Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 72,432   Posts: 1,596,851   Online: 1216
      
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 33
  1. #11

    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,081
    Quote Originally Posted by Jedidiah Smith View Post
    but the tonality of Plus-X was better. I don't know if this makes sense, but I could see the difference. The Plus-X had a more "old school" B&W look to it; more grey tones throughout.

    Jed
    YES! I used to talk to my students about grain and tonality. I asked them to imagine that their work was hanging in a gallery. I asked them which they would see first when they walked into the room, grain or tonality. Tonality screams at you rfrom across the room, grain whispers from 6 inches.

    I shot globs of t-max films and never did care for them. As soon as I went back to PX/TX, everything got better!

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,081
    Another point that may matter to you is the volume of dev that you have to make. D-76 is available in gallon and (still?) 1 liter sizes. X-tol is made in the 5 liter size only. You should go thru a gallon of D-76 faster than 5 liters of X-tol.

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    16,991
    Blog Entries
    1
    Images
    3
    hey jed

    you can use most developers for those films.
    tmax developer is made for tmax films, and they
    suggest developing times for the other films ...
    and xtol and hc.. d76 and the other developers suggested
    work very well for all those films as well.

    have fun!

    john

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Ventura, California
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    420
    Images
    1
    Jim - you know, I could never figure that out back in the day - why did Kodak choose to put X-tol in 5 Ltr. package? Who's got a "5 Ltr" jug laying around in their house in the U.S.? :-) Not to be picky but come on... 1 gallon is easy to store.
    Have you found an appreciable difference between D76 and X-tol for your work? I know you're a good proponent of the older style films, ala plus-X, and I always have been in the past as well. I just know that I need to re-evaluate everything now that I'll have a different enlarger setup and live thousands of miles south with different light.

    Thanks to all,
    Jed

  5. #15

    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Valley Stream, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,216
    I'm a big fan of both D-76 and XTOL. There are some films for which I prefer D-76, mostly because I don't have reliable starting point data for XTOL. For Plus-X and Tri-X, of course, there is no question. Kodak has excellent data for both developers paired with either film. I use both developers one shot, and diluted 1+1 99% of the time. The results I get with these films are different in each developer, but the differences are very subtle and not something you'd really notice until you compared the same scene, taken with the same camera and lens, in the same light, side by side. That said, XTOL will deliver about 1/3 stop bit more shadow detail without blowing the highlights all to hell. In practice, it means that if you rate the film at box speed, you get a little more shadow detail. Grain is about the same; a little less noticeable with XTOL, but nothing dramatic. The same advice holds true for TMX and TMY. D-76 is good; XTOL a little bit better. I tried using TMax developer a few times, and was unimpressed. It's nothing special, except that it is a liquid and easy to mix up. It does not deliver the fine grain or slight speed boost of XTOL. HC-110 is ok for sheet film in trays, when you want short development times. It's a bit hot for tank use at the official dilutions, making it harder to control.

    You owe it to yourself to give the newly reformulated TMY-2 a try. It really is superior in every way to the old TMY. Under moderate enlargement of 4x to 5x, it's hard to distinguish grain under a grain focusing microscope. The tonality is fantastic. I'm able to get detail in very dark places, all the while holding the highlights in check. It's really that good. It doesn't replace Tri-X though, which is more punchy through the middle tones. Each has it's uses. Practice will tell you when to use each.

    Who needs a 5L jug anyway? Five 1L soda pop bottles will do the trick better. Fill 4 of them to the very top and the fifth one will come in at bit more than 1/2 full. The completely full bottles will last 6 months, The partially full one, about two.
    Last edited by fschifano; 06-12-2009 at 08:58 PM. Click to view previous post history.
    Frank Schifano

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,081
    Hi Jed, Frank sums it up every time! Yes, you can certainly split-up X-tol into smaller bottles and the extra liter that D-76 doesn't have shouldn't make that much of a difference. I haven't noticed much, if any, difference between the two.

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    16,991
    Blog Entries
    1
    Images
    3
    xtol used to be sold in 1L packages, but there were problems, just like the extreme dilutions that were recommended
    for different printing applications ... and kodak discontinued the 1L packaging and the recommendations of extreme dilutions ...

    when xtol was first introduced it was suggested that it was very difficult to get blown highlights using this developer.
    i never liked xtol ( some people swear by it ), even when over processed by 30% the negatives didn't have the "snap"
    that other developers tend to offer ( i used it for about 3 years ) ...

    have fun

  8. #18
    Thomas Bertilsson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Minnesota
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    14,631
    Images
    289
    Jed,
    One way of using the Xtol developer that is very economical and changes the developer to yield negatives that are all but flat is to re-plenish it. And this is where the 5L packaging comes in handy.
    I use a 2L stock working solution (my largest tank likes 1,850ml full), and with each 35mm/120/8x10 equivalent area film I pour 70ml of fresh stock solution into the working solution jug before I pour back what I used during development.
    This way you can process 70+ rolls of film with one 5L package. I would recommend to use 1L bottles to store the stock replenisher so you don't oxidize it unnecessarily.

    The developer, once seasoned, is wonderful. It appears that the remains from film processing (bromide among others) seem to be good for the process. I've had a batch going for about three months now, and I aim to continue using it perpetually.

    It's a very economical and good way to use this developer.

    Also, Xtol seems to work really well in scenes with high brightness range. In flat lighting it might not be the best choice.
    "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

  9. #19
    rphenning's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    California
    Shooter
    Med. Format RF
    Posts
    341
    We are from the same town, Jedidiah. Personally I would be stoked if we had some weather once in a while. I have personally liked what I have gotten with ID11 which is Ilford's copy of D76. So there is my answer.

  10. #20

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    51
    You have Clayton F76plus in Calif. It is a liquid eazy to use.comes in quarts or 1000ml 33oz jug not sure of size. Very good stuff.

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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