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 |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Diluted D-76 & Imporved D-76 at dilution
"Keith Tapscott." wrote in message ... In the British Photographic Almanac 1957, the D-76d formula (also known as Ilford ID-166) was the developer used to compare some of the then, new PQ fine-grain developers designed by Kendall and Axford which led to the introduction of Ilford Microphen. The MQ buffered-borax developer lost activity and effective film speed quickly when KBr was was raised above 0.25 grams per litre of stock-solution. Developers such as Ilford ID-68 and Microphen had good stability and working capacity with negligible loss of film speed compared to the MQ developer with reuse and with minimal increase in graininess compared to D-76d. Unfortunately, Ilford discontinued Microphen replenisher a long time ago. Ilford DD designed for Dip & Dunk processors and it`s amateur variant DDX are buffered-borax developers which fully exploit film speed. Perhaps in the fullness of time, these developers will remain while Microphen might be discontinued. Xtol is an interesting alternative to D-76 and Microphen. It would be nice if Kodak designed a liquid concentrate similar to DDX based on their Xtol formula. -- Keith Tapscott. I have never heard of this before Kendall and Axford are well recognized photo scientists. Do you have a citation to this work? In the old D-76 paper it was found that about 0.25 gram of bromide suppressed the slight fog typical of _fresh_ D-76 resulting in a slight increase in film speed. As far as reliability and activity is concerned remember that buffered D-76 used with replenishment was a standard developer for motion picture negative development for many years. It would not have been if not reliable. Adding bromide does lose film speed but does not affect devloper activity, they are different functions. Microphen is essentially buffered D-76 with Phenidone substituted for metol and adjustments made for the required pH. It requires some bromide due to the propensity of Phenidone to produce fog. However, benzotriazole is more effective because the anti-fog property of bromide is not very effective with Phenidone. Microphen is not quite the same as the published formula, for one thing it has a different pH. D-23 will mostly duplicate the results of D-76 as far as film speed and grain but is not as long lived and can not be replenished as long as D-76. The mutually regenerative effects of metol and hyroquinone in D-76 extend its useful life considerably. I don't understand why you found development times with buffered D-76 so long. It has the same activity and pH as fresh standard D-76. The comparisons were done long ago by Crabreee, et.al. in their 1929 paper. -- -- Richard Knoppow Los Angeles, CA, USA |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Diluted D-72 Shelf Life | Steven Woody | In The Darkroom | 3 | June 20th 06 03:01 AM |
Delta 3200 with diluted D76? | Jukka Vuokko | In The Darkroom | 3 | October 10th 04 06:54 PM |
id-11 stock vs id-11 diluted | Stefano Bramato | Medium Format Photography Equipment | 3 | May 6th 04 12:19 AM |
id-11 stock vs id-11 diluted | Nick Zentena | Medium Format Photography Equipment | 0 | May 1st 04 12:07 PM |
Dilution Question | missblueamerican | In The Darkroom | 25 | March 14th 04 11:25 PM |