If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Oh, BTW, a simple test (was salvaging a developer)
True .. except where I live it's pretty remote. I'm not a city slicker. I
needed a developer and asked a stupid question (?) and got beat up for it. This is senseless. I wanted to try something and Mr Knoppow answered that with an intellegent answer. I accept that so let it be!! Bill "Tom Phillips" wrote in message ... ? wrote: Exhausted film developer is more costly than exhausted print developer, you only know when you wasted negatives. But there in lies the answer. Cut off a couple of inches of unexposed film and seal in your developing tank as though it was a roll. Develop normally. A quick inspection should give you a clue whether you want to use that developer on important negatives. Oh fer crying out loud. Just use ***FRESH*** developer. It's like a few extra minutes out of your day to mix some up and you always get consistent results. -- Regards, Dewey Clark http://www.historictimekeepers.com Ebay Sales: http://cgi6.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAP...ems&userid=dsc Restorations, Parts for Hamilton M21s, Products for Craftsmen Makers of Historic Timekeepers Ultrasonic Clock Cleaning Solution "br" wrote in message ... I have a half gallon of Xtol, which I'm sure, will not give proper development because it was made up about 9 months ago. (It's still clear) Is there any type of chemical that can be added to make sure of normal development? I would like to experiment but not sure how to start. (I heard that Xtol's life dimishes with age) Bill |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Oh, BTW, a simple test (was salvaging a developer)
br wrote: True .. except where I live it's pretty remote. I'm not a city slicker. I needed a developer and asked a stupid question (?) and got beat up for it. This is senseless. Don't think you got beat up, but a rather good answer I thought. Also didn't think the question was stupid, as some developers do have long shelf lives. But it's legitimate to question why you just don't use/order fresh developer. What I thought was "senseless" was someone making a simple question into 2 additional "BTW" threads. But at some point you have to consider whether the amount of effort spent on fooling with an old and likely oxidized developer is worth that effort, especially in context of how important your images are vs. how important it becomes to economize (in either time or money) on developer. I.e., I usually keep freshly ordered developer on hand, then you can quantitatively test the shelf life and activity of an old stock or concentrate by actually comparing resulting densities against the fresh developer. But if important images, to blindly use an old developer with a limited shelf life to begin with seems hardly worth it. I generally prefer concentrates (Rodinal, HC110 etc) as they have very long shelf lives compared to stock solutions you mix from packaged developers. But clearly, someone else has a preference for D76 :-) I wanted to try something and Mr Knoppow answered that with an intellegent answer. I accept that so let it be!! Bill "Tom Phillips" wrote in message ... ? wrote: Exhausted film developer is more costly than exhausted print developer, you only know when you wasted negatives. But there in lies the answer. Cut off a couple of inches of unexposed film and seal in your developing tank as though it was a roll. Develop normally. A quick inspection should give you a clue whether you want to use that developer on important negatives. Oh fer crying out loud. Just use ***FRESH*** developer. It's like a few extra minutes out of your day to mix some up and you always get consistent results. -- Regards, Dewey Clark http://www.historictimekeepers.com Ebay Sales: http://cgi6.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAP...ems&userid=dsc Restorations, Parts for Hamilton M21s, Products for Craftsmen Makers of Historic Timekeepers Ultrasonic Clock Cleaning Solution "br" wrote in message ... I have a half gallon of Xtol, which I'm sure, will not give proper development because it was made up about 9 months ago. (It's still clear) Is there any type of chemical that can be added to make sure of normal development? I would like to experiment but not sure how to start. (I heard that Xtol's life dimishes with age) Bill |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Oh, BTW, a simple test (was salvaging a developer)
? wrote: Aye matey, therein lies the rub. Who DID simply ask why he chose to "risk" using old developer without being disparaging of his question? The simple fact is, most of the responses were needlessly pejorative in tone. The "majority" of responses to this meager thread are to your two needless and silly tangents. That says something -- like you don't know posting netiquette... If someone asks a question, it is likely the petitioner would like information free of invective. If the parameters of his question are unclear, it is more fruitful to ask to have his question further refined rather than to simply assume he violates your personal ethic and to start chastising him. A little tolerance goes a long way. IMO, "BR" is capable of perceiving the responses he received as he sees fit. I see no point in trying to prove to he incorrectly interprets his own perceptions. As nsgs go, this one is pretty tame as well as usually informative. Noting the pejorative behavior of certain posters (i.e., acknowledging them) only encourages them to reply with more invectiveness. So, along with suggesting the OP use fresh developer, it's suggested if certain posters have nothing to offer but smart asinine-ness, the solution is simple: killfile. Works for me. |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Oh, BTW, a simple test (was salvaging a developer)
? wrote: I can't help but notice you are the main contributor to this silly (pejorative term perhaps?) thread. Interesting that you should complain about its existence yet act to prolong its life. Prolong? Isn't that why you started this stupid subthread? To gain attention? Feel free to take the last post, it would appear there is nothing left here of interest to me. |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Oh, BTW, a simple test (was salvaging a developer)
Aye matey, therein lies the rub. Who DID simply ask why he chose to "risk"
using old developer without being disparaging of his question? The simple fact is, most of the responses were needlessly pejorative in tone. If someone asks a question, it is likely the petitioner would like information free of invective. If the parameters of his question are unclear, it is more fruitful to ask to have his question further refined rather than to simply assume he violates your personal ethic and to start chastising him. A little tolerance goes a long way. IMO, "BR" is capable of perceiving the responses he received as he sees fit. I see no point in trying to prove to he incorrectly interprets his own perceptions. -- Regards, Dewey Clark http://www.historictimekeepers.com Ebay Sales: http://cgi6.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAP...ems&userid=dsc Restorations, Parts for Hamilton M21s, Products for Craftsmen Makers of Historic Timekeepers Ultrasonic Clock Cleaning Solution |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Oh, BTW, a simple test (was salvaging a developer)
I can't help but notice you are the main contributor to this silly
(pejorative term perhaps?) thread. Interesting that you should complain about its existence yet act to prolong its life. Feel free to take the last post, it would appear there is nothing left here of interest to me. -- Regards, Dewey Clark http://www.historictimekeepers.com Ebay Sales: http://cgi6.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAP...ems&userid=dsc Restorations, Parts for Hamilton M21s, Products for Craftsmen Makers of Historic Timekeepers Ultrasonic Clock Cleaning Solution |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
salvaging a developer
"br"
All developers die if left to do so. Test your may not yet be dead Xtol with a small print. Set the Xtol aside and mix a new batch. Let it age 72 hours then test it in the same way the old Xtol was tested. If the two tests turn out the same, use up the old soon. Save the new mix test print for comparison purposes. Who knows, the new mix may be around a long time. IIRC, now days five liters is as little as can be bought. Dan |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Oh, BTW, a simple test (was salvaging a developer)
On Wed, 28 Jan 2004 21:15:24 -0500, "br" wrote:
True .. except where I live it's pretty remote. I'm not a city slicker. I needed a developer and asked a stupid question (?) No, you asked "Is there any type of chemical that can be added to make sure of normal development?" in hopes of insuring the capability of Xtol to develop your films. While my answer was curt, it was in fact accurate. The only agent that you can add to a developer to insure that it works is a developing agent. and got beat up for it. This is senseless. "Got beat up" ? I wanted to try something and Mr Knoppow answered that with an intellegent answer. I accept that so let it be!! I concur. Now, I suggest the following given your remote location. Solution A Elon 10g Sulfite 100g Water 1.0L Solution B Sod.Metaborate 4.0g Water 1.0L Mix A with very hot (130F) distilled water and I suggest storing in 250ml glass bottles. Add a pinch of the sulfite to the water prior to mixing the Elon in. The sulfite will absorb most of the free oxygen in the water. Mix B with warm (100F) water and also store in 250ml bottles. For use simply mix 1A:1B:2 Water (250:250:500) to make 1.0L of working solution. Develop the film as you would using D-76 diluted 1:1 Cost : 0.95/L of stock. Elon .80 S.Sulfite .05 Metaborate .05 Water .05 Believe me, you won't have to worry about it going ten-toes up. Regards, John S. Douglas, Photographer - http://www.darkroompro.com Please remove the "_" when replying via email |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Oh, BTW, a simple test (was salvaging a developer)
Thank you Mr. Douglas.
I think it's about time to order some supplies and mix my own and be sure have fresh developer when needed. My intentions was never cause such a ruckus over such a simple question and any questions I may ask in the future, hopefully, will not cause such a commotion. Believe me I have many questions and really would like constructive answers as anyone else would. What is this formula you gave me? I'm interested to know. Bill "John" wrote in message ... On Wed, 28 Jan 2004 21:15:24 -0500, "br" wrote: True .. except where I live it's pretty remote. I'm not a city slicker. I needed a developer and asked a stupid question (?) No, you asked "Is there any type of chemical that can be added to make sure of normal development?" in hopes of insuring the capability of Xtol to develop your films. While my answer was curt, it was in fact accurate. The only agent that you can add to a developer to insure that it works is a developing agent. and got beat up for it. This is senseless. "Got beat up" ? I wanted to try something and Mr Knoppow answered that with an intellegent answer. I accept that so let it be!! I concur. Now, I suggest the following given your remote location. Solution A Elon 10g Sulfite 100g Water 1.0L Solution B Sod.Metaborate 4.0g Water 1.0L Mix A with very hot (130F) distilled water and I suggest storing in 250ml glass bottles. Add a pinch of the sulfite to the water prior to mixing the Elon in. The sulfite will absorb most of the free oxygen in the water. Mix B with warm (100F) water and also store in 250ml bottles. For use simply mix 1A:1B:2 Water (250:250:500) to make 1.0L of working solution. Develop the film as you would using D-76 diluted 1:1 Cost : 0.95/L of stock. Elon .80 S.Sulfite .05 Metaborate .05 Water .05 Believe me, you won't have to worry about it going ten-toes up. Regards, John S. Douglas, Photographer - http://www.darkroompro.com Please remove the "_" when replying via email |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Oh, BTW, a simple test (was salvaging a developer)
On Thu, 29 Jan 2004 22:21:12 -0500, "br" wrote:
Thank you Mr. Douglas. You can call me John. "Mr.Douglas" was my father ;) I think it's about time to order some supplies and mix my own and be sure have fresh developer when needed. My intentions was never cause such a ruckus over such a simple question and any questions I may ask in the future, hopefully, will not cause such a commotion. Believe me I have many questions and really would like constructive answers as anyone else would. I understand. Unfortunately many of us don't have Richards open-mindedness. What is this formula you gave me? I'm interested to know. Essentially a variation on D-76H. Metaborate instead of Borax as Borax has solubility issues. In other words, it will come out of solution relatively easily. Please let me know if you try it. I've been meaning too but I've been rather busy what with having the 2 additions to the family and purchasing a new home. Regards, John S. Douglas, Photographer - http://www.darkroompro.com Please remove the "_" when replying via email |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|