id11/d76 today alternative: Hc110 or Xtol? Or both?

Last, XTol is environment friendly, which adds to its interest.

(I used Delta100, TMax100, HP5, and Foma 100 /T200 films in 120 rolls).

Emmanuel


Thanks Emmanuel for your words.
Only one thing: I always used bottled low mineral water. maybe surely
not better than demineralized water, but far far better than the normal
water from home sink. And cost me about 1,30 Euro for 12 litres.
Low low mineral water from the supermarket or home store....
It's damn good idea, isn't it?

Ciao,
Stefano

--
Non è bello cio che è bello figuriamoci cio che è brutto!

Regarding X-Tol, well, that's the developer I mostly use for
low/medium speed films (up to 1600ISO).
In 35mm, I usually dilute it 1+1, for larger negs you can go 1+3
(coarser grain but more acutance).
I consider it as one of the best compromises between fine-grain (finer
than D-76/ID-11), acutance and speed.
Properly mixed and stored, the stock solution can last very long:
I diluted a 5 liters pack in March 2002 and it still gives good
results, more than 2 years and a half after (much longer than what
Kodak states).
I keep some to see if it can reach the 3 years ...


Ciao Claudio,
is always a pleasure to read your words and suggestions.
I want to try this developer.
Bought two packs for preparing 5 litres... hope well!!

PS: i want to prepare myself some developers and fixers too... it's just
arrived the mini-scale and anchell's cookbook!! just to add snap on
my life!! wow||

Salutoni,
Stefano

--
Non è bello cio che è bello figuriamoci cio che è brutto!

In article ,
Michael A. Covington wrote:

"Thor Lancelot Simon" wrote in message
...

Kodak does sell a product that's basically meant to turn distilled
water into "average North American tap water" for use in mixing
developer, though. I can't ever remember its name, but if you're
going to mix developer with distilled water you should really use
it.

I've never heard that. I've always had good results using either distilled
water or tap water (the results are the same except that I can trust the
distilled water to be somewhat cleaner and more free of dissolved air).
What is this product?

Well, it's *not* "color developer starter"; I always get it mixed up
and then remind myself that that's the _wrong_ product. I will browse
a bit and see if I can find the right one on Kodak's web site.

It's basically just a plastic envelope full of highly soluble mineral
salts that give you the exact water Kodak formulated their photographic
chemicals for, when added to distalled water. It's cheap, too.

I haven't used it myself in years, because I no longer live somewhere
where well water (and well water with too much dissolved iron and
sulfur to be good for photo processing, at that) is the norm. But if
you want to be able to follow Kodak's recommendations for touchy
processes like, say, E-6, with confidence, and you're using distilled
water to mix the stock solutions, it's a really good idea (and it won't
hurt to use it for black and white processing, either).

--
Thor Lancelot Simon
But as he knew no bad language, he had called him all the names of common
objects that he could think of, and had screamed: "You lamp! You towel! You
plate!" and so on. --Sigmund Freud

In Paris, the tap water is full of calcium and leaves little mineral
deposits all over the film. I solved the problem by giving the film a
final rinse for 30 sec. or so in water to which I had added 1/2 tsp or
so of water softening crystals along with Photo-Flo. This took care of
the problem and I got clean negs. Here in Maine, I don't have that
problem, and Photo-Flo in the final rinse does just fine by itself.



Richard Knoppow wrote:

"Michael A. Covington" wrote
in message ...


"Thor Lancelot Simon" wrote in message
...



It's not necessarily a good idea to use distilled water
to mix
developer; Kodak formulates it for "average North
American tap water"
and water with no mineral content at all is definitely
not that.

Kodak does sell a product that's basically meant to turn
distilled
water into "average North American tap water" for use in
mixing
developer, though. I can't ever remember its name, but
if you're
going to mix developer with distilled water you should
really use
it.


I've never heard that. I've always had good results using
either distilled water or tap water (the results are the
same except that I can trust the distilled water to be
somewhat cleaner and more free of dissolved air). What is
this product?



I have also heard this but never seen any substantiation.
Kodak _does_ make its products with the idea that less than
ideal tap water is going to be used to mix them but the
difference is in the use of buffering agents to compensate
for water pH and the addition of sequestering agents to keep
calcium and magnesium carbonates in the water from
precipitating on the emulsion. Bottled drinking water has
minerals in it for flavor. Really pure water tasts very flat
as does completely de-aereated water.
Water can be improved for photographic purposes by
boiling it. Boil the water for about five minutes and allow
it to sit and cool. Then syphon off the clear water. Boiling
serves three purposes: it drives off dissolved gasses (like
air and chlorine); it reduces temporary hardness by
converting some of the dissolved carbonates into insoluble
form. They then are deposited on the walls of the vessel or
are precipitated and fall to the bottom of the vessel. It
coagulates any organic matter which also is precipitated
during cooling. The last is probably of no significance in
city water systems but may be important for well water.
Since Aluminum and copper can cause fogging its best to
use a container of some other material for boiling. Boiling
will NOT remove chloramines, currently used in many city
water supplies in place of chlorine. This can be removed by
the use of an activated charcoal filter like a Brita filter.
Neither chlorine or chloramines appear to have any effect on
photographic chemistry. Chlorine is destroyed by hypo.
Dirty water is probably a worse problem in most places
than the purity. A good water filter is helpful but even a
coffee filter will help a lot. The use of a rinse of clean
water after washing will remove dirt from dirty wash water.
I suggest a rinse as follows:

Water to 1 liter
Isopropyl alcohol, 99% 25 ml
Kodak Photo Flo 2.5 ml (half strength)

70% Isopropyl rubbing alcohol can be used, the amount is
then 35ml. Just make sure its just alcohol and water, not
the kind with Oil of Wintergreen or other flavorings in it.

Soak the film in this for about two minutes and hang up to
dry without sqeegeeing.
Prints can be rinsed in plain clean water and squeegeed off
with a soft sponge before drying.

In Paris, the tap water is full of calcium and leaves little mineral
deposits all over the film. I solved the problem by giving the film a
final rinse for 30 sec. or so in water to which I had added 1/2 tsp or
so of water softening crystals along with Photo-Flo. This took care of
the problem and I got clean negs. Here in Maine, I don't have that
problem, and Photo-Flo in the final rinse does just fine by itself.



Richard Knoppow wrote:

"Michael A. Covington" wrote
in message ...


"Thor Lancelot Simon" wrote in message
...



It's not necessarily a good idea to use distilled water
to mix
developer; Kodak formulates it for "average North
American tap water"
and water with no mineral content at all is definitely
not that.

Kodak does sell a product that's basically meant to turn
distilled
water into "average North American tap water" for use in
mixing
developer, though. I can't ever remember its name, but
if you're
going to mix developer with distilled water you should
really use
it.


I've never heard that. I've always had good results using
either distilled water or tap water (the results are the
same except that I can trust the distilled water to be
somewhat cleaner and more free of dissolved air). What is
this product?



I have also heard this but never seen any substantiation.
Kodak _does_ make its products with the idea that less than
ideal tap water is going to be used to mix them but the
difference is in the use of buffering agents to compensate
for water pH and the addition of sequestering agents to keep
calcium and magnesium carbonates in the water from
precipitating on the emulsion. Bottled drinking water has
minerals in it for flavor. Really pure water tasts very flat
as does completely de-aereated water.
Water can be improved for photographic purposes by
boiling it. Boil the water for about five minutes and allow
it to sit and cool. Then syphon off the clear water. Boiling
serves three purposes: it drives off dissolved gasses (like
air and chlorine); it reduces temporary hardness by
converting some of the dissolved carbonates into insoluble
form. They then are deposited on the walls of the vessel or
are precipitated and fall to the bottom of the vessel. It
coagulates any organic matter which also is precipitated
during cooling. The last is probably of no significance in
city water systems but may be important for well water.
Since Aluminum and copper can cause fogging its best to
use a container of some other material for boiling. Boiling
will NOT remove chloramines, currently used in many city
water supplies in place of chlorine. This can be removed by
the use of an activated charcoal filter like a Brita filter.
Neither chlorine or chloramines appear to have any effect on
photographic chemistry. Chlorine is destroyed by hypo.
Dirty water is probably a worse problem in most places
than the purity. A good water filter is helpful but even a
coffee filter will help a lot. The use of a rinse of clean
water after washing will remove dirt from dirty wash water.
I suggest a rinse as follows:

Water to 1 liter
Isopropyl alcohol, 99% 25 ml
Kodak Photo Flo 2.5 ml (half strength)

70% Isopropyl rubbing alcohol can be used, the amount is
then 35ml. Just make sure its just alcohol and water, not
the kind with Oil of Wintergreen or other flavorings in it.

Soak the film in this for about two minutes and hang up to
dry without sqeegeeing.
Prints can be rinsed in plain clean water and squeegeed off
with a soft sponge before drying.

On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 21:48:18 GMT, stefano bramato
wrote:

Can someone help me? Few words are happily enough and well accepted!!

Stick with the ID11. No need to change.If Ilford does go
belly-up you can switch to D76 which is comparable to ID-11. HC110 is
OK if you're using medium or large format but 35mm shows a little too
much grain for my taste.

Regards,

John S. Douglas, Photographer - http://www.puresilver.org
Please remove the "_" when replying via email

On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 21:48:18 GMT, stefano bramato
wrote:

Can someone help me? Few words are happily enough and well accepted!!

Stick with the ID11. No need to change.If Ilford does go
belly-up you can switch to D76 which is comparable to ID-11. HC110 is
OK if you're using medium or large format but 35mm shows a little too
much grain for my taste.

Regards,

John S. Douglas, Photographer - http://www.puresilver.org
Please remove the "_" when replying via email

Indeed, low mineral water is a great idea.
My concern with tap water is the amount of chloride (easy to smell) which
has constantly increased during the last 5 years and has reached a very high
level since the anti-terror gouvernment actions in 2002 (I am living in
Lyon, a major city in France... when I have a chance to spend a week-end in
the Alps, the tap water is just perfect to drink and for developing films!).
Cheers,
Emmanuel

"stefano bramato" wrote in message
t...
Last, XTol is environment friendly, which adds to its interest.

(I used Delta100, TMax100, HP5, and Foma 100 /T200 films in 120 rolls).

Emmanuel


Thanks Emmanuel for your words.
Only one thing: I always used bottled low mineral water. maybe surely
not better than demineralized water, but far far better than the normal
water from home sink. And cost me about 1,30 Euro for 12 litres.
Low low mineral water from the supermarket or home store....
It's damn good idea, isn't it?

Ciao,
Stefano

--
Non è bello cio che è bello figuriamoci cio che è brutto!

Ecolar wrote:

Indeed, low mineral water is a great idea.
My concern with tap water is the amount of chloride (easy to smell) which
has constantly increased during the last 5 years and has reached a very high
level since the anti-terror gouvernment actions in 2002 (I am living in
Lyon, a major city in France... when I have a chance to spend a week-end in
the Alps, the tap water is just perfect to drink and for developing films!).

According to Kodak, at least, chlorine and chloramine in tap water (at
least at levels permitted for drinking) don't have any effect on
developers or development.

--
The challenge to the photographer is to command the medium, to use
whatever current equipment and technology furthers his creative
objectives, without sacrificing the ability to make his own decisions.
-- Ansel Adams

Donald Qualls, aka The Silent Observer http://silent1.home.netcom.com

Opinions expressed are my own -- take them for what they're worth
and don't expect them to be perfect.

Ecolar wrote:

Indeed, low mineral water is a great idea.
My concern with tap water is the amount of chloride (easy to smell) which
has constantly increased during the last 5 years and has reached a very high
level since the anti-terror gouvernment actions in 2002 (I am living in
Lyon, a major city in France... when I have a chance to spend a week-end in
the Alps, the tap water is just perfect to drink and for developing films!).

According to Kodak, at least, chlorine and chloramine in tap water (at
least at levels permitted for drinking) don't have any effect on
developers or development.

--
The challenge to the photographer is to command the medium, to use
whatever current equipment and technology furthers his creative
objectives, without sacrificing the ability to make his own decisions.
-- Ansel Adams

Donald Qualls, aka The Silent Observer http://silent1.home.netcom.com

Opinions expressed are my own -- take them for what they're worth
and don't expect them to be perfect.