Kodak D-76

[Victorio Galindo]

hijust one simple question i have just bought kodak d 76 p. powder to make liquid developer , the problem is i don't want to use it all at one go since i don't shoot much in films and want to use it sparingly i read somewhere that the time span of this developer is not more than 4 month after developing it.what if i want to make only the required quantity for one or two roll of film at a time

Thanks in advance

4:55AM, 17 October 2014 PDT(permalink)

Fotohuis (Robert):

there is one more question what should be quantity of water if i want to make the whole stock ?i mean one liter of water, two liter of water or more ?

119 months ago(permalink)

I have been using D-76 again for the last few months. I have been buying the 1L size (yes it's a bit more expensive compared to the 3.8L size packet) but it it just the right amount. I make up the 1L of stock and using it one to one I get 4 batches of film out of it. Depending on 120 or 35mm I usually get 4-8 rolls of film. For $5 not a bad deal. It would be more economical to use the 3.8 L size but until recently I was only using it occasionally. I might start getting it in the larger size because it has become my go to.

119 months ago(permalink)

I agree that the good advice is to not split the powder in small portions. However, I did that with other (Agfa) developers in the past with no bad results.

In fact, one doesn't recommend to split the entire powder quantity because it isn't a single substance but a mixture of various substances. That's why, it is probable that the proportions aren't exactly preserved in the upper and lower part of the bag, due to transportation vibration etc.

I personally would consider this risk rather small. Packaging is quite tight, leaving no much liberty for movement to the content. In case I have to split the 1 gallon package, I would try to mix well the content by reversing the bag 15-20 times before opening it, I would try to precisely split the content (I think it is marked 415 grams but I would check it myself), and (very important) I would try to store the unused quantity to well closed glass cans. In the past I did use the small plastic boxes from the film cans for small quantities (especially Kodak and Agfa boxes). Of course, as I told this is just a personal thought, not the "best" practice.

Originally posted 119 months ago. (permalink)

mindraster edited this topic 119 months ago.

Go to this link and click 'download' at the top right to get to the d-76 single batch calculator. This is not mine, somebody else sent it to me. You'll need a weight scale that measures in grams.

It's worked great for me, but I make no guarantees explicit or implied. Your mileage may vary. Void where prohibited, except as allowed by law. Past performance not a guarantee of future results.

119 months ago(permalink)

If making D76 from scratch you can do every volume for making a stock. If making from a package you have to use the whole content because it is impossible to mix all 4-5 ingredients homogenius.

When making 1 liter start with 800ml dissolving the powder and then fill up till 1 liter (1000ml). The powder takes space too (intermolucular) otherwise you will end with 1,1 liter volume. The same for 3,8 ltr. Start with 3,4 liter and fill up till 3,8 liter.

In this way you have to make all powder stock solutions.

119 months ago(permalink)

Fotohuis (Robert) with all due respects to your vast experience in film I think if you examine the contents of a d76 package you will see a very uniform distribution. This is by process design and not by chance mixing of raw chemicals. Without the manufacturing technology D76 would have to be a 2 part mix like ID-11. This pelletizing of a mix of chemicals is well beyond the scope of the home chemist.

I'm not saying it's perfect but it's close enough for all but the most critical low volume users and certainly better than most of us can mix small amounts of chemistry let alone find small quantities to purchase at a reasonable price.

Originally posted 119 months ago. (permalink)

Metrix X edited this topic 119 months ago.

I was just wondering why everyone seems to hate D-76 developer? I have

used Perceptal and D-76 and no matter what they 'say' haven't seen much

of a difference, except perceptal took twice as long. Grain was the same

for the same film, exposed the same and of the same subject (18% gray card)

Some people, I believe, continue to use it because they like its "look," always

a valid consideration. Otherwise, I'm not sure what technical considerations

would keep this developer on the market. I invite response from them which

etc.Until Xtol came along, my primary b&w developer for decades was D 76. Although

occassionally seduced by some other product, I would eventually return to D 76,

and at length, except for specialty and push-processing brews, stayed with it.

While particular developers could best it on a single criterion, such as

sharpness, grain etc., as an overall balance of qualities, D 76 had no

superior. Xtol, however, has seemingly squared the circle with finer grain,

greater sharpness and increased film speed, compared with D 76, so I switched.

But when the lights go on again, the difference is really slight. I can't

imagine why anyone would hate D 76. Allen Zak

I live in a metropolitan area that includes the capital of the state of New

York. 500,000 souls live here, more or less. Until last week, we had one

decent camera store, and a bunch of Ritz Camera/one-hour places.Last Thursday, the good store, where I have been doing business for more

than 30 years, closed to move to a new location. Yup - relocating their

darkroom department, their outstanding selection of Nikon and Hassleblad

equipment, their collection of antique wooden cameras.Yesterday, I visited the new store - I was the first customer through the

door. Looks just like a Ritz Camera now. One hour machine, lots of promo's

for Kodak color, but no darkroom stuff any more. No Nikons, no

Hassleblads - just junk.So the problem is that I can't try Naaco whatever, cuz I can't buy it!

Sure, I may be able to mail-order - but then, I spent half an hour scouring

the B&H web site today for something that I know they have but couldn't

find.

"Ron" wrote in message

news:k7CK7.109717$XA5.18...@typhoon.nyc.rr.com...

Same here. I've used D-76 and it works fine. I've used the liquid ilford HC

developers and they work good too. rodinal is alos good. The only deveolper

I hated was ilfosol-s and only because all I ever got was negs that were

too thin to print no matter how long I tried to develop them!--

Stephe

Where I live, you don't get the 1qt or 1/2gal packs. The darn thing

dilutes to 3.8 litres - that's a storage problem and it's bound to get

oxidised before I use it all up. I use ID-11 or HC-110 instead.

>One alternative is to buy the chemicals and make up what you need as you need it.

>

>Francis A. MiniterExactly. Another would be to make up a concentrate and

store it in small glass bottles. Rodinal wasn't the only

high concentration developer. In fact it should be hard to

make up a 2X concentrate of D-23. It could be diluted 1:5

and would probably store quite well.

I have had mixed 3.8, 1/2 full bottles of D-76 last for over a year. It

did, it worked near full strength when I used it. I dont think you can

mix portions of the 3.8 liter package as you need it for it is a powder

and measuring the powder will give undesirable, nonconsistant results.

I think Sprint uses Phenidone in all their developers. The whole

line is intended for institutional or school use where the least

hazard of toxicity is desired. Phenidone has a much lower occurance of

alergic reaction than Metol, so Sprint tends not to use Metol in its

formulas.

Ilford also uses Phenidone in many of its packaged formulas.

Microphen is essentially a Phenidone version of buffered D-76. The

difference is a slight gain in film speed and slightly larger grain.

DDX is a liquid concentrate version of Microphen.

Bromophen is an Ilford print developer which is essentially a

Phenidone version of Dektol. Again, slight differences, Bromophen

tends to produce slightly cooler tones and has slightly greater

capacity.

I don't have the MSDS for Sprint chemicals but the ingredients list

on the containers suggest they are not much different from the Ilford

products.

---

Richard Knoppow

Los Angeles, CA, USA.

dick...@ix.netcom.com

I can't say that I hate D.76 with a passion but I do like to be able

to control the environment.D.76's introduction was literally revolutionary when introduced as it

resulted in 35mm negatives with reduced grain at no cost to the speed

of the emulsion.D76 relies upon a large quantity (almost to saturation limit) of

Sodium Sulphite to perform the triple role of preservative, alkali, &

silver halide solvent. This is essentially the "break through" that

was D76What are D.76's historic problems:1.The PH of a freshly made up solution will actually rise with

age resultin in variability of development.2.The enormous amount of Sodium Sulphite means that this

developer is not at all useful as either a compensating developer or

an acutance developer. The Sodium Sulphite prevents proportional

exhaustion of the developer in over-exposed areas (eg sky without

yellow or orange filtering) so that development "keeps going"

resulting in what has been termed "solvent blocking".The silver halide solvent properties of Sodium Sulphite also prevent

crisp sharp edge effects characteistic of Pyrogallol or Pyrocatectin.The formulas below offer a very good alternative to continuing to use

"off the shelf" products as the offer a great deal of control for the

circumstances and the film.The DK50 without the alkali is also an excellent two bath developer.

I have been using modified versions of DK-50 for many years with

excellent results achieved from a variety of films.I have been able to achieve very good results using:AGFA APX-25

Kodak TMAX-100

Kodak Plus-X

Kodak TRI-X

Ilford Delta-100

Ilford PANF+There are three formulas that I use, of note however is that apart

from one formula I leave out the alkali and make up as a more

conentrated developer.The original kodak DK-50 formula is;Metol = 2.5grams

Hydroquinone = 2.5grams

Sodium Sulphite [anh] = 30grams

Sodium Metaborate [Kodalk] =10grams

Potassium Bromide 0.5grams

Water to 1.0 LitresMy variants are:Formula #1Metol = 2.5grams

Hydroquinone = 2.5grams

Sodium Sulphite [anh] = 30grams

Potassium Bromide 0.5grams

Potassium Chloride =15grams

Water to 500mlFormula #2Metol = 2.5grams

Hydroquinone = 2.5grams

Potassium Metabisulphite = 5grams

Potassium Bromide 0.5grams

Water to 250mlFormula #3Phenidone = 0.2grams

Hydroquinone = 2.5grams

Sodium Sulphite [anh] = 30grams

Sodium Carbonate = 15grams

Borax [Sodium Tetraborate] = 10grams

Potassium Bromide 0.5grams

Water to 1.0 Litres

Alkali SolutionsAlkali Solution #1Sodium Carbonate [anh] = 37.5 grams

Water to 500mlAlkali solution #2Sodium Carbonate 37.5grams

Borax = 10grams

Water to 500ml

The above three variants on the original Kodak formula allow much

greater control depending and allow the developer to be tailored to a

particular film or circustances (ie push or compensating)Formula #2 is an excellent compensating developer with edge effect

enhancement due to the absence of Sodium Sulphite. Without the

sulphite it is much less likely that highlight blocking will occur as

the developer will be more readily exhausted where a large amount of

silver bromide is to be reduced.In the case of formula #1, the typical developer to water dilution is

about 1 part developer to 9 parts water. I usualy make up 1litres of

working solution so this equates to 100ml of developer stock to 900ml

of water.In the case of formula #2 only 50ml of developer stock is required due

to the increase concentration.The amount of alkali solution will vary depending upon the film type

and the contrast required. A good starting point with Alkai solution

#1 is 40ml of alkali solution added to the 1+9 developer solution.Development times would start at say 6 minutes and range to 9 minutes

depending upon film type and contrast required.Formula #3 works best with AGFA films as I find these films seem to

need much more "aggressive" development. The Ilford films produce the

highest contrast and the Kodak would be between the Agfa and Ilford.The addition of Potassium Chloride considerably helps to reduce grain

clumping and hence "graininess".The compounded Sodium Carbonate + Borax alkali has very good buffering

qualities and also can reduce the clumping of grains due to in part to

the reduced PH.I hope to publish more details because I do find these formulas

produce very consistent and quite pleasing results with very good

tonality, if in particular reliability is what you value then these

formulas are very reliable.In the past I would have only used Pyrogallol but the cost of Pyro and

the inconsistent results are something that can be quite troublesome.

I loathe the pre made up formulas, in particular HC110 as you are left

with no control.

3a8082e126