Tektol

[Dave_B]

Has anyone here tried Tektol as a paper developer? A search comes up empty. The folks who make/sell it claim that it is the photographic paper version of Kodak XTOL, e.g. a low toxicity developer that uses ascorbic acid instead of nasty things like hydroquinone or metol.
They claim that it works as well as Dektol. Folks here have any thoughts?
Thanks,
Dave B.

[Gary L. Quay]

I've used it. I was impressed by the results. I find it hard to compare it to dektol, because I've only used it once. It came close to Ansco 130 in the tests I did. I liked it.

--Gary

[Joe Smigiel]

We've switched to using it in the community college darkroom where I teach. We replaced Ilford Universal with it. It works well on the papers our students use (Ilford Multigrade RC & FB, neutral and warmtone) and I like it with FOMA 532, 542, etc. I haven't done side-by-side comparisons with other print developers like Ansco 130, Dektol, etc.

It doesn't seem to have the same capacity as the Ilford product and it also seems to leave more tray residues, but those are just impressions and not something I've critically evaluated. The biggest change is the developer solution is darker and a yellow-orange color and that makes evaluating prints by inspection in solution a bit different. (But, the real evaluation takes place in the light anyways, right?) Takes some getting used to.

When purchased in bulk (to make 200 liters of working developer), it actually turned out to be less than the cost of the Ilford liquid due to packaging restraints. But, that also needs to be compared to the capacity issue, so my guess is that they are pretty close in terms of economics. In smaller quantities, the Ilford may be more economical and easier to source. The main benefit would be the lower toxicity of the Silvergrain product.

[Dave_B]

Guys:
Thanks for the help. I think I'll give it a try.
Dave B.