PDA

View Full Version : ID11 Recipe



kev curry
3-Apr-2010, 00:09
I've been looking around for the recipe for ID11 but cant find it. I'm now beginning to wonder if its a commercial secret? I can find the recipe for D76 but my understanding is that in spite of some common misconceptions they are not the same.
I develop in tubes and my times are all down for ID11 so I don't want to change anything, I just want to mix my own chemicals.
Anyone know if the recipe is available?

IanG
3-Apr-2010, 03:27
The published Formulae for D76 and ID-11 are identical, as are Defender 6, Foma FV3, Forte FD20, Foton N12 and a few others.

However there are very minor differences in the commercially available products, these have very little or no effect on normal usage and are tweaks to the buffering for use in replenishment systems.

Ian

kev curry
3-Apr-2010, 03:36
Thanks Ian. Right, so you reckon that I could use all my EI/dev times that I established for Ilfords ID11 without any change?

IanG
3-Apr-2010, 03:44
Should be no problem at all.

Ian

kev curry
3-Apr-2010, 03:46
Cheers Ian

neil poulsen
3-Apr-2010, 09:08
I don't know about this. Take a look at the published recommended development times for both, and they're different for the same film.

As much as I want to support Ilford, I'm redoing my calibrations for D76, because I'll get shorter development times when mixing 1:1. D76 comes across as a stronger developer, so I conclude that D76 will better support expanding contrast.

For example, take a look at the following link.

http://www.ilfordphoto.com/Webfiles/2006216122447.pdf

Ilford recommends developing HP5 Plus (ASA400) for 13 minutes in ID11(1:1) and for 11 minutes in D76(1:1).

kev curry
3-Apr-2010, 09:44
That I think speaks for its self then...they are different! I'd really need to treat D76 as a different developer and carry out new tests accordingly if I wanted to mix my own chems.
Thanks for pointing that out Neil.

IanG
3-Apr-2010, 10:31
I don't know about this. Take a look at the published recommended development times for both, and they're different for the same film.

As much as I want to support Ilford, I'm redoing my calibrations for D76, because I'll get shorter development times when mixing 1:1. D76 comes across as a stronger developer, so I conclude that D76 will better support expanding contrast.

For example, take a look at the following link.

http://www.ilfordphoto.com/Webfiles/2006216122447.pdf

Ilford recommends developing HP5 Plus (ASA400) for 13 minutes in ID11(1:1) and for 11 minutes in D76(1:1).

Ilford & Kodak publish times based on differing criteria so take Neil's comments as a pinch of salt.

In practice they work in the same way, and are interchangeable with each other and the published formulae.

Ian

kev curry
3-Apr-2010, 11:02
When I get through my stock of ID11 I'll mix my own from scratch and see what happens.
Thanks for the input.

Pete Watkins
3-Apr-2010, 12:01
Kev,
I'm getting good results with D-76H home brewed. Used 1-1 with Foma 100 or 200 8 1/2 minutes. Keeps me happy 'till I start messing with Pyrocat again.
Pete.

CG
3-Apr-2010, 12:55
IanG won't steer you wrong. He has a very good grip on Ilford and Kodak formulas (and much else).

The published home brew formulas for ID-11 and D-76 are identical. Their factory made pre-packaged products have slight proprietary twists that make them easier to mix from the package. Ilford's and Kodak's store bought powderpacks differ slightly but act very, very similarly when mixed.

Both published formulas are thus:

Water. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .750 ml
Metol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 g
Sodium Sulphite anhyd . . . 100 g
Hydroquinone . . . . . . . . . 5 g
Borax . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 g
Water to . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 L

The replenishers are identical also:

Water. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .750 ml
Metol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3 g
Sodium Sulphite anhyd . . . 100 g
Hydroquinone . . . . . . . . . 7.5 g
Borax . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20 g
Water to . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 L

neil poulsen
3-Apr-2010, 19:17
Ilford & Kodak publish times based on differing criteria so take Neil's comments as a pinch of salt.

In practice they work in the same way, and are interchangeable with each other and the published formulae.

Ian

From the link, both of these development times (D76 & ID11 at the same dilution and temperature) are provided by Ilford on the same Ilford film. They are directly comparable.

IanG
4-Apr-2010, 03:23
From the link, both of these development times (D76 & ID11 at the same dilution and temperature) are provided by Ilford on the same Ilford film. They are directly comparable.

Yet again - Ilford & Kodak give figures for slightly different processing criteria they DON'T use the same testing methods or contrast indexes, so your reading too much into their data. What's more important is the inter-changeability in use which was the reason ID-11 plus was discontinued a few years ago in the US market and the formula reverted back to the original.

Ian .

IanG
4-Apr-2010, 03:31
Kev,
I'm getting good results with D-76H home brewed. Used 1-1 with Foma 100 or 200 8 1/2 minutes. Keeps me happy 'till I start messing with Pyrocat again.
Pete.

Pete, D76H is a misnomer based on a much earlier Easrman Kodak Research formula published in 1927, it's not a Kodak formula and would be better called H76 (Haist).

From the 1928 British Journal Photographic Almanac, whether the unit of volume is UK or US isn't given.

Eastman Kodak Research Fine Grain Developer 1927

For Fine grain. - A developer recommended by the Eastman Kodak Research Laboratories for use when images of specially fine grain are required is as follows:-

Metol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 gr (2g)
Sodium Sulphite (anhyd) . . . . . . 400gr (100g)
Borax . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 gr (2g)
Water to . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 ozs *** (If US oz 1600ml - UK 1540ml)

The developer works more slowly than those of normal formula. - A.P., May 25, p. 504.

This seems to be one of the earliest published Fine Grain developer from Kodak.

It's far more likely that the volume is US, particularly as the formula emanates from Rochester not Kodak Research, Harrow, but the difference is quite negligible. This formula pre-dates D76 and is quite similar to D103 and DK76 & DK76b, although more dilute.

D76h is a "Kodak" buffered Borax variation of D76

Metol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2.5 g
Sodium Sulphite anhyd . . . 100 g
Hydroquinone . . . . . . . . . 5 g
Borax . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 g
Boric Acid . . . . . . . . . . . .15 g
Water to . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 litre

The misnaming causes confusion

Ian