Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,970   Posts: 1,523,487   Online: 882
      
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 15 of 15

Thread: Atomal Formula

  1. #11

    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Rhine valley
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    107

    A 49 vs. Atomal

    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Howell
    I don't have any information about the formulas, but I used Afga Atomal when I lived in Europe in the early to mid 80s and I thought it to be very similar to Microdol X, last year I tired A49 and did not like at all, tones and grain seemed to be different and I had to double the development times, I thought I had a bad batch, mixed up a new batch same issues.
    Calbe A 49 is based on HQ and CD 2 (derivate of paradiaminophenylene). Undiluted usually 10 mins. I use this stuff 1:2 diluted on TMZ @ 3200, 30 mins. Gives fine grain, one of the best developers for the old Forte 400, or other grainny films where resolution is rather limited by grain size.

    I used the Craigclu formel replaced that secret ingriedient with p-Diamino-phenylen. Strong stuff, something like 7 mins diluted 1:1 or 10 mins diluted 1:2 on 400 ASA film. Not bad, I guess I will clean out the MCM 100 bottle and prepare some "Atomal". Original Atomal seems to be less strong, as Agfapan film take 10-12 mins undiluted.

    Like Rodinal - Rodinal Spezial, Atomal - Atomal FF is a different chemistry. Atomal FF being fine grain, one could get fine grain from Tri-X (Version of 1998) at 250 ASA - it just did not look like TX anymore! On the package it says B contains HQ, the total weight is 303 g chemistry for 5 litres. Developing time 6-8 mins at 20°C.

    Kind regards,

    Wolfram
    Colour? We can always use an airbrush later...

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Plymouth. UK.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,400
    Images
    3

    Agfa Atomal.

    A packet of Atomal for sale. Whether it`s still usable, IDK.

    http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/AGFA-ATOMAL-ul...QQcmdZViewItem

  3. #13
    gainer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    3,726
    Images
    2
    Craig, there's too much sulfite in that formula to allow the stain to form. Pyrocatechin AKA catechol or pyrocatechol, is closely related to hydroquinone, which will also stain under the same conditions as catechol. I have heard that HC110 at one time or another used catechol in place of hydroquinne. It doesn't take a lot of sulfite to prevent staining. Pyrogallol is much less affected by sulfite.
    Gadget Gainer

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Los Alamos, NM
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,043
    [QUOTE=Dr.Kollig;173975]Calbe A 49 is based on HQ and CD 2 (derivate of paradiaminophenylene). Undiluted usually 10 mins. I use this stuff 1:2 diluted on TMZ @ 3200, 30 mins. Gives fine grain, one of the best developers for the old Forte 400, or other grainny films where resolution is rather limited by grain size. ...

    /QUOTE]

    That sounds a bit like Crawley's FX-10, which was one of his attempts (FX-9 and FX-10) to build an old style PPD developer with modern ingredients. FX-10 is said to work reasonably well with modern films, most of the time. Does anyone know if the the two formulas are really related and how they may be related?

  5. #15
    Ian Grant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    West Midlands, UK, and Turkey
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    16,216
    Images
    148
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr.Kollig View Post
    Calbe A 49 is based on HQ and CD 2 (derivate of paradiaminophenylene).
    Wolfram
    Checking their current MSDS sheet for A 49 Calbe list N,N-Diethyl-1,4-phenylendiammoniumsulfat as a major ingredient.

    This appears to probably be CD-1 N,N-Diethy1-1,4-Phenylene Diamine Sulfate or something very similar rather than CD-2 2-amino-5diethylamino-toluene hydrochloride.

    I should add that in a variety of Patents Kodak list CD-2 as 2-amino-5diethylamino-toluene hydrochloride, the Minnesota Mining and Mineral Company do the same. But in other Patents Kodak call N,N-Diethy1-1,4-Phenylene Diamine Sulfate CD-2, 3M call it CD1 !!!!.

    Checking my notes I found:

    Trade names:
    CD1 (Kodak)
    Activol No. 6 (Johnsons)
    Mol Wt. 200.7

    Systematic names:
    N,N-Diethyl-p-phenylenediamine hydrochloride (CA)
    Diethyl-p-phenylenediamine hydrochloride
    p-Aminodiethylaniline hydrochloride

    Trade names:
    CD2 (Kodak)
    Activol No. 2 (Johnsons)
    Tolochrome (May and Baker)
    Mol Wt. 214.7

    Systematic names:
    N5, N5-Diethyl-toluene-2,5-diamine hydrochloride (CA)
    Diethylamino-o-toluidine hydrochloride
    2-Amino-5-diethylaminotoluene hydrochloride

    and then this:

    Trade names:
    Activol No. 7 (Johnsons)
    Mol Wt 213.3

    Systematic names:
    N,N-Diethyl-p-phenylenediamine hemisulfate
    Diethyl-p-phenylenediamine hemisulfate
    p-Aminodiethylaniline hemisulfate


    Which all adds to the confusion.

    The MSDS also mentions Borax which is not in the Atomal formula Craig listed at the start of the thread.

    Ian
    Last edited by Ian Grant; 10-06-2007 at 02:48 PM. Click to view previous post history. Reason: To add the Borax

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