Re: [Leica] Etc.-tol

[Kip Babington <cbabing3@swbell.net>]

I've always been attracted to the cost efficiency of some of the non-Kodak paper
developers, of which Neutol is probably the most cost efficient.  At the moment I'm
using Ilford's Multigrade developer which claims 100 prints/liter of working
solution.  But the problem I find is that each print carries away enough developer
that after about 50 prints there's barely enough left in the tray to cover a sheet.
I can "solve" this problem by using 2 liters, but that's enough for 200 prints and
the stuff will rot before I produce that many.  I recall having a similar experience
with Neutol.

I use these developers primarily for their convenience in preparation and for their
high capacity (there have been sessions where I've turned out 80-100 prints, and it
was nice not to have to change chemistry in the middle - and I can't get a gallon of
Dektol or Ektaflo in my 8x10 trays to achieve the same effect), not so much for
their economy.  But I've always been a bit disappointed that I really couldn't get
the capacity they claim because of the mechanics of the printing process.  Anybody
else find this to be the case?

Cheers,
Kip

Mark Rabiner wrote:

> <snip>
> Lasts all day!:
> They are claiming 80 prints per liter when diluted 1/9. That's a print for every
> 1.25 mls of straight from the bottle developer.
> 800 prints per liter bottle as you buy it from the store! About a penny a print.
> Must be Phenidone cause Metol don't shake like that!
> Dektol gives you about a print an once from my experience.
> That's 32 prints per liter of Dektol verses
> 800 prints per liter of Neutol
> That makes Neutol exactly 25 times more efficient than Dektol if all is true.
> What if it's only 12? :)

<snip>