DiXactol Tests

I'm testing a number of film/developer combinations. It seems that
DiXactol does not produce the densities promised at recommended ie's and
dilutions. Can anyone else confirm or comment on this?
-Lew

Yeah, let's use Joe's developer.


Lew wrote:
I'm testing a number of film/developer combinations. It seems that
DiXactol does not produce the densities promised at recommended ie's and
dilutions. Can anyone else confirm or comment on this?
-Lew

There's more there than it initially appears. Have you printed the
negatives yet? I don't use it currently but recall needing 1/2 to 2/3
stop more than box speed to get easy printing stuff. It does work
well when you get it tuned in. Are you using distilled water?

On Tue, 21 Feb 2006 19:02:05 -0500, "Lew" wrote:

I'm testing a number of film/developer combinations. It seems that
DiXactol does not produce the densities promised at recommended ie's and
dilutions. Can anyone else confirm or comment on this?
-Lew


Craig Schroeder
craig nospam craigschroeder com

I'm judging densities from contact sheets made on the same vc paper I
use for printing. I use a diffusing head on my enlarger so the contacts
densities should be dead on for what I'll get from prints. I'd rather not
live with the speed loss since I do a lot of available light work. Forgot to
mention that I accidently used delta 400 for the DiXactol whereas my other
tests were with HP5+. Brooklyn water is fine for a bunch of other
developers, so it'll have to do here.
Did you ever experiment with increased concentrations?
-Lew
"Craig Schroeder" wrote in message
...
There's more there than it initially appears. Have you printed the
negatives yet? I don't use it currently but recall needing 1/2 to 2/3
stop more than box speed to get easy printing stuff. It does work
well when you get it tuned in. Are you using distilled water?

On Tue, 21 Feb 2006 19:02:05 -0500, "Lew" wrote:

I'm testing a number of film/developer combinations. It seems that
DiXactol does not produce the densities promised at recommended ie's and
dilutions. Can anyone else confirm or comment on this?
-Lew


Craig Schroeder
craig nospam craigschroeder com

Is that a staining developer?

If so, stain density will not be seen by VC papers.

Staining developers do not work with VC papers the same way that
standard developers do. The stain is opaque to blue but transparent to
green light. I think you're going to find that combo unsatisfactory.

Lew wrote:
I'm testing a number of film/developer combinations. It seems that
DiXactol does not produce the densities promised at recommended ie's and
dilutions. Can anyone else confirm or comment on this?
-Lew

UC wrote:
Is that a staining developer?

If so, stain density will not be seen by VC papers.

Staining developers do not work with VC papers the same way that
standard developers do. The stain is opaque to blue but transparent to
green light. I think you're going to find that combo unsatisfactory.



The above is mostly misinformed and oversimplified, but partly just
dead wrong. Stain density most certainly is seen by VC papers. One can
prove it by bleaching all of the silver from a stained negative with a
ferricyanide bleach, and then printing the remaining stain image on VC
paper. Staining developers do not work the same way with any papers as
non-staining developers do. The vast majority of the stain produced by
any staining developer is seen as neutral density by VC printing
papers, and acts exactly like silver density, except for the lack of
grain in the stain density. Please keep in mind that UC has never used
or tested a staining developer, and has no practical experience
whatsoever in this area.

Dixactol is a catechol/glycin developer, and as such, I would expect it
to be rather slow working, and produce an upswept curve, and a speed
loss with most films. Dixactol Ultra partially addresses these issues
by adding phenidone, which should increase toe speed and general
activity, but probably won't alter the upswept curve shape that is a
signature of glycin developers. If you're interested in making up a
home-brewed version of Dixactol Ultra, I suggest the following:


A

distilled water @ 125F 75ml

Sodium sulfite 3g

glycin 2g

catechol 10g

phenidone .2g

sodium metabisulfite 5g

distilled water to 100ml

B

cold, distilled water 75ml

sodium hydroxide 10g

cold, distilled water to 100ml

Dilute 1A:1B:100 water, and develop for 6min/70F


Jay

wrote:
UC wrote:
Is that a staining developer?

If so, stain density will not be seen by VC papers.

Staining developers do not work with VC papers the same way that
standard developers do. The stain is opaque to blue but transparent to
green light. I think you're going to find that combo unsatisfactory.



The above is mostly misinformed and oversimplified, but partly just
dead wrong. Stain density most certainly is seen by VC papers.

No, it isn't. One can refer to Thorton's book Edge of Darkness, on
pages 96-97, where he shows the difference in highlight density seen by
VC papers. The flat print produced on the VC paper (page 97) is
produced because the stain is not 'seen' by the green-sensitive
component of the paper. That's exactly what Thornton says... I know
what I am talking about, dumbass.

prove it by bleaching all of the silver from a stained negative with a
ferricyanide bleach, and then printing the remaining stain image on VC
paper. Staining developers do not work the same way with any papers as
non-staining developers do. The vast majority of the stain produced by
any staining developer is seen as neutral density by VC printing
papers, and acts exactly like silver density, except for the lack of
grain in the stain density. Please keep in mind that UC has never used
or tested a staining developer, and has no practical experience
whatsoever in this area.

Dixactol is a catechol/glycin developer, and as such, I would expect it
to be rather slow working, and produce an upswept curve, and a speed
loss with most films. Dixactol Ultra partially addresses these issues
by adding phenidone, which should increase toe speed and general
activity, but probably won't alter the upswept curve shape that is a
signature of glycin developers. If you're interested in making up a
home-brewed version of Dixactol Ultra, I suggest the following:


A

distilled water @ 125F 75ml

Sodium sulfite 3g

glycin 2g

catechol 10g

phenidone .2g

sodium metabisulfite 5g

distilled water to 100ml

B

cold, distilled water 75ml

sodium hydroxide 10g

cold, distilled water to 100ml

Dilute 1A:1B:100 water, and develop for 6min/70F


Jay

Jay:
I guess it'll be easy enough to add phenidone to my store bought DiX
since my tests show that I'm losing film speed as well as density. Would you
care to give your diy brew a name for future reference? Is it close to any
published formulas?
-Lew

wrote in message
oups.com...

UC wrote:
Is that a staining developer?

If so, stain density will not be seen by VC papers.

Staining developers do not work with VC papers the same way that
standard developers do. The stain is opaque to blue but transparent to
green light. I think you're going to find that combo unsatisfactory.



The above is mostly misinformed and oversimplified, but partly just
dead wrong. Stain density most certainly is seen by VC papers. One can
prove it by bleaching all of the silver from a stained negative with a
ferricyanide bleach, and then printing the remaining stain image on VC
paper. Staining developers do not work the same way with any papers as
non-staining developers do. The vast majority of the stain produced by
any staining developer is seen as neutral density by VC printing
papers, and acts exactly like silver density, except for the lack of
grain in the stain density. Please keep in mind that UC has never used
or tested a staining developer, and has no practical experience
whatsoever in this area.

Dixactol is a catechol/glycin developer, and as such, I would expect it
to be rather slow working, and produce an upswept curve, and a speed
loss with most films. Dixactol Ultra partially addresses these issues
by adding phenidone, which should increase toe speed and general
activity, but probably won't alter the upswept curve shape that is a
signature of glycin developers. If you're interested in making up a
home-brewed version of Dixactol Ultra, I suggest the following:


A

distilled water @ 125F 75ml

Sodium sulfite 3g

glycin 2g

catechol 10g

phenidone .2g

sodium metabisulfite 5g

distilled water to 100ml

B

cold, distilled water 75ml

sodium hydroxide 10g

cold, distilled water to 100ml

Dilute 1A:1B:100 water, and develop for 6min/70F


Jay

UC,

if you'd ever used a staining developer, you'd know how very wrong you
are when you say that VC paper don't see stain density. I now exactly
how staining developers print on VC papers, and why, but I don't care
to waste my time educating you. If you want to discuss staining
developers with me, you'll have to do a lot more reading, and maybe
even a few actual experiments, like the one I suggested in my last
post. Your juvenile insults are wasted on me.

Lew,

call it what you like, but before you make some up, I should point out
some typos in the formula. The sodium sulfite should read .3g, and the
sodium metabisulfite .5g. I don't know if it's close to any published
formula, but if it is, I don't know the formula. If you decide to make
it up, keep in mind that it will take a lot of stirring to get the
glycin into solution, and it helps to keep the solution hot until all
of the glycin is dissolved. The phenidone is a little stubborn, too,
but not like the glycin. Good luck.

Jay

I found an error in what I wrote. Corrected text:

VC paper has three components.

Part is sensitive to UV and blue, part is sensitive to UV, blue, and
slightly to green, and part is sensitive to UV, blue, and strongly to
green.

Since all three compomnents are sensitive to blue, exposure to blue
light gives the greatest contrast, as the density adds logarithmically.
Exposure to green light gives the least contrast, because only one
component is reacting. This is extremely simple, and I have no idea why
you don't get it.


In essence, VC paper does not 'see' the stain as significant density.
The paper therefore
gives a darker, stronger reaction than it would if the stain were
silver, or if the paper were insensitive to green.

"...(remember, the yellow part of the stain's spectrum doesn't provide
any printing density with VC papers)." Barry Thornton, page 98.

So, you're contradicting the man who formulated DiXactol!

Dumbass!

Thornton, who formulated DiXactol, explains it on pages 96-99 of his
book.


wrote:
UC,

if you'd ever used a staining developer, you'd know how very wrong you
are when you say that VC paper don't see stain density. I now exactly
how staining developers print on VC papers, and why, but I don't care
to waste my time educating you. If you want to discuss staining
developers with me, you'll have to do a lot more reading, and maybe
even a few actual experiments, like the one I suggested in my last
post. Your juvenile insults are wasted on me.

Lew,

call it what you like, but before you make some up, I should point out
some typos in the formula. The sodium sulfite should read .3g, and the
sodium metabisulfite .5g. I don't know if it's close to any published
formula, but if it is, I don't know the formula. If you decide to make
it up, keep in mind that it will take a lot of stirring to get the
glycin into solution, and it helps to keep the solution hot until all
of the glycin is dissolved. The phenidone is a little stubborn, too,
but not like the glycin. Good luck.

Jay