Dektol 1:2 or 1:3?

[Sam G]

After using Ilford paper developer for a few years, I have recently tried
Dektol and have been satisfied with the results. An article in the recent
Camera Arts suggested using 1:3 dilution but I noted that most writers on
this group use 1:2. Can anyone speak to the differences (other than cost)
between the use of these dilutions?
Thanks,
Sam

[Sam G]

[Mike King]

I use 1+3 all the time. It gives me a deeper solution level in my tray for
the same amount of stock solution and a slightly longer processing time. I
routinely process RC prints for 90 seconds and FB prints for 2 to 2 1/2
minutes depending on the paper--some papers I'll go as long as 3 minutes.

On the downside a quart of 1+3 working solution will have a lesser print
capacity than a quart of 1+2 dilution simple because there is less
developing agent in the same volume of water. That's all right for the way
I work, your mileage may vary.

--
darkroommike
......................
"Sam G" <jean...@iserv.net> wrote in message
news:97Sx8.53129$To6.16...@e420r-atl1.usenetserver.com...

[Michael A. Covington (Portable computer)]

"Sam G" <jean...@iserv.net> wrote in message
news:97Sx8.53129$To6.16...@e420r-atl1.usenetserver.com...

Dektol 1:3 will be used up sooner and will work a little slower.

[Sam G]

[John]

I use 1:1. Why ? Well it's more stable than the higher dilutions. When
using the 1:2 dilution, I found that I had occasionally exhausted the developers
capacity to develop a good dmax.

Regards

John S. Douglas, Photographer
http://www.darkroompro.net

[Todd F. Carney]

"Michael A. Covington \(Portable computer\)"

> Dektol 1:3 will be used up sooner . . .

Michael--

Are you sure about this? It's my understanding that it's the amount
of *stock* solution available in the dilution, rather than the rate of
dilution, that determines capacity. I've never actually come close to
using up a tray of Dektol--it goes bad too fast. Have you experienced
less capacity in greater dilutions?

Todd Carney
Eugene, Oregon

[Dan Quinn]

RE: Sam G 4/25/02
How about 1:9? Prints were coming out OK but took twice the time.
An error had been made in dilution. Lots of control. Dan

[Mike King]

8 oz of stock will make 24 oz at 1+2 or 32 oz at 1+3 but the capacity of the
8 oz of stock remains the same. Which was what I was trying to say no
matter how badly I tried to say it. The big advantage of the higher
solution is slightly longer processing times and greater depth of solution
in the tray for the same amount of stock solution nice when struggling to
soup 3 or 4 fiber base prints at the same time.

--
darkroommike
......................
"Todd F. Carney" <tca...@fcb-research.com> wrote in message
news:3aadd1f4.0204...@posting.google.com...

[Francis A. Miniter]

Hi Sam,

I use 1:2 most times, though I have to confess that as every use of developer
depletes the contents of the tray, at the end of the printing session I add
some water to keep the bottle filled. So, eventually I am probably closer to
1:2.3 or so.

I refrigerate my D72 to prevent oxidation. And it never seems to go bad from
oxidation. What I have noticed is what John Douglas commented on, namely that
after a number of prints you cannot get a good DMax, but that usually takes
quite a number. There appears to be no easy way to predict when this will
happen.

It was my understanding that the dilution of Dektol (D72) affects contrast.
Has anyone actually checked that out?

Francis A. Miniter

[Francis A. Miniter]

If you want to try a slow but very fine process, use Dassonville D-3 at
1:15 dilution. Printing times are from 3 to 7 minutes, but the image is
self-toned and fine-grained.

Francis A. Miniter

[Richard Knoppow]

"Sam G" <jean...@iserv.net> wrote:

1:3 will give you slightly longer development times and lower
capacity.
At one time recommended dilutions for D-72 (the published formula
for Dektol) varied from 1:1 to 1:4 depending on the use. 1:2 is about
right for general use although 1:1 will have longer tray life. The
higher dilutions were suggested mainly for warm tone paper but at 1:4
Dmax will begin to suffer a little.
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA.
dick...@ix.netcom.com

[Mike King]

Someone put this one to rest a while back (sorry I can't cite the article),
since paper is mostly developed to completion contrast should not be
affected by developer dilution, the only thing that should change is the
time to complete development--OTOH I suspect that overdevelopment or greatly
extended development with highly dilute developers may actually lower
contrast as fog levels creep up.

--
darkroommike
......................
"Francis A. Miniter" <min...@attglobal.net> wrote in message
news:3CC9798E...@attglobal.net...

[Ralph W. Lambrecht]

Sam

You may check Richard Henry's book 'Controls in B&W Photography for the final
word on this, but inb a nutshell.

Weaker dilutions will produce a lower max density, and they will have a
shorter life span. However, there is little difference between 1+2 and 1+3.

Ralph W. Lambrecht

[Jean-David Beyer]

Mike King wrote:
>
> Someone put this one to rest a while back (sorry I can't cite the article),
> since paper is mostly developed to completion contrast should not be
> affected by developer dilution, the only thing that should change is the
> time to complete development--OTOH I suspect that overdevelopment or greatly
> extended development with highly dilute developers may actually lower
> contrast as fog levels creep up.
>

Doctor Richard J. Henry tested Dektol at various dilutions. He printed
a step wedge with controlled exposure and plotted the D/H curve of the
prints with varying dilutions of developer. The results were:

He got a Dmax of 2.4 under the test conditions with stock solution of
Dektol.
He also got DMax of 2.4 at dilutions of 1+1 and 1+2.
But at 1+3, Dmax dropped to about 2.33 (this may not be visible to the
naked eye).
At 1+5, Dmax dropped to about 2.26. At 1+10, Dmax dropped to about
2.2. At 1+15, Dmax dropped to about 2.1.

Since this is plots of step wedge contact printed on paper, you can
estimate the contrast from the spacing of the densities of the various
steps of the wedge. To my naked eye, except for the two darkest (on
the print) zones, the contrast is constant as a function of dilution.

--
.~. Jean-David Beyer Registered Linux User 85642.
/V\ Registered Machine 73926.
/( )\ Shrewsbury, New Jersey http://counter.li.org
^^-^^ 5:20pm up 4 days, 14:53, 3 users, load average: 2.01, 1.97, 1.68

[Mike King]

With no knowledge of the processing times for these results I would suspect
that for all practical purposes 1+3 is the highest dilution I would ever use
in the darkroom and that then for practical purposes there is no difference
in density for all the dilution's one would realistically use with Dektol.
I am unable to visually distinguish a dMax of 2.4 from a dMax of 2.33. For
the higher dilution's did the dMax diminish or the dMin increase (increased
fog--as I also surmised?)?

--
darkroommike
......................
"Jean-David Beyer" <jdb...@exit109.com> wrote in message
news:3CCB18D7...@exit109.com...

[bopab...@gmail.com]

As far as consistent processing, see Ansel Adam's book, "The Print", on the use of factorial development. When the image first begins to appear, note the time. As you process additional prints, you extend developing time accordingly.