Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Rangefinder Forum > Image Processing: Darkroom / Lightroom / Film > Analog DarkRoom / Printing

View Poll Results: D76 or XTOL
D76 160 44.20%
XTOL 202 55.80%
Voters: 362. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

Old 01-28-2015   #201
emmef2
Registered User
 
emmef2's Avatar
 
emmef2 is offline
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 116
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ranchu View Post
Just wanted to share this cool thing again. There are different developers on the top right.
Great find!
thanks
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-28-2015   #202
Fotohuis
Registered User
 
Fotohuis's Avatar
 
Fotohuis is offline
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: the Netherlands, sometimes Ukraine
Posts: 1,772
Quote:
xtol is xtol in Norway also ;-) so u can get everything without understanding a word...
My Norwegian language is as crappy as my Czech or Russian ..... BTW you CAN switch to English.

A good picture says more then thousand words .....
__________________
"De enige beperking in je fotografie ben je zelf"



  Reply With Quote

Old 02-28-2017   #203
Ronald M
Registered User
 
Ronald M is offline
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 4,031
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith View Post
Then again ... the US pres gets voted in without having to really prove that he can actually run the country!
More than one got in without proving anything other than age.The only constitutional requirements are age 35 and be natural born citizen. One can not prove natural born and has a social security number registered to someone born in Conn. in 1894. That makes him 102. Yes place and date are coded into the number.

I get totally disgusted at the speeches some give and they clearly have no understanding of economics or needs of the people. Their only purpose is to stay in office.

And his opponent could not run the country and has history to prove it.

To be in congress, you need to need be 35 or 30, that`s all. And that is all some of them have, age.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-28-2017   #204
Ronald M
Registered User
 
Ronald M is offline
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 4,031
I can make D76 and it works perfectly, around $1 a liter. Turns amber when it goes bad.

Why do I need to make a whole gallon just to develop a few rolls?
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-01-2017   #205
Pioneer
Registered User
 
Pioneer's Avatar
 
Pioneer is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Age: 63
Posts: 2,667
Quote:
Originally Posted by Al Kaplan View Post
Keith, D-96 is the suggested soup for Eastman Double-X Negative 5222. Some folks here use the stuff.
I use D76 and D23 and prefer either of them to Xtol.

For users of EK 222, the formulas for D76 and D96 are very close. There are slightly higher amounts of each chemical in D96 as opposed to the amounts in D76 and the addition of a small amount of Potassium Bromide.

I suspect that D96 is recommended for cinema b&w film because it is a little more potent and will last for at least 100 feet of film (a standard length on a reel) before needing replenishment. Beyond that I would doubt that users of EK 5222 will see much difference between the two in real life developing.
__________________
"Your 1st 10,000 Photographs Are Your Worst"
HCBresson

"My 2nd 10,000 Are Not A Lot Better"
Dan
  Reply With Quote

Old 3 Weeks Ago   #206
brian steinberger
Registered User
 
brian steinberger is offline
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 122
I used to use a lot of Xtol, then tried ID-11 (D-76) 1:1 and fell in love with the sharpness. Xtol produces less grain by "mushing" it. When I enlarge a MF neg up to 16x20 I can clearly see the difference. ID-11 is definetly grainier, but also sharper IMO. I'll take sharpness over finer grain any day.
  Reply With Quote

Old 3 Weeks Ago   #207
traveler_101
American abroad
 
traveler_101 is offline
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Oslo, Norway
Posts: 893
Quote:
Originally Posted by brian steinberger View Post
I used to use a lot of Xtol, then tried ID-11 (D-76) 1:1 and fell in love with the sharpness. Xtol produces less grain by "mushing" it. When I enlarge a MF neg up to 16x20 I can clearly see the difference. ID-11 is definetly grainier, but also sharper IMO. I'll take sharpness over finer grain any day.
XTOL seems plenty sharp to me and one must keep in mind that it is environmentally benign - a nice feature I think. I use it with Fomapan 200 and it is very good. Much depends, however, on the film you are using? I prefer D-76 with Tri-X absolutely. On the other hand a grainy film like Fomapan 400 could use some grain suppression. I thought D76 was just fair with it and am hoping to get better results with XTOL.
  Reply With Quote

Old 3 Weeks Ago   #208
lawrence
Registered User
 
lawrence's Avatar
 
lawrence is offline
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: London, UK
Age: 65
Posts: 1,894
Quote:
Originally Posted by brian steinberger View Post
I used to use a lot of Xtol, then tried ID-11 (D-76) 1:1 and fell in love with the sharpness. Xtol produces less grain by "mushing" it. When I enlarge a MF neg up to 16x20 I can clearly see the difference. ID-11 is definetly grainier, but also sharper IMO. I'll take sharpness over finer grain any day.
It's always struck me as strange that Kodak claims that stock Xtol is slightly sharper than stock D76. Maybe D76 just seems sharper but isn't from a scientific point of view? Or maybe D76 sharpens up more when diluted?
__________________
'Never trust any photograph so large that it can only fit inside a museum' Duane Michals
  Reply With Quote

D76 or XTOL. Why?
Old 3 Weeks Ago   #209
venchka
Registered User
 
venchka's Avatar
 
venchka is offline
Join Date: Apr 2006
Age: 71
Posts: 6,211
D76 or XTOL. Why?

XTOL 1:3 and continuous agitation in JOBO tanks works very nicely for me.
Arista-EDU Ultra 200 exposed @ 100. Xtol 1:3.
http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/ven...ion-1.jpg.html
Wayne


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
__________________
Wayne
Deep in the darkest heart of the East Texas Rain forest.
Quote:
"Leave me alone, I know what I'm doing" Kimi Raikkonen
My Gallery
My Blog-Reborn
FlickrMyBookTwitSpaceFace
  Reply With Quote

Old 2 Weeks Ago   #210
mcfingon
Western Australia
 
mcfingon is offline
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Western Australia
Posts: 691
I'm finding at the moment that XTOL stock appears sharper than ID-11 stock, with lots of crisp, fine detail in the negatives. I prefer the tonality of stock XTOL as well. I have tried XTOL at up to 1+3 dilutions as well as ID-11, but I think XTOL is delivering very high sharpness and very pleasant tones at full strength. XTOL is also very consistent in its keeping qualities. After mixing the 5 litre bag I pour it into 15 300ml bottles, which keep for months in my darkroom.
  Reply With Quote

Old 2 Weeks Ago   #211
Godfrey
somewhat colored
 
Godfrey's Avatar
 
Godfrey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 7,667
D76 give more pointilistic grain. XTOL gives a smoother look and pushes better. HC-110 is somewhere in between. Selectol is closer to XTOL. Microdol-X smooths grain and cuts sharpness. Acufine nets a speed gain and tonally is close to XTOL. Diafine produces D76' look at pushed XTOL speeds. Rodinal at normal dilution nets very high detail with very large grain; Rodinal at 1:100 dilution nets superb tonality at slightly reduced film speeds with very long development times. ...

Why limit the poll to just D76 and XTOL?
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 19:37.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.