Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 74,544   Posts: 1,646,142   Online: 816
      
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 50
  1. #21

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Southern USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,506
    A major bugaboo with MQ developers and their replenishment is bromide buildup. This effectively limits the number of times a system can be replenished unless a large volume of the developer (say 1/3 of the volume) is dumped periodically in order to bring the bromide level down. PQ or PA developers are less sensitive to bromide buildup and make a better choice for a replenishment system. I use the term Phenidone to include its several variants such as Phenidone B and the Dimezones.
    Last edited by Gerald C Koch; 12-17-2013 at 12:15 AM. Click to view previous post history.
    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

  2. #22

    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Plymouth. UK.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,406
    Images
    3
    Ilford DD can be replenished too. The technical data can be downloaded from Ilford's website and I am sure that Simon Galley can help with advice for replenishment.

  3. #23

    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    18
    Quote Originally Posted by Gerald C Koch View Post
    A major bugaboo with MQ developers and their replenishment is bromide buildup. This effectively limits the number of times a system can be replenished unless a large volume of the developer (say 1/3 of the volume) is dumped periodically in order to bring the bromide level down. PQ or PA developers are less sensitive to bromide buildup and make a better choice for a replenishment system. I use the term Phenidone to include its several variants such as Phenidone B and the Dimezones.
    Gerald,

    Do you think in the case of a print developer where a significant quantity is removed with each print, bromide build up would be minimized?

    thanX,
    tim
    Last edited by Buggs; 12-17-2013 at 06:13 AM. Click to view previous post history. Reason: grammer

  4. #24

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    UK
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    4,418
    If you are doing one 135 a day use D76 1+3 and discard.

    If you are running a cine print machine 24/7 and fast processing, it is economic to replenish. and you are going to purge the whole machine regular.

    You will need to check the pH, filter, etc.,... and a damaged frame not end of world.

    D96 ( the cine developer) is real cheap to initialize and replenish cheaper than D76...

    If you use a stock bottle for D76 with 135 one bit of film shard transferring from one film to another can make retouching real difficult. 1+3 is safer.

    Deep tank for large format and prints maybe...

    You need to be an organic chemist to design a developer and its replinisher the two are paired.

  5. #25
    Thomas Bertilsson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Minnesota
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    14,770
    Images
    296
    Quote Originally Posted by Buggs View Post
    Gerald,

    Do you think in the case of a print developer where a significant quantity is removed with each print, bromide build up would be minimized?

    thanX,
    tim
    I'm not Gerald, but I use replenished Ethol LPD for my prints, and I can share how I get around that problem and get consistent results.

    The factory instructions are to mix up a gallon kit of LPD as usual. You take 1/3 of the gallon and mix it with water 1:2 for one gallon of working solution.
    You take the remaining 2/3 and mix it 2:1 for one gallon, which becomes your replenishing solution.
    For each Qty 30 - size 8x10 prints (or equivalent), you replenish 300ml.
    At the end of the printing session, top up your working solution to fill your storage container completely.

    When you run out of replenisher, you mix a new batch. But here is where I do it differently than what's recommended; I use the old working solution to mix the new working solution instead of water. So 1/3 of the fresh LPD is mixed with old working solution to make one gallon of fresh working solution.
    I think I've gone through maybe 30 cans of LPD and I have continuously replenished the same LPD this way every single time, so there is some trace from the very first can in my existing working solution.

    I honestly don't know how other replenished print developers work, if there's a specific replenishing solution, and so on. But that's how LPD has worked for me, and I really enjoy how it's working out for me. Very economical.
    "Often moments come looking for us". - Robert Frank

    "Make good art!" - Neil Gaiman

    "...the heart and mind are the true lens of the camera". - Yousuf Karsh

  6. #26

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Lancaster County, Pennsylvania, USA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    97
    As far as I know, Xtol is the only developer that also serves as its own replenisher. For years, I used it that way in Kodak hard rubber tanks and it never went bad. Now I do less film and, for reasons that shouldn't be examined too closely, am using D-23. I'm now working on a liter bottle of D-23 that I've been replenishing since September. So far, so good. BTW, the Anchell and Troop Film Developer's Cookbook has formulas for developers and their replenishers.

  7. #27
    Thomas Bertilsson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Minnesota
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    14,770
    Images
    296
    Quote Originally Posted by presspass View Post
    As far as I know, Xtol is the only developer that also serves as its own replenisher. For years, I used it that way in Kodak hard rubber tanks and it never went bad. Now I do less film and, for reasons that shouldn't be examined too closely, am using D-23. I'm now working on a liter bottle of D-23 that I've been replenishing since September. So far, so good. BTW, the Anchell and Troop Film Developer's Cookbook has formulas for developers and their replenishers.
    Edwal 12 works as its own replenishing solution too. I've kept a batch running for a few years, and it has been a remarkably stable and consistent developer.
    Metol, Sodium Sulfite, Paraphenyline Diamine (PPD), and Glycin. Works a charm.
    "Often moments come looking for us". - Robert Frank

    "Make good art!" - Neil Gaiman

    "...the heart and mind are the true lens of the camera". - Yousuf Karsh

  8. #28

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Southern USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,506
    Quote Originally Posted by Buggs View Post
    Gerald,

    Do you think in the case of a print developer where a significant quantity is removed with each print, bromide build up would be minimized?

    thanX,
    tim
    There are two problems with print developers other than bromide buildup. Their higher pH relative to film developers makes them more prone to oxidation and their constant exposure to air while in a tray compounds the problem. The result is much higher oxidation than for a film developer. The buildup of oxidation byproducts can cause print staining. I personally would never replenish an MQ print developer for this reason. A PQ print developer like LPD presents a somewhat more favorable situation.
    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

  9. #29
    MattKing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Delta, British Columbia, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    13,690
    Images
    60
    Quote Originally Posted by presspass View Post
    As far as I know, Xtol is the only developer that also serves as its own replenisher.
    T-Max RS also serves as its own replenisher.
    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

  10. #30

    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    338
    Quote Originally Posted by Gerald C Koch View Post
    A major bugaboo with MQ developers and their replenishment is bromide buildup. This effectively limits the number of times a system can be replenished unless a large volume of the developer (say 1/3 of the volume) is dumped periodically in order to bring the bromide level down.
    Quote Originally Posted by Buggs View Post
    Gerald,

    Do you think in the case of a print developer where a significant quantity is removed with each print, bromide build up would be minimized?

    thanX,
    tim
    I think it needs to be pointed out that bromide CONCENTRATION is the important thing in a developing solution. And concentration can never by reduced by dumping part of the solution nor by the carry-out due to wet film or paper. Solution volume is reduced, but not concentration.

    I'm not a chemist, my knowledge is more on the level of a tech or Chem E, but I have quite a lot of experience in replenished systems. Mainly in color neg/print going back to C-22, but a few low volume B&W machine lines such as Kodak Selectomat and Versamat developers. It is never my experience that a well-designed and operated replenished system needs to be periodically dumped. To be clear, my experience is mostly in machine processing, on a scale probably beyond the imagination of most members here.

    I've never tried to replenish a tray system, though, so anything I could say about that would only be a semi-educated guess. This may not be obvious to everyone, but a tray has a large surface area compared to its volume. By comparison, a processing machine might be 3 or 4 or 5 feet deep, so the surface-area to volume ratio is improved on the order of about 100 times. So one expects the tray system to be worse on both oxidation and evaporation by roughly the same factor.
    Last edited by Mr Bill; 12-17-2013 at 01:21 PM. Click to view previous post history.

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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