, pH drops as temperature rises, giving some auto-correction of temperature.
    • Avoids borates which damage citrus trees.

    And TEA has some disadvantages:
    • It's harder to locate in some areas.
    • 85% TEA is also available, potentially causing inconsistency.
    • It's too viscous and must be thinned by another solvent (I used propylene glycol above).

    Anyway, I mixed the formula directly into water, so I don't know if all that ascorbic acid and citric acid can dissolve in 25 ml of solvent. There's only one way to find out: Mix it! I also want to try that 2-bath idea I mentioned a couple days ago. If that works, this concentrate will be very useful, giving XTOL quality when used normally, and a push with low contrast if used as a 2-bath.
    What do you think about all this? And should I go with the metaborate formula in propylene glycol, or this TEA-based formula?

    Finally, a question for chemists: Is 4.2 g/L of citric acid enough to chelate all the calcium and magnesium in hard water? If so, that would be another advantage of the TEA-based formula.

    Mark Overton
    Last edited by albada; 10-21-2012 at 03:41 AM. Click to view previous post history.

  9. #259
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    23,382
    Images
    65
    Mark;

    It is hard to answer your question about chelation as Citric Acid is a poor chelating agent and water contents and quality vary all over the world. Run a keeping test vs Xtol is what I suggest.

    PE

  10. #260
    Rudeofus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,780
    Images
    10
    A keeping test will only tell us whether the concentrate keeps, but won't tell us much about the effectiveness of the citric acid chelating agent against hard water. I'm quite confident that citrate won't tie up iron enough to render it ineffective against the Ascorbate.

    Here's my take:
    1. You can find chelate stability of various citrate salts here.
    2. The strongest competitors for Ca2+ in any film dev will be sulfite and carbonate. Carbonate also competes for Mg2+.
    3. With estimates for ion concentration and the numbers taken from the linked pages above you can calculate whether Ca2+ or Mg2+ will likely precipitate.
    Trying to be the best of whatever I am, even if what I am is no good.



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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