Just bought some Xtol - any tips/advice?

[welly]

My first pack of Xtol. I'm going to be running Foma 100 and TMax 100 through it. I'm starting to shoot both those films at ISO 50 as I've been finding my negatives coming out a little dark. Just wondering if anyone has any general advice about using Xtol? Not sure there is anything to reveal but someone out there might have some useful advice!

[David Michael Bigeleisen]

I shoot all of my film, including TMax 100 as rated by the manufacturer. I develop in x-tol according to manufacturer's instructions and get great results.

David Michael Bigeleisen

[polyglot]

I shoot Foma 100 at 50 - you can do it at 100 but it becomes quite contrasty by the time you've given it enough development to bring the shadows in. I would expect to get box speed from TMX; I get more than box speed from TMY2 in Xtol.

Xtol 1+1 works great to tame the Foma grain and make up for some of its poor speed. You will need a slightly longer development if you pre-rinse, which you should. I find that if you take the published non-rotary Xtol time and apply it for rotary development with a pre-rinse, it will be pretty close and you can tweak to your content from there.

Don't rotary process with Xtol at higher dilutions than 1+1. You must use distilled or bottled water to make up the stock; the iron in tap-water will kill Xtol in a couple of days - at least it does in Adelaide. You can also make the bag up to 4L instead of 5L which means it has a little less oxygen in it and will theoretically keep a little better; just remember to do 80+120mL instead of 100+100mL to make up your working solution. Store the stock in a mylar bag, i.e. 10L silver-bag-in-box water carton, the same carton you used to make up the stock.

[welly]

I shoot Foma 100 at 50 - you can do it at 100 but it becomes quite contrasty by the time you've given it enough development to bring the shadows in. I would expect to get box speed from TMX; I get more than box speed from TMY2 in Xtol.

Xtol 1+1 works great to tame the Foma grain and make up for some of its poor speed. You will need a slightly longer development if you pre-rinse, which you should. I find that if you take the published non-rotary Xtol time and apply it for rotary development with a pre-rinse, it will be pretty close and you can tweak to your content from there.

Don't rotary process with Xtol at higher dilutions than 1+1. You must use distilled or bottled water to make up the stock; the iron in tap-water will kill Xtol in a couple of days - at least it does in Adelaide. You can also make the bag up to 4L instead of 5L which means it has a little less oxygen in it and will theoretically keep a little better; just remember to do 80+120mL instead of 100+100mL to make up your working solution. Store the stock in a mylar bag, i.e. 10L silver-bag-in-box water carton, the same carton you used to make up the stock.

Awesome, thank you. Actually looking at my TMX sheet I developed the other day, it does look a fair bit lighter than the Foma. I wonder if I should just run that at box speed. I'll do some tests this weekend but the Foma definitely needs more exposure than 100. 50 seems to work quite nicely.

I'm using BTZS tubes for my processing these days and have been using D76 at 1+1 so thought Xtol would probably work as well. I've seen talk of 1+2 but I shall heed your advice. Plus I'll grab a few litres of Evian tomorrow to mix it up!

Thanks again!

[Noah B]

I just started using xtol the other day too, I always rate my film at box speed regardless of developer. Xtol develops more midtones than other developers so your highlights won't get blown completely out. What polygot said, used distilled water to make up your 5 liters and then store in brown plastic 1 gallon and quart container, glass if you prefer. I use an electric roller base for my film and it comes out great!

[hmf]

I've been using Xtol for years, and started mixing in tap water before anyone told me otherwise. Never had a problem. You should be able to get at least 6 months storage from your stock solutions if you use opaque containers filled to the brim.

As stated earlier, Xtol gives pretty close to box speed for most films. FWIW, I rate TMX at 80 and tray develop at 1+2.

[C_Remington]

My first pack of Xtol. I'm going to be running Foma 100 and TMax 100 through it. I'm starting to shoot both those films at ISO 50 as I've been finding my negatives coming out a little dark. Just wondering if anyone has any general advice about using Xtol? Not sure there is anything to reveal but someone out there might have some useful advice!

When you say your negatives are too dark...do you mean that they are too dense and your prints are too light or, do you really mean that the resulting prints are too dark and your negatives are thin?

[welly]

When you say your negatives are too dark...do you mean that they are too dense and your prints are too light or, do you really mean that the resulting prints are too dark and your negatives are thin?

Actually to my eye, the negatives look fine but I literally have nothing to compare them against as my 4x5 negatives are the only ones I've ever seen. I only say they look dark as they always scan dark. Of course, it could be my scanner needs profiling which is a different subject! But when I look at the negatives there are both dark areas and light areas, and occasionally areas that look almost transparent. I wouldn't say any look especially "thin" though. But perhaps they are, who knows! I have nothing to compare them against!

[Bruce Osgood]

I'm using my second batch of Xtol. My film is Delta 100 at 100. I find temperature is a critical factor and there is not even a 2 degree variance allowance.

I would agree that the mid-tones are rendered fuller and more pleasingly and box speed is where Delta at least, should be shot.

[Bruce Osgood]

Actually to my eye, the negatives look fine but I literally have nothing to compare them against as my 4x5 negatives are the only ones I've ever seen. I only say they look dark as they always scan dark. Of course, it could be my scanner needs profiling which is a different subject! But when I look at the negatives there are both dark areas and light areas, and occasionally areas that look almost transparent. I wouldn't say any look especially "thin" though. But perhaps they are, who knows! I have nothing to compare them against!

Have a look here:

http://www.ephotozine.com/article/assessing-negatives-4682

[Jeff Dexheimer]

I'll grab a few litres of Evian tomorrow to mix it up!

Thanks again!

If you mean the drinking water, I would recommend getting true distilled water instead. Get the stuff made for ironing cloths. It should be made by evaporation, not filtration. Some "distilled" water is actually not distilled, but filtered.

[Brian C. Miller]

My first pack of Xtol. .... Just wondering if anyone has any general advice about using Xtol? Not sure there is anything to reveal but someone out there might have some useful advice!

I mix up Xtol in a clean plastic bucket dedicated for that, and then I store it in plastic containers, full to the brim. I use tap water, as the water is decent where I live. The stock solution has kept for over a year, staying clear. If your stock solution is not clear, then that indicates that you may have a problem, and you should test it before you use it on something important. The old 1L packs sometimes came caked, and the chemicals were bad, and didn't mix up clear. When I use it, I dilute it just prior to use from the stock solution, and then after it's used the diluted solution goes down the drain. I have used it in trays, canisters, and my Jobo. It's a good, consistent developer.

[C_Remington]

Actually to my eye, the negatives look fine but I literally have nothing to compare them against as my 4x5 negatives are the only ones I've ever seen. I only say they look dark as they always scan dark. Of course, it could be my scanner needs profiling which is a different subject! But when I look at the negatives there are both dark areas and light areas, and occasionally areas that look almost transparent. I wouldn't say any look especially "thin" though. But perhaps they are, who knows! I have nothing to compare them against!

FWIW, I would try to contact print your 4x5 negatives; take the scanning variables out of the equation. You may be trying to "fix" something that isn't broken (e.g, your upstream developing/exposing process.)

[Ed Richards]

I have used Xtol for years. I store it in a tank with a floating lid:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/88372-REG/Doran_Plastic_Storage_Tank_2.html

It is relatively cheap and really helps. I put small glass marbles in the bottom to raise level of the bottom to higher than the top of the drain inside the tank. This reduces the volume of developer that is exposed to air when you get near the bottom and the floating lid hangs on the drain.

I used Xtol at 1:3 for years with Tmax 100 in rotary tubes (Jobo expert). Works great. Kodak even had times for it in the older literature. Kodak changed those recommendations about the time it released TMY-2, saying do not dilute it more than 1:1. Since 1:1 saves distilled water and works fine, I did not bother testing TMY-2 with 1:3. I just use the recommended time. My effective ISO is 500, but I follow the advice to put my shadows on Zone 4. You can reduce the time about 20% to compress a high dynamic range scene. I found that I had to pre-soak so I just put the film and prewash for 5 minutes. I also found that I need to fix for about 14 minutes to really get the pink out with TMY-2. I always test a new batch of developer with non-critical negatives. I have one batch give me problems. That was 5 years ago, but they were important negatives.:-(

[Sal Santamaura]

...Don't rotary process with Xtol at higher dilutions than 1+1...Why not? I process sheets in Jobo Expert drums, on a CPP-2, all the time using XTOL 1+3. Stock is mixed using distilled water, then stored in 20 full 250ml amber glass bottles with teflon-lined caps. Dilution at time of use always with distilled water. No problems and great results.

[welly]

Thank you all, some very useful information here. I shall get some shots developed this weekend and post my results!

[Peter De Smidt]

Don't rotary process with Xtol at higher dilutions than 1+1.

I've been successfully using Xtol 1+2 and 1+3 in a Jobo for over a decade.

[welly]

Just further to my "My negatives seem dark when I scan them in!" complaint - I realise this isn't going to be very scientific, accurate and probably impossible to assess on my "iMac screen light box" but :)

http://i.imgur.com/Pm8XpML.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/wCzQRd2.jpg

Tmax 100 exposed at ISO 50. Developed for 7 minutes in D-76 (1:1) using BTZS tubes. From this rather vague and scratchy capture from my iPhone, what do you think? I think I shall do some testing tomorrow as I plan to mix up this Xtol tonight.

[ScottPhotoCo]

How and what did you meter?

Tim
www.ScottPhoto.co

[welly]

How and what did you meter?

Tim
www.ScottPhoto.co

Oh I just used incident metering for this. I was kind of rushed and needed to leave where I was shooting fairly quickly (long-ish story).

[welly]

Actually, here's another scan that was developed at the same time, although it's Foma 100 (at 50). Developed for 6:30. And actually, I felt like I had to do very little to the scan, particularly not whack the gamma or brightness up by several notches! Actually, hardly at all. Oh, the big blob in the middle of the screen is a rain drop. I shot this just as the heavens opened and my camera and myself were utterly soaked.

http://i.imgur.com/VhV37My.jpg

[Michael W]

i've been using Xtol for years. Sydney tap water is fine to mix with. Sometimes I use 1+1, sometimes 1+2 - depends on the film. Both work fine, never had a problem with Xtol and it does give full speed with most films. I'm not familiar with Foma 100 however so 50 might be suitable for that.

[Michael W]

That Tmax neg looks good for shadow detail so I'd say you exposed well. Looks dense in the highlights, but perhaps the main subject was in shade and you had a bright area in the background. Either way I imagine that highlight would print or scan as pure white.
The Palisades scan looks very low contrast. Could have used a bit more exposure and development time based on the scan. The weather wouldn't be helping with the light so flat. Would be helpful to see another neg shot rather than your finished result.

[polyglot]

Why not? I process sheets in Jobo Expert drums, on a CPP-2, all the time using XTOL 1+3. Stock is mixed using distilled water, then stored in 20 full 250ml amber glass bottles with teflon-lined caps. Dilution at time of use always with distilled water. No problems and great results.


I've been successfully using Xtol 1+2 and 1+3 in a Jobo for over a decade.

Fair enough. 1+3 rotary is the only Xtol "failure" I've ever had, though it was a 120 roll in a Jobo. Uneven and very thin. If it works for you, don't let me stop you!


Just further to my "My negatives seem dark when I scan them in!" complaint - I realise this isn't going to be very scientific, accurate and probably impossible to assess on my "iMac screen light box" but :)

http://i.imgur.com/Pm8XpML.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/wCzQRd2.jpg

Tmax 100 exposed at ISO 50. Developed for 7 minutes in D-76 (1:1) using BTZS tubes. From this rather vague and scratchy capture from my iPhone, what do you think? I think I shall do some testing tomorrow as I plan to mix up this Xtol tonight.

Your exposures on those two negs is perfect, you don't need any more or less, i.e. don't change the EI. They're pretty contrasty though, so you could probably use a bit less development. Or maybe you're running the development a bit hot? Reducing development will give you a teensy bit less speed but you have bags of shadow detail there that it won't be a problem.

For reference, you have enough exposure if there is shadow detail where you want it. If there are transparent holes in the neg (which will be blank/black in the print) and you wanted to see something there, then you need more exposure.

If your scans are coming out flat or dark, that's a problem in your selection of the black- and white-points in your scans. There's a (C-41) scan howto in the FAQ in my signature that might help.

[welly]

Your exposures on those two negs is perfect, you don't need any more or less, i.e. don't change the EI. They're pretty contrasty though, so you could probably use a bit less development. Or maybe you're running the development a bit hot? Reducing development will give you a teensy bit less speed but you have bags of shadow detail there that it won't be a problem.

For reference, you have enough exposure if there is shadow detail where you want it. If there are transparent holes in the neg (which will be blank/black in the print) and you wanted to see something there, then you need more exposure.

If your scans are coming out flat or dark, that's a problem in your selection of the black- and white-points in your scans. There's a (C-41) scan howto in the FAQ in my signature that might help.

Most of my negatives are coming out looking fairly similar to that. I do have the occasional dark negative and the occasional thin negative but mostly they generally "look" alright to my eyes. It's been really puzzling why I've often had to crank the gamma in Epson scan up to over 2. It's made me concerned I'm getting my negatives wrong. I'm going to the Richard White organised large format gathering next weekend so I thought I might take a few random negatives with me for some of those guys to take a look at as well.

I'll check out your FAQ and see if I can get some tips there. Thanks very much for your help, really appreciated!