Zone VI Paper Developer Alternative

[jeroldharter]

In a previous post, someone mentioned the demise of Zone VI chemicals. I am working down my stash of Zone VI paper developer which I hate to lose.

I have seen numerous opinions about a suitable replacement along with some contradictions. Some say to just use Dektol but it might be slightly warmer or less contrasty. Some say to use Bromophen as a similar PQ developer but their product info says it is somewhat warm toned. I would like to avoid liquid developers if possible because of shipping cost and oxidation (I used to like Edwal Ultrablack but its shelf life is not great).

I found the Zone VI to be a sharp, contrasty, cold tone developer. What should I buy to replace it? Thanks.

[Drew Wiley]

I don't know of any off-the-shelf direct replacement, but it's easy to mix something
similar from scratch. My formula is a little bit cooler due to the presence of benzotriazole instead of potassium bromide:

hot H20 375ml
sodium sulfite 20g
hydroquinone 10g
sodium carbonate 40g
benzotriazole 1/4g
water to make 500ml

[Drew Wiley]

ooops, forgot the metol 1-1/2 g

[Peter De Smidt]

Until it was discontinued, I used a lot of Zone VI print developer. Since then I've used both Dektol and phenidone/ascorbic acid developers. With a little adjusting, such as adding some benzotriazole to Dektol, both worked well for me with Ilford MG Fiber, but then 99.9% of the time I tone in selenium and a touch of sulfide, and so I wouldn't say my prints are cold-toned.

[Merg Ross]

Have you considered mixing your own? Quick, easy, economical and you will have complete control of color with either the addition of 1% BTA or 10% KBr.

Water
Sod. sulfite
Sod. Carbonate (Arm & Hammer works fine).
Phenidone
Hydroquinone
BTA &/or KBr.

[Mark Sampson]

I faced the same issue a few months ago. I went back to Dektol 1:2, 2 min.@ 68F, just as Kodak recommends. Printing on to Ilford Multigrade IV FB, I can't really see any difference. I find Ilford Multigrade liquid developer to be very slightly warmer than either, still acceptable. I think that using modern cold-tone papers, the developer doesn't make much difference. I tried Ansco 130 from the Formulary, that produces beautiful prints that are subtly different than Z-VI or Dektol prints, but I can't hack the 3-minute developing time.

[jeroldharter]

I faced the same issue a few months ago. I went back to Dektol 1:2, 2 min.@ 68F, just as Kodak recommends. Printing on to Ilford Multigrade IV FB, I can't really see any difference. I find Ilford Multigrade liquid developer to be very slightly warmer than either, still acceptable. I think that using modern cold-tone papers, the developer doesn't make much difference. I tried Ansco 130 from the Formulary, that produces beautiful prints that are subtly different than Z-VI or Dektol prints, but I can't hack the 3-minute developing time.

I mixed up a small package of Dektol tonight and plan to use it side-by-side with the Zone VI tomorrow on Kentmere FP VC paper. I am hoping that is is close enough because Dektol is simple, cheap, and available.

[Merg Ross]

I misunderstood and thought you were seeking a PQ developer.

However, my comment regarding color (tone) will work for an MQ developer as well. Dektol can be modified with the addition of BTA or KBr to produce the tone that you seek.

Mark, the old Ansco 130 is one of my favorites. What dilution and temperature are you using to take 3 minutes? Thanks.

[John Cahill]

I actually might have a pack or two of Zone VI left. I really like it. But I found that I like my own modification of Ansco 103 (not a typo) better. Use standard formulary, but halve the amount of potassium bromide when making the stock solution and substitute 10% benzotriazole in the working solution as needed.

[Drew Wiley]

None of the above gives a true cold tone on Kentmere Fineprint, but instead you will
still have a bit of greenish-brown tone, plain Dektol being the worst offender in this
regard. The silver iodide emulsion of Fineprint is difficult to tame with MQ or PQ
developers. Amidol works superbly, however; and glycin formulas like 130 do very
nicely but won't render quite as cold a tone. There are a number of toning tricks involved too if you want the maximum effect. Great paper. An interesting off-the-shelf dev concentrate you might also want to try is Formulary BW65. I have no idea
how it will react to Fineprint, but it did give amidol-like results with graded papers.

[Gary L. Quay]

I second the Formulary BW65 suggestion. I've recently started using it, and it's quite good.

--Gary

[John Cahill]

I don't know of any off-the-shelf direct replacement, but it's easy to mix something
similar from scratch. My formula is a little bit cooler due to the presence of benzotriazole instead of potassium bromide:

hot H20 375ml
sodium sulfite 20g
hydroquinone 10g
sodium carbonate 40g
benzotriazole 1/4g
water to make 500ml

******************

Since I like cold-tones, I use my modified Ansco 103 to make one liter of stock solution

3.5 g Metol
45 gm Sod Sulfite,
11.5 gm. Hydroquinone
78 gm. Carbonate (mono)
.6 gm Bromide

***********
10% benzotriazole as needed for cold tones and to prevent fog. The bit of bromide, I was told, acts as a buffer to slow warming as the soup is used, since the development process produces bromide. I have used this as a satisfactory replacement for Zone VI paper developer. I dilute the above stock 1:2 for use.

[Doremus Scudder]

Correct me if I'm wrong here, but I was under the impression that the Zone VI print developer was nothing more than repackaged Bromophen. It came in the same two-part mix and seemed the same to me.

I believe Zone VI at the time was also branding Ilford Ilfobrom as Brilliant paper.

IMHO, all the bally-hoo about which developer gives what image tone on what paper is a bit over-emphasized. As mentioned above, you can fine-tune the image tone of many developers by using benzotriazole in place of KBr as the restrainer, or warm up a paper by using more KBr, or use a combination of the two for intermediate tones. I keep bottles of 2% benzotriazole, 10% KBr and 10% NaCarbonate on the shelf and tweak the developer as needed for a given print.

I have a tendency to use split developing techniques using a soft-working and contrasty developers on graded paper. Image tone is often warmer with more time in the soft developer, but it simply tones away in selenium, so I usually don't worry about it so much. That said, I like a bit more selenium toning than neutral black, a touch of warm eggplant in the blacks for most prints, up to almost POP purple for others. I don't think one image tone works for all prints.

At any rate, I still have a stash of Zone VI developer that I am using, so I'm interested in this thread as well. I have also used the BW65, which is very nice, but changes the way some prints selenium tone. Dektol works well and gives (for me anyway) more blacks and correspondingly less shadow detail. However, it's all just a matter of fine tuning during printing to get the print you want.

Best,

Doremus Scudder

[Bruce Barlow]

In 1988 Fred told me, specifically, that Zone VI developer "is Dektol. Why screw around?" The usual Fred candor. I worked for Zone VI at the time, so there was no reason to hide anything.

These days, I add a little Benzotriazole because, having tested, all my papers are subject to a little chemical fog. I get whiter whites with a restrainer. Toning takes out the greenish cast.

[Ken Lee]

The classic formula D-72 is reputed to be quite close to Dektol, if not the same. You can mix your own at a very affordable price.

See http://www.digitaltruth.com/data/kodak_d72.php

The ol in the name of Dektol and similar developers, refers to the popular developing agent Metol (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metol), namely monomethyl-p-aminophenol hemisulfate.

[David Michael Bigeleisen]

I have been using Ilford Bromophen for quite a while. I found it to be a bit more contrasty than zone vi. You might want to give it a try. I think I may have a few packages of zone vi developer lying around. Please let me know if you would like to have them. David

[RichardRitter]

The problem is the Zone VI developer that was made back in the 80's to work with Brilliant paper was not being made in the 90's. Some where in the 90's the formula was changed.

If you have read Bruce's paper/ developer test articles and seem the prints you would know that you need to experiment to find what works best with your paper, shouting style and printing techniques, how you develop the film ect.....

I use a modified version of the 80's developer on Brilliant and use Dektol for every thing else. The Dektol get used at a 1 to 1, to a 1 to 5 mixture. Depends on the image.

Plus I use Benzotriazole, any where from 1/4 oz per quart of working stock to 4 oz per quart. This depends on the paper being use and the subject matter being printed.

[Drew Wiley]

Bruce - I still have some Zone VI packets on hand, and it's definitely not #76 - related
MQ formula but cooler and with a little better shadow separation (as noted already,
to help the blocking of shadows in the late great graded Brilliant bromide paper). I quit
using it when I worked up my above formula for Polygrade V, which doesn't respond
well to either amidol or glycin. But with a couple of my favorite new papers, namely
Kentmere FP and Adox MCC, both amidol and Ansco 130 give much better image color
for me than any MQ or PQ formula.

[Drew Wiley]

Ooops - I meant to say it's not Dektol (not #76).

[Mark Sampson]

i'll agree with Drew about the Z-VI developer, his description fits my experience. But Dektol 1:2 still works well for me, and it's a local product.
Merg, I used A-130 1:1 and it needed 3 minutes in the developer. In my basement darkroom it's rarely above 68 and I'd bet A-130 works better at higher temps. I does look good but in the end, the extra time spent and the added expense made me decide to keep it simple. Since I use selenium toner, I can control the tone color there.
Truth be told, the change from Kodak Polymax Fine-Art to Ilford MG IV FB has been more significant than any changes in the paper developer.

[Bruce Barlow]

Bruce - I still have some Zone VI packets on hand, and it's definitely not #76 - related
MQ formula but cooler and with a little better shadow separation (as noted already,
to help the blocking of shadows in the late great graded Brilliant bromide paper). I quit
using it when I worked up my above formula for Polygrade V, which doesn't respond
well to either amidol or glycin. But with a couple of my favorite new papers, namely
Kentmere FP and Adox MCC, both amidol and Ansco 130 give much better image color
for me than any MQ or PQ formula.

Well, it's your word against Fred's. Fred also said to use ZVI 1:2 rather that the 1:3 in the instructions.

My favorite developer with Forte Polygrade V is Fine Art VersaPrint II, available from the Formulary. It's got glycin. When I showed all my test prints in Monterey at the View Camera conference to quite a collection of photographers, all but Paula Chamlee chose my favorite paper (Polygrade V) and developer (VersaPrint) out of 400 options. It was kinda creepy to see such consistency. It continued the following year in Springfield, Mass.

So I guess I'm quibbling with the Polygrade and glycin statement.

[Drew Wiley]

Bruce - somewhere I have the actual formula for Zone VI, and the level of hydroqu.
is above that of Dektol. Doesn't matter - all one has to do is mix the two and the
effect is distinct once actual prints are made. Don't care what Fred did or didn't say;
but according to a previous post, there were apparently two different generations of
ZVI dev, and I have the latest. I only use it with RC Ilford paper for commercial work,
never for personal prints any more. As far as glycin is concerned, it's used in all kinds of ways, including in BW65. But the popular 130 formula didn't give me what I wanted at all with Polygrade V, especially considering this thread is about cold tone developers
per se. Kinda academic now, however, since this particular paper is out of production,
and all I've got left myself is a 50-sheet box of 20X24.

[Merg Ross]

i'll agree with Drew about the Z-VI developer, his description fits my experience. But Dektol 1:2 still works well for me, and it's a local product.
Merg, I used A-130 1:1 and it needed 3 minutes in the developer. In my basement darkroom it's rarely above 68 and I'd bet A-130 works better at higher temps. I does look good but in the end, the extra time spent and the added expense made me decide to keep it simple. Since I use selenium toner, I can control the tone color there.
Truth be told, the change from Kodak Polymax Fine-Art to Ilford MG IV FB has been more significant than any changes in the paper developer.

Mark, thanks. Yes, Hydroquinone and Glycin perform best above 68. I usually keep the developer betweeen 72 and 75 degrees and go at least 2 minutes. A-130 is still one of my favorites, with slight modification.

[John Bowen]

Well, it's your word against Fred's. Fred also said to use ZVI 1:2 rather that the 1:3 in the instructions.

My favorite developer with Forte Polygrade V is Fine Art VersaPrint II, available from the Formulary. It's got glycin. When I showed all my test prints in Monterey at the View Camera conference to quite a collection of photographers, all but Paula Chamlee chose my favorite paper (Polygrade V) and developer (VersaPrint) out of 400 options. It was kinda creepy to see such consistency. It continued the following year in Springfield, Mass.

So I guess I'm quibbling with the Polygrade and glycin statement.

OK Bruce, I've got to ask......what did Paula prefer?

[jeroldharter]

A couple of times I tested a number of papers blindly to find the one I preferred. On some level, I wanted to prefer some obscure paper which would demonstrate my superior taste. I was, of course, disappointed to prefer Kodak (Polymax FA). Once that died, I did a similar test and found Kentmere FP VC. It was more by habit that I use the Zone VI developer and I always got good results with it so no reason to change. I just compared it side by side to Dektol. To my eye, the tones with Dektol are slightly colder and less contrasty untoned, and nearly indistinguishable toned. So I guess that plain old Dektol will be good enough for me.

Thanks for all of the lively conversation though. I might try Bromophen and the PF developer (? BW65 - I bought a bottle years ago and never got around to using it - I prefer powder developers).

[Bruce Barlow]

John B: Paula liked Ilford Galerie Grade 2, and I don't remember which developer.

Drew: Totally agree about 130 - it's nice if you like warm. VersaPrint iis reasonably cold, so there's something afoot other than glycin. I will say that 130 and VersaPrint last forever, and when I tried different dilutions, I couldn't tell any difference, so the economics versus Dektol can be mitigated. How much Polygrade do you have in your freezer? I have a bunch.

[Anthony Oresteen]

Bruce - somewhere I have the actual formula for Zone VI, and the level of hydroqu.
i......

Drew, can you post it? Thanks!