Only one Developer for B&W

[Jim MacKenzie]

Ilford's D-76 is called ID-11.

Using that developer undiluted will result in finer-appearing grain at the expense of less perceived sharpness (acutance). Since grain is a non-issue for most large-format photography, dilution seems to make more sense to me. (I have long used diluted D-76 with 35mm film and find that the trade-off has been worthwhile; I almost always prefer image sharpness over fine grain, and simply use slower films when I want both.)

D-23 is a good developer with which to play with. Eventually you will probably want to add a second and third developer (one at a time!). One of the greatest advantages, to me, of large format photography is that you can shoot an image on several sheets of film and develop it in different developers with different times to get precisely what you want out of the image. It is far easier to tinker with possibilities with LF than it is with roll film or 35mm. One can, of course, take this to ridiculous lengths but I like the idea of shooting an image on three or four sheets of film so that I can try different possibilities a little more easily.

Stick with D-23 awhile. Learn what you love about it and what you hate about it. Once you know that, try to find a developer that will really complement it and learn how to use it (Rodinal pops into my head as a possibility, or a pyrogallol or pyrocatechin developer like PMK or Pyrocat). It is even entirely possible that you will love D-23 so much that this additional step will not be necessary.

[Bruce Watson]

XTOL ist the one and only, good speed very nice tones, sharpnes almost no grain!
Test it use it don't look back.

I'll second that. XTOL is the only developer I use for B&W. I mix it with steam distilled water. I store the stock solution in old wine bottles using a vacuvin stopper system. Using this system I've used stock that was eight months old that worked as well as freshly mixed.

I use XTOL at the 1:3 dilution. As Armin says, excellent speed, excellent tones, excellent sharpness, and small, well formed grain.

And if Kodak ceases to make it, there are published formulas that are reputed to be very similar that give very simlar results that you can mix yourself from readily available chemicals. I've never done that, however, because it's just too cheap and easy to buy from Kodak.

[Henry Ambrose]

Another vote for Xtol.
Its a great all-around developer, you'll get fine results with most any film and its cheap to buy and easy to mix. I make my Xtol with RO or distilled water and store it in small glass bottles. Keeping it in small pre-measured doses makes it very convenient to use. Xtol keeps very well, giving consistent results over time.

I can also say that D23 is a fine developer. D23 gives me about one full stop less speed than Xtol 1:3. Otherwise I can't think of anything wrong with D23.

[ronald moravec]

If you are looking long term to when supplies are no longer easily available, pick something you can mix from raw materials that will keep into the future.

D 23 or D76 is it. Buy some bulk (one pound) metol, and break in down to 2 oz bottles. Tape seal the lids of seven bottles and work from one. cut a plastic spoon down so you can get into small bottles. Either mixed developer will be good in a full sealed bottle for 6 months unused.

xtol has some virtues, but it has a limited shelf life. I will give you fits if the package shelf life is exceeded, although it will appear to work, it will not. I no longer use it.

The real problem is going to be paper. Almost all of todays papers have chemicals in the emulsion so the manufacturer does not need to age it before distribution. This keeps down mfrg costs, but limits shelf life of the paper to 2/3 years tops.

I have some 40 year old paper that is still good, but it is an old emulsion, Polycontrast.

[Wayne Crider]

"I have a stock of Tmax, Tri-x 320, Ilford FP4 and FP5" (HP5+?)

There are solvent developers (fine grain) and non-solvent (high acutance) developers. Some loose speed, some maintain it and some increase it. Most acutance developers are compensating to a degree. Then there's super fine grain and tanning developers, and developers that can be divided for two bath processing. Almost hard top choose just one!

Tabular grain films like Xtol and it's the recommended developer by Kodak. I use it and like it. It mixes easily and last quite a long time (over a year in my case) if precautions are taken. It's pretty benign and gives about a 2/3 stop increase in speed... D76 is a developer that every film manufactuer makes sure their film will perform well in, "although there are questions if it is the optimum developer for todays films" (quote FDC-Film developing Cookbook). Crawley addressed this in his FX developers... I've used D76/IDII in the past but would probably start mixing my own D76 if wanting to use it again. The formula changes without notice and that's not necessairly a good thing for some... I like Diafine as it's easy to use with no exact temp problems but Diafine doesn't seem to like tabular grain films. If I was traveling and developing as I go I might use a two bath without the temperature requirements... I've used Pyrocat, but developing times / contrast index's are mostly by experiment for your enlarging source. It works, has it's adherents, and can be used (as others) as a stand developer especially for micro contrast gradation. I found a shorter life expectency.

It believe what it comes down to is using the correct developer for the subject matter, being low contrast or high contrast situations, and what look you want to achieve. I think that you may be better off sticking to one film (for awhile) and using 2 different developers. One developer for fine grain and one for acutance with a push. If your deep tanking it or Jobo'ing your film, there are developers that are better then others for the specific process. If you shoot smaller quanities of film and would like a longer lasting developer the 510 Pyro above or Diafine might serve you better. As a all around developer I believe Xtol surpasses D76.

[lungovw]

Hello again,

So I followed Jay De Fehr's recomendation and prepared some 510 Pyro. The first film looks very good. But I have one question: My room temperature was about 68 F and it was quite difficult to pump the developer into the seringe (without needle of course). The viscosity is very high. Is there a problem if I heat it up everytime I need some from the stock bottle? I prepared 200 ml and use about 5 each time. That means the last five would experiment 40 ups and downs in temperature. I wonder it that would make it worse in any way. Any clue about it?

Rgds


Wagner

[Jay DeFehr]

Hi Wagner.

TEA is fairly viscous at room temp, but not so much that it creates any problems in my darkroom. I keep my 510-Pyro in a condiment squeeze bottle with a measuring syringe inserted into its tip. To make a working solution, I just turn the bottle upside down and draw out the required volume of concentrate, and then add it to my pre-measured water, and stir. If a thinner consistency is easier for you to work with, you could try Pat Gainer's trick of keeping the bottle of concentrate in a hot water bath. Heating/cooling cycles have no adverse effects that I'm aware of, so if it makes it easier for you, I say go for it.

Jay

[j.e.simmons]

Jay,
There has been some experimentation with Pat Gainer's PC-TEA formula adding some propelyne glycol to the formula to make pouring easier. Have you tried replacing some of the TEA in 510 Pyro with glycol? Of course the glycol serves only part of the funciton of TEA - it's not an accelerator - so it may throw off the balance.

And to keep this thread on topic, I'm finding PC-TEA to be a good developer for various films if you are looking for a simple, long-lasting non-staining developer.
juan

[Donald Brewster]

I'm a classicist. Tri-X in D-76 1+1.

[Christopher Perez]

After reading a couple links, I'm concerned about the cancerous nature of hydroquinone in D76 (and other) developers.

XTOL looks safest, health wise.

The reason for my sudden concern is that I tray process 8x10 in D76. I read where the chemicals are absorbed through the skin. It scared me.

Besides XTOL, which developers are commonly available in the US that are relatively "safe" from a health perspective?