A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

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.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » General Photography » In The Darkroom
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Tmax & D-76



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old August 4th 10, 02:15 AM posted to rec.photo.darkroom
Richard Knoppow
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 751
Default Tmax & D-76


"Nicholas O. Lindan" wrote in message
m...
"Richard Knoppow" wrote

The line about T-Max being as fine grained in Microdol-X
as Technical Pan in Technidol is from me.


HA! If I could get Google to search rec.photo.darkroom -
I am sure I was pointing this out as early as ...

* * * *

Perceptol - from the MSDS information - doesn't really
look a whole lot like Microdol-X

Part A:
Metol

Part B
S. Sulfite
S. Bromide
S. Tripolyphosphate (STPP)

The STPP is a water softening agent in this application
(among it's other uses it adds weight to seafood by making
it retain water). I don't know if there is a dichroic
fog inhibitor or if the bromide takes care of it.

I guess P. Bromide could be a fine-grain agent, but I
would
wonder about its effect on shadow detail. The only film
developer w/ bromide TIKO (WTEO Perceptol) is D-96, used
by the motion picture industry.

One rather whacked-out developer in the Microdol-X vein
is Rollei RLS (LP Cube XS) that is made from

Metol
Ammonium Chloride

without the s. sulfite (if the MSDS can be believed).

--
Nicholas O. Lindan, Cleveland, Ohio
Darkroom Automation: F-Stop Timers, Enlarging Meters
http://www.darkroomautomation.com/da-main.htm
n o lindan at ix dot netcom dot com

Be careful! The MSDS you have for Perceptol is an old
one and in error. I wrote them about the sodium bromide, its
suppsed to be sodium chloride. Its possible that Microdol-X
has ammonium chloride in it, I think the cation may not be
important. But there are often several versions of MSDS
around. Also, they don't show all the ingredients, only
those deemed to be hazardous and sometimes not even those if
present in very small quantity. For instance both T-Max and
T-Max RS are Phenidone developers but no mention of it was
made in their MSDS for years.
Many packaged developers have some sort of sequestering
agent or agents in them to control impurities in the water,
mostly magnesium and calcium carbonates, the most common
"hardness" in water and sometimes also trace metals like
iron.
I don't have an actual formula for Microdol/Perceptol
but it appears to contain about 15 or 20 grams of sodium
chloride per liter of working solution, otherwise similar to
D-20. I am pretty sure the X in Microdol-X is a silver
sequestering agent, perhaps a mercaptan, to prevent dichroic
fog. I never had any problem with this from Perceptol so
perhaps it too has some anti-silvering agent in it.
Kodak has a ton of patents for anti-silvering agents,
who knows which were actually used and where since they can
also be added to emulsions.



--
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA




  #12  
Old August 4th 10, 02:44 AM posted to rec.photo.darkroom
Nicholas O. Lindan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,227
Default Tmax & D-76

"Richard Knoppow" wrote

The line about T-Max being as fine grained in Microdol-X as Technical Pan
in Technidol is from me.


HA! If I could get Google to search rec.photo.darkroom -
I am sure I was pointing this out as early as ...

* * * *

Perceptol - from the MSDS information - doesn't really
look a whole lot like Microdol-X

Part A:
Metol

Part B
S. Sulfite
S. Bromide
S. Tripolyphosphate (STPP)

The STPP is a water softening agent in this application
(among it's other uses it adds weight to seafood by making
it retain water). I don't know if there is a dichroic
fog inhibitor or if the bromide takes care of it.

I guess P. Bromide could be a fine-grain agent, but I would
wonder about its effect on shadow detail. The only film
developer w/ bromide TIKO (WTEO Perceptol) is D-96, used
by the motion picture industry.

One rather whacked-out developer in the Microdol-X vein
is Rollei RLS (LP Cube XS) that is made from

Metol
Ammonium Chloride

without the s. sulfite (if the MSDS can be believed).

--
Nicholas O. Lindan, Cleveland, Ohio
Darkroom Automation: F-Stop Timers, Enlarging Meters
http://www.darkroomautomation.com/da-main.htm
n o lindan at ix dot netcom dot com


  #13  
Old August 4th 10, 03:05 AM posted to rec.photo.darkroom
Nicholas O. Lindan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,227
Default Tmax & D-76

"Peter Irwin" wrote

This matches my experience with TMX in Microdol-X. Grain
is amazingly fine, actual resolution is very good, but it just
didn't look /sharp/.


I used TMX/M-X for shooting resolution targets a few years ago
when I ran out of Tech Pan.

I found the combination has the same resolution with a high
contrast target as Tech Pan. Microdol-X does not reduce
resolution. That it is a 'solvent developer' is an urban
legend - it has no more S. Sulfite in it than D-76.

Often systems that have lower resolution look sharper.
I am not interested in the appearance of detail, but only in
real detail. 'Acutance' and touted 'edge effects' are,
in my book, vile concepts.

--
Nicholas O. Lindan, Cleveland, Ohio
Darkroom Automation: F-Stop Timers, Enlarging Meters
http://www.darkroomautomation.com/da-main.htm
n o lindan at ix dot netcom dot com


  #14  
Old August 4th 10, 03:24 PM
IanG IanG is offline
Junior Member
 
First recorded activity by PhotoBanter: Dec 2009
Posts: 7
Default

Perceptol contains Sodium Chloride and no Bromide, that's an error in an old MSDS and has already been pointed out in this thread.

Ian

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicholas O. Lindan View Post
"Richard Knoppow" wrote

The line about T-Max being as fine grained in Microdol-X as Technical Pan
in Technidol is from me.


HA! If I could get Google to search rec.photo.darkroom -
I am sure I was pointing this out as early as ...

* * * *

Perceptol - from the MSDS information - doesn't really
look a whole lot like Microdol-X

Part A:
Metol

Part B
S. Sulfite
S. Bromide
S. Tripolyphosphate (STPP)

The STPP is a water softening agent in this application
(among it's other uses it adds weight to seafood by making
it retain water). I don't know if there is a dichroic
fog inhibitor or if the bromide takes care of it.

I guess P. Bromide could be a fine-grain agent, but I would
wonder about its effect on shadow detail. The only film
developer w/ bromide TIKO (WTEO Perceptol) is D-96, used
by the motion picture industry.

One rather whacked-out developer in the Microdol-X vein
is Rollei RLS (LP Cube XS) that is made from

Metol
Ammonium Chloride

without the s. sulfite (if the MSDS can be believed).

--
Nicholas O. Lindan, Cleveland, Ohio
Darkroom Automation: F-Stop Timers, Enlarging Meters
http://www.darkroomautomation.com/da-main.htm
n o lindan at ix dot netcom dot com
  #15  
Old August 4th 10, 04:20 PM posted to rec.photo.darkroom
Nicholas O. Lindan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,227
Default Tmax & D-76

"Richard Knoppow" wrote

The MSDS you have for Perceptol is an old one and in error. I wrote them
about the sodium bromide, its suppsed to be sodium chloride.


Ah, now that makes a lot more sense.

When Kodak announced the discontinuation of Microdol-X
I looked into Perceptol, came upon the erroneous MSDS
and promptly bought 10 bags of M-X.

I have tried the home-brew Microdol - D-23 with a 30 (?)
gm/l dollop of pure NaCl and it silvers badly when used
with TMax films.

If Perceptol works with TMax/Delta then it more than likely
has an anti-silvering agent in it.

Hmm, anti-silvering - anti-Ag'ing - Anti-Aging. I wonder
if one could sell the stuff on the back pages of the National
Enquirer. Proven Anti-Aging formula ... Might help all those
people poisoning themselves with colloidal silver.

--
Nicholas O. Lindan, Cleveland, Ohio
Darkroom Automation: F-Stop Timers, Enlarging Meters
http://www.darkroomautomation.com/da-main.htm
n o lindan at ix dot netcom dot com


  #16  
Old August 4th 10, 07:51 PM
Keith Tapscott. Keith Tapscott. is offline
Senior Member
 
First recorded activity by PhotoBanter: Feb 2005
Posts: 112
Default

Some photographers have observed similar results with Ilford Delta 100 in undiluted Perceptol, virtually grainless but lacking in crisp definition. This is why I prefer D-76 for general use and Perceptol diluted at least 1+1 for films in the ISO 50-100 speed groups.

I don't use Perceptol much these days.
  #17  
Old August 4th 10, 08:18 PM
Keith Tapscott. Keith Tapscott. is offline
Senior Member
 
First recorded activity by PhotoBanter: Feb 2005
Posts: 112
Default

The only difference I can see from the MSDS for Microdol-X and Perceptol, is that Kodak list boric oxide (B2O3) as a component. Both developers list sodium chloride as constituents.

A former Kodak pundit has mentioned on a popular photo-forum, that Kodak encapsulate the developing agents with a special coating to prevent them from reacting with the other constituents in the single-powder compounds.

I am wondering if that special component is the boric oxide (boric anhydride) that Kodak mention in their MSDS's.

Ilford do similar to their P.Q. powder developers by adding a pinch of sodium metabisuphite in Part 'A' of Microphen and Bromophen, but not in ID-11 or Perceptol, as Metol is already slightly acidic.

Ilford information sheet P 10.5 FINE GRAIN DEVELOPMENT: Shows that ID-11 and ID-2 can be modified to produce finer grain by adding ammonium-chloride. Use 40 grams for each litre of stock ID-11 and 10 grams for each litre of working strength ID-2 (1+2).
  #18  
Old August 4th 10, 08:31 PM
Keith Tapscott. Keith Tapscott. is offline
Senior Member
 
First recorded activity by PhotoBanter: Feb 2005
Posts: 112
Default

Back on topic, using films like T-Max 100, Delta 100 and Acros 100 in a true fine-grain developer of the Microdol type, will yield grain as fine as can be expected without switching to special micro-fine grained B&W films which require specially formulated low contrast developers.
The down side, is some loss of effective film speed and acuity.
I prefer my negatives with a bit more sharpness over the finest grain, so it's D-76 1+1 for me.
  #19  
Old August 5th 10, 06:32 PM posted to rec.photo.darkroom
Richard Knoppow
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 751
Default Tmax & D-76


"Keith Tapscott."
wrote in message
...

The only difference I can see from the MSDS for Microdol-X
and
Perceptol, is that Kodak list boric oxide (B2O3) as a
component. Both
developers list sodium chloride as constituents.

A former Kodak pundit has mentioned on a popular
photo-forum, that Kodak
encapsulate the developing agents with a special coating
to prevent them
from reacting with the other constituents in the
single-powder
compounds.

I am wondering if that special component is the boric
oxide (boric
anhydride) that Kodak mention in their MSDS's.

Ilford do similar to their P.Q. powder developers by
adding a pinch of
sodium metabisuphite in Part 'A' of Microphen and
Bromophen, but not in
ID-11 or Perceptol, as Metol is already slightly acidic.

Ilford information sheet P 10.5 FINE GRAIN DEVELOPMENT:
Shows that ID-11
and ID-2 can be modified to produce finer grain by adding
ammonium-chloride. Use 40 grams for each litre of stock
ID-11 and 10
grams for each litre of working strength ID-2 (1+2).




--
Keith Tapscott.

Kodak uses some odd chemical names for more familiar
stuff in their MSDS. Kodak also has a bunch of patents on
methods of combining chemicals for use in powder formulas, I
have no idea of which ones were actually used commercially.
AFAIK, boric anhydride is becomes boric acid in solution and
suggests that there is a buffer combination there similar to
the one in D-76d which uses borax and boric acid.
Those familiar with the art (patent speak) know that
its usual in published formulas to list the chemicals in the
order in which they are to be dissolved. When a developer
contains Metol it is dissolved first, or at least before the
sulfite. The reason is that Metol does not dissolve in a
fairly strong sulfite solution. In the past it was common
for packaged developers to come in two parts, the first
contained the Metol and was dissolved first, the second
contained the remainder of the ingredients. Kodak has a
method of treating the chemicals in packaged developers so
that all can be combined at once. Note that packaged D-76
and Dektol consist of a single container. I don't know
exactly what they do. One reads occasional complaints about
the difficulty of dissolving these packaged developers
without having a residue of undissolved crystals. I have
wondered if this problem is the result of this treatment.
BTW, I've found that the problem is at least minimised by
keeping the solution hot until solution is complete.
Kodak is reportedly discontinuing D-76, Microdol-X, and
Kodak Hypo Clearing Agent. Ilford makes similar if not
identical products but Kodak originated all of these and I
can't help but wonder if the Ilford versions are really
identical. For one thing the MSDS for ID-11 indicates its
not buffered. D-76 has a problem with increasing activity as
it ages which is cured by the buffering found in the Kodak
version. Perceptol seems to work very well and I routinely
use it for T-Max 100 and have used it for several other
films. I am not sure what is in Ilford wash aid but its
seems to be the same as KHCA, a buffered solution of sodium
sulfite. Kodak adds two sequestering agents to control
deposition of aluminum compounds from the hardener and
metallic carbonates in the water. I wonder if Ilford adds
these since they do not use hardener in their fixing baths.
Unfortunately we live in a age of super-giant
corporations, that way because it is "more efficient" but,
in fact they are not very efficient and are incapable of
catering to medium or small markets profitably, something
that smaller and more specialized businesses _are_ able to
do. Being big is not always an advantage. Years ago I came
across a very interesting paper called "On Being the Right
Size". I can't remember the author, it was in an anthology
of papers on either mathematics or physics published by
_Scientific American_ magazine. Maybe a web search would
find it.


--
--
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA



  #20  
Old August 5th 10, 08:24 PM posted to rec.photo.darkroom
Jean-David Beyer
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 247
Default Tmax & D-76

Richard Knoppow wrote:

Being big is not always an advantage. Years ago I came across a very
interesting paper called "On Being the Right Size". I can't remember
the author, it was in an anthology of papers on either mathematics or
physics published by _Scientific American_ magazine. Maybe a web
search would find it.

It can be found in The World of Mathematics, Volume 2, pages 952 ff.
"On Being the Right Size" by J.B.S. Haldane. Haldane, J. B. S. (March
1926). "On Being the Right Size". Harper's Magazine.


--
.~. Jean-David Beyer Registered Linux User 85642.
/V\ PGP-Key: 9A2FC99A Registered Machine 241939.
/( )\ Shrewsbury, New Jersey http://counter.li.org
^^-^^ 15:10:01 up 11 days, 18:02, 3 users, load average: 5.12, 4.86, 4.80
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Tmax 100 versus APX 100 Matthew McGrattan In The Darkroom 107 April 6th 05 09:32 PM
Delta 400, Tmax 400; Delta 100, Tmax 100, FP 125; plus Pan F 50 [email protected] In The Darkroom 5 January 25th 05 06:58 PM
new kodak tmax 100 Beppe Alborč In The Darkroom 3 December 29th 04 12:10 PM
Taming Tmax 100 one_of_many Large Format Photography Equipment 15 July 16th 04 07:16 AM
experiences with 400TX and TMAX developed with HC100/TMAX/XTOL? E Colar In The Darkroom 8 February 10th 04 10:47 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:34 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.