D-23 or D-76

[norm the storm]

Hi

I know, bad news for Kodak and all argentic lovers.

Probably it will be easy to make ourself the equivalent or to find the equivalent with
other brand.

What do you prefer for the dynamic range D-23 or D-76?

[ROL]

Hi

I know, bad news for Kodak and all argentic lovers.

Probably it will be easy to make ourself the equivalent or to find the equivalent with
other brand.

What do you prefer for the dynamic range D-23 or D-76?

It seems to me you'll find more "dynamic range", however you meant it to be understood, in film types. Be that as it may, neither floats my boat as well as pyro, XTOL, Rodinal, etc.

[John Kasaian]

I thought most Kodak photo chemicals have long been produced by outside suppliers? As far as D-76 and Xytol goes, lots of companies are making those under different names. The Freestyle catalogue sorts this out so you don't have to:) If you want to roll your own, arm yourself with Stephen Anchell's Cookbook and check out Formulary for the chemistry.:D

[Drew Wiley]

Well, once again ... Kodak's reorganization does not equate to their extinction. But anyway, there are so many film developers out there at the moment that it can be
almost bewildering to a beginner. Photographers Formulary is also a good place to buy them, or you can easily mix your own. 76 is probably a little more versatile for most.
Formulary has a buffered variety which doesn't vary as much over its storage life as
Kodak's version. 23 has more silver-solvent effect and is perhaps not as crisp with
fine detail. I don't personally use either anymore. Just depends on your film and expectations.

[Jay DeFehr]

Formulary has a buffered variety which doesn't vary as much over its storage life as
Kodak's version.


Kodak's version has been buffered since...the '40s? Earlier? How complaints linger!

[John Kasaian]

So true! Ansco 130 is still A-130 and can be had from Formulary and I think, Bostick & Sullivan even though the real New York Ansco company is deader that King Tut and the latest Ansco labelled stuff I've seen is chinese plastic toy camera kerfluffle.
D-76 or XYTOL by any other name should still smell the same as the stuff in yellow. Even Rodinal and other Agfa staples are still being manufactured.

[BetterSense]

I like D23, but I find it costs me 1 stop of real shadow speed. So I use it in the summer.

I never liked D76 anyway. Xtol is better.

[Drew Wiley]

Jay - FACT: Kodak 76 needs time to reach equilibrium. Freshly mixed stock behaves differently from product a week to several months old. FACT. I've done hundereds of
contrast masks with this developer and know exactly the outcome, and its an appreciable distinction. You standardize one way or the other.

[Ken Lee]

You might find this article (http://www.kenleegallery.com/html/tech/D-23.php) interesting, particularly this portion, which quotes Stephen Anchel in the Darkroom Cookbook (emphasis mine):

Anchel mentions that many general-purpose developers contain 2 developing agents, like D-76 which uses Metol and Hyrdoquinone: the two agents together, work better than one alone. This is known as Superadditivity. However....

"... it would seem that the best developers to use are those that exhibit superadditive characteristics. Most general-purpose developers fall into this category. However, there is a flip side. Most developers that utilize this effect tend to yield greater high-value density than those that rely on one developing agent. A developer of the semi-compensating type using either metol or pyro alone in a solution of relatively low pH, is capable of producing brilliant high values, full-scale mid-tones and shadows (e.g. Kodak D-23 and Kodak D-1, ABC Pyro, especially Edward Weston's variation)." - pp. 42

"Kodak D-23 This is a semi-compensating developer that produces fine shadow values while retaining a high emulsion speed... Note: This developer produces negatives of speed and graininess comparable to Kodak D-76, without D-76's tendency to block highlights. " - pp. 150

[Tim Meisburger]

I like D76 for Shanghai, and dislike Rodinal (go figure). I currently use D23 because I can get the chemicals here, can easily mix it as needed,and because it is supposed to be very similar to D76. Ansel Adams used it (sometimes) so it should be good enough for my poor work.

[Jay DeFehr]

Jay - FACT: Kodak 76 needs time to reach equilibrium. Freshly mixed stock behaves differently from product a week to several months old. FACT. I've done hundereds of
contrast masks with this developer and know exactly the outcome, and its an appreciable distinction. You standardize one way or the other.

Drew,

FACT. Neither of your facts support your contention about buffering in alternative formulations of D-76 compared to the commercial product.

OPINION. Your style of discussion is unnecessarily aggressive and absolutist.

[Drew Wiley]

I've compared them Jay. What you call "absolutist" is absolutely right if people like me
don't want to have to waste countless hours repeating work because of a mere generalization. No big deal. One just standardizes. Pick a time. Use 76 right after mixing, or one day later, or wait for about a week, full glass bottles, OK for about 6 mo.
This was a big deal way back when Kodak started pushing TMax in the first place and
folks were having trouble, and John Sexton went around explaining the problem with
76. No big secret.

[IanG]

I've compared them Jay. What you call "absolutist" is absolutely right if people like me
don't want to have to waste countless hours repeating work because of a mere generalization. No big deal. One just standardizes. Pick a time. Use 76 right after mixing, or one day later, or wait for about a week, full glass bottles, OK for about 6 mo.
This was a big deal way back when Kodak started pushing TMax in the first place and
folks were having trouble, and John Sexton went around explaining the problem with
76. No big secret.

And remember Johns Sexton's articles ( the ones I have) were before Tmax was released to the piblic.

I think Kodak only changed the buffering of D76 in the 60's or 70's and it's needed most when the dev is used 1+1 or 1+3 but helps as well in replenished systems. Ilford also changed the buffering in ID-11.

These devs all need at least 12 hours to equlibilise after mixing, if not the results are harsher grain, not as tonal, seasoning eliminates this and if not they settle after 4 or 5 films.

Ian

[Drew Wiley]

Certain applications are way fussier than general shooting. About all I used 76 for in
recent years was masking, where the toe quality at low contrast was very fussly. So
no guesses here. HC-110 is more predicatable, so I've switched over.

[ki6mf]

D 76 is a personal preference! However I think it may not matter that much. Knowing how to do film speed test and figure out how shortening or lengthening development time to alter contrast can be achieved with most developers can be achieved with most developers.

[Drew Wiley]

A nice substitute for D23 is Ilford Perceptol. It's not a published formula so I don't know
how chemically similar they are, but it can be used to obtain very similar effects, though perhaps a bit sharper.

[Lenny Eiger]

Hi

I know, bad news for Kodak and all argentic lovers.

Probably it will be easy to make ourself the equivalent or to find the equivalent with
other brand.

What do you prefer for the dynamic range D-23 or D-76?

What is you application? Do you print in the darkroom? Do you like to scan? Do you print high contrast, medium or low?

None of your questions can be answered until you specify the above criteria....

Best,

Lenny

[John Berry]

zonal pro, Gama plus developer at 20:1 is similar to d-23.

[Pete Watkins]

My preference is for D-76h. I've used it for a few years now. The formula is in the cookbook.
I have a formula for Perceptol (I used this stuff for years with 35mm) that came from Apug. There is a loss of film speed with Perceptol though, OK with 35mm but not for me with f9 LF lenses.
Pete.

[IanG]

Kodak D76h is just a variation of the buffering of D76 plus the Metol is increased to 2.5g and there's 15 g of Boric acid. The Hydroquinone remains at 5g,

Kodak published their first Fine Grain developer back in 1927

Eastman Kodak Research Fine Gran 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 (1600ml)

This seems to be one of the earliest published Fine Grain developer from Kodak. D76 was published around the same time but at that pont was only recommended for use with cine processing.

Ian

[Sal Santamaura]

Kodak D76h is just a variation of the buffering of D76 plus the Metol is increased to 2.5g and there's 15 g of Boric acid. The Hydroquinone remains at 5g...Incorrect.

D-76H:

750 ml water at 125 degrees F
2.5 g Metol
100 g Sodium Sulfite
2 g Borax
cold water to make 1 liter.

[Bruce Osgood]

I've been a fan of D-76 for a few years and am considering trying D-23 if only to gain a better control over blank skys'. Additionally I've been using an acid free processing of Stop and TF-4 Fixing which I am pleased with.

My hesitation in trying D-23 is a potential scum left on the neg without the acid Stop/Fix routine. Do you who use D-23 work in an acid free process?

Thanks,

[Ken Lee]

Do you who use D-23 work in an acid free process?

Yes. Plain water for stop bath, and TF-3 Alkaline Fixer (http://www.digitaltruth.com/data/tf3.php).

With an alkaline fixer, there is no need for Hypo Clear. There is less washing, less water used.

[Bob McCarthy]

Tablet films = Pyrocat

Standard films = D23

Long scale = D23 two bath

D23 loses a little film speed to D76, but I sure like the highlights better.

bob

[Drew Wiley]

I'd agree that Perceptol slows the film speed, but it gave me better results with modern films like FP4. What D-23 was nice for was divided dev, going between a tray
of dev and one with just a Kodalk solution. With somewhat thicker emulsion films you
could get something analogous to water-bath dev, but much more reliable. For general
shooting I gave up on all the above (including 76) once I started using pyro - just so
much easier to print.

[Renato Tonelli]

I have read that D23 is not recommended rotary processors like Jobo - fact or fiction?

[John Dey]

I use D-23 for night time photography. Scenes were there is huge dynamic range and the light source might be in the image like a street light or store sign. D-23 holds the high values very well while having great shadow detail. My experience is that the developer has more grain than D-76. I am indifference about the loss of speed since my exposures are already measured in seconds and dealing with reciprocity failure. But only D-23 gives me a printable negative with night scenes. D-23 is a good tool to have in your dark room. But my favorite developer for daily use is D76 1:1.

[IanG]

Incorrect.

D-76H:

750 ml water at 125 degrees F
2.5 g Metol
100 g Sodium Sulfite
2 g Borax
cold water to make 1 liter.

This isn't a Kodak formula and it's not D76h it is however mistakenly called D76H but is not one of the variations of D76 published by Kodak themselves.

Ian

[Sal Santamaura]

This isn't a Kodak formula and it's not D76h it is however mistakenly called D76H but is not one of the variations of D76 published by Kodak themselves...Certainly not published by Kodak. Proposed by Grant Haist, for whom it's named. When someone on a forum refers to D-76H, one can count on it being the formula I posted.

See here:

http://books.google.com/books?id=EGQQFr__Q5MC&pg=PA42&lpg=PA42&dq=grant+haist+d-76h&source=bl&ots=HodW0HlWxK&sig=GWX-NUZs2Nq-J0FjXPI6FPllxbc&hl=en&sa=X&ei=VWYxT6bEKqGW2AWzu5jUBw&ved=0CEAQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=grant%20haist%20d-76h&f=false

[Greg Blank]

I am not sure why that would be, I've processed in the Jobo using D-23 and D76. D23 produces less contrast than D76, YMMV. I've gotten good results with D23.


I have read that D23 is not recommended rotary processors like Jobo - fact or fiction?

[Renato Tonelli]

Greg - Thank you. I had read conflicting information, some of it claiming that D23 was not suitable for constant agitation.