XTOL compliants and problems?

[Andrew O'Neill]

It's a first rate developer and I have been using it for years as my main "conventional" developer. Films sing in xtol 1+1. Just be sure to use the required volume when diluting.

[jeroldharter]

I use Xtol 1:1 as my main developer. I don't have much bad to say about it.

It mixes OK but sometimes there are little undissolved bits. I use a magnetic stirrer so I can't complain too much.

Also, it needs time. Short development times for contraction can be erratic

[mat4226]

Nothing bad to say here about XTOL. In my brief history processing my own B&W film (120 and 8x10), using XTOL 1:1 has been very reliable. The biggest mistake I made with the first mixed batch was using the bulk of the developer within a week and letting the small amount at bottom oxidize for two months . Attention to detail when mixing and limiting oxygen exposure should give it plenty of life.

[Henry Ambrose]

Great developer.
Just use it.

[David Swinnard]

I used it for many years, both the one litre and five litre packages. I never experienced the dreaded "Xtol failure". I always mixed the stock and working solutions with distilled water (one less variable to worry about.)

I used half-litre brown glass bottles (filled to brim and sealed with Saran Wrap under the cap) and have had them last up to 13 months in the fridge. I might have lasted longer, but I ran out - it was a slow year.

I mostly used it at the 1+3 dilution - ALWAYS ensuring I met Kodak's minimum STOCK recommendations. I used it for 35mm through 4x5 (Acros and the TMaxes mostly) and only stopped when I started using Pyrocat HD a few years ago. (Acros at night at 1+3 - wonderful!)

[Peter De Smidt]

I too used Xtol for years, mainly at 1 + 2 and 1 +3. I really like it. My film developing is more intermittent now, though, and so I've switched to Pyrocat MC in glycol, mainly for it's keeping properties.

[p_markowski]

A number of members have mentioned X-tol failure and/or bad packaging, I'm in this camp from personal experience, and that is last time I used the developer . I could not find a comfort zone on a product that has failed for me in such a critical area (I have enough variables) so I switched. I went Pyro-PMK (liquid contents, no air borne dust or undissolved contents) and have been very happy. I look back at previous negs with satisfaction but not enough to commit my time in the field to jeopardize.

[Ian Gordon Bilson]

I have recently started using Xtol replenished,which was a leap of faith on my part,as I had,like many users on this forum,always used the standard D76/ID-11 at 1:1 to 1:3 dilutions.
Test was a 36exp roll of Fuji NP400 developed in Xtol 1:1,as is my wont,and a clip test in stock developer.
No contest at all : the stock result was most convincing : improved acutance and a very slightly lower contrast negative, probably half a grade.
Subject blique sunlight on a textured surface/55/2.8 MicroNikkor,bracketed -1 to + 1f.
Test printed at magnification equivalent to 16in wide enlargement.
Not what I expected at all : but well worth the trouble,and the economy of use is very welcome for a multi-format user.
Blame the folks at Apug for making me think outside the square..

[Sirius Glass]

Great developer undiluted that I have used for years with and without replenishment. Undiluted replenished XTOL gives the best results.

The only problem that I have had was using the JOBO processor and the 3010 drum with replenished XTOL, was that the recommended 15% reduction in time was too agressive when I used it on HP5+. Use the time for 20 degrees C 8 minutes plus 1 minute for the replenishment = 9 minutes on the Ilford website and use the full 9 minutes, do not reduce the time.

Steve

[Jim Noel]

I have had it go bad in an unopened package so I threw the other packages away and refuse to use it.