Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 68,771   Posts: 1,484,321   Online: 1084
      
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 18 of 18
  1. #11
    MattKing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Delta, British Columbia, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    11,594
    Images
    59
    Quote Originally Posted by lawrenceimpey View Post
    One of us is misreading J78. On page 7 they give the 'useful capacity' in litres (in brackets) in the last column. According to them the number of films is 4, which seems rather conservative to me.
    On page 8 of J78 the capacity numbers for replenished D76 are quoted at 120/gallon.

    The numbers in J78 for straight, one-shot D76 are indeed 4/litre.

    Personally, I like using a replenishment routine.
    Matt

    “Photography is a complex and fluid medium, and its many factors are not applied in simple sequence. Rather, the process may be likened to the art of the juggler in keeping many balls in the air at one time!”

    Ansel Adams, from the introduction to The Negative - The New Ansel Adams Photography Series / Book 2

  2. #12
    cliveh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    2,729
    Images
    336
    What a strange thread. Surely the pedantics of developer usage, diluted or otherwise are of no importance when processing what you shot into a printable negative?

    “The contemplation of things as they are, without error or confusion, without substitution or imposture, is in itself a nobler thing than a whole harvest of invention”

    Francis Bacon

  3. #13
    Ian Grant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    West Midlands, UK, and Turkey
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    15,968
    Images
    148
    Quote Originally Posted by cliveh View Post
    What a strange thread. Surely the pedantics of developer usage, diluted or otherwise are of no importance when processing what you shot into a printable negative?
    We could say what a strange reply.

    In practice it's actually extremely important to have your processing under your full control to get good consistent results.

    In the late 1960's I used the technique of increasing dev times in unreplenished developer, I soon switched to replenishment as it made sense and results where totally predictable.

    There's various development options but which ever is chosen it's important to learn to get it right that way you can concentrate on making images with confidence.

    Ian

  4. #14
    tony lockerbie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Bega N.S.W. Australia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,258
    Images
    366
    Or use the DD method....dilute and discard....works for me!

  5. #15
    cliveh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    2,729
    Images
    336
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Grant View Post
    In practice it's actually extremely important to have your processing under your full control to get good consistent results.Ian
    I agree and that is exactly why I wonder why the OP is questioning dilution/or not and quantaties of developer.

    “The contemplation of things as they are, without error or confusion, without substitution or imposture, is in itself a nobler thing than a whole harvest of invention”

    Francis Bacon

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Dunedin,New Zealand
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    264
    It seems counter-intuitive to me to re-use a single batch of Xtol until it runs out of oomph.
    If you stopped after a few films,depending on your developer volume,you will have a "seasoned"batch of developer,which you can keep at a stable level of activity by replenishment.
    Xtol,being its own replenisher,makes it more amenable to this than D76.
    I first learnt about this on this forum - I'll never go back.
    Thanks folks

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    London, England
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    69
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Grant View Post
    In the late 1960's I used the technique of increasing dev times in unreplenished developer, I soon switched to replenishment as it made sense and results where totally predictable.
    Ian
    I've tended to steer away from replenishment but maybe will try it with Xtol as it sounds rather simple, since the replenisher is the developer. However, doesn't your replenisher get stale as you decant it into the developer i.e. as the air gap at the top of the bottle of replenisher increases?

    Lawrence

  8. #18
    Sirius Glass's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Southern California & Virginia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    12,635
    Quote Originally Posted by lawrenceimpey View Post
    I've tended to steer away from replenishment but maybe will try it with Xtol as it sounds rather simple, since the replenisher is the developer. However, doesn't your replenisher get stale as you decant it into the developer i.e. as the air gap at the top of the bottle of replenisher increases?

    Lawrence
    No, I squeeze out the air. Hint: It is easier to do this with plastic bottles than with glass bottles.
    Warning!! Handling a Hasselblad can be harmful to your financial well being!

    Nothing beats a great piece of glass!

    I leave the digital work for the urologists and proctologists.

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