Re: [Leica] Xtol experience

["Dan Post" <dpost@triad.rr.com>]

Erwin-

I was fascinated by your post. I was pleasantly surprised to find that Good
Ole D-76 is still such a competitive developer, and was 'almost' as good as
Xtol in your test, or so I surmised. (There again, the old saying that
"almost only counts in hand grenades and horseshoes" comes to mind!)

What puzzled me was the environmental concerns about hydroquinone.
Hydroquinones, of which the film developer is but one type, are present in
many plants. Even gallic acid can be derived from a plant source, and while
moderately toxic, in the dilutions I've always used, it seem innocuous
enough, and with the short active life of developers due to incipient
oxidation, even in storage, I thought that developing agents were rather
quickly broken dowm, and that only those who suffer from contact dermatitis
need worry.

Having worked in a photofinishing lab, it seemed to me that even the
phenylenediethylamine developers were of little environmental concern, and
that the only problem we had was to minimize the silver in our effluent.
This is not to say that silver is a toxic material, but it can inhibit the
bacterial breakdown in some systems if introduced in sufficient quantitiy.
Also there is the economic factor since it is easily and economically
recyclable in even a small scale lab.

Personally, I have always like D-76, and the only significant departure has
been my forays into using the PMK formula- which much to my surprise, seems
very well suited for making negatives that seem 'designed' for split
printing!

Alos- your contrast index of .62 seems reasonable- I personally prefer one
about .50 to .55 since my system of printing was evolved using a step tablet
in .15 density steps and corresponds to a one stop film exposure developed
to a .50 CI. The point is rather moot, however, and really to each person's
personal style- I can easily print negatives with CI up to about .80 if the
scene is not too extreme.

I did notice that the Xtol tables- or the ones I printed out a year or so
ago, seemed to give recommended times for the lower contrast indices. I
don'ty know if this is a trend with the newer thin emulsion films, but I
never really felt comforatble with the T-Max or Delta films at first. They
'LOOKED' thin to the eye- but would always show more density to the
densitometer than appeared to the eye! It may be similar to the way
negatives done in the old Microdol-X seemed thinner than they actually were!

I agree with you, Erwin, that some sort of 'densitometer' is almost  a
necessity (Sorry, Mark! I gotta disagree with you!- but I still love ya!).
For most of my needs, and the needs of my friends, the good ole Beseler
color analyzers make pretty decent 'densitometers', and measure the density
of the negative in the printing system- which can vary from enlarger and
lens combination to another. Using a calibrated step tablet, I found that in
the overall range of most of these devices, the readinga are within a 10%
variation- close enough for 'government work' as we used to say.

Despite all the furor about Erwin's post, I have to 'fess up that I find his
approach enlightening, and similar to mine- though I take a more
'laissez-faire' approach, and noit as precise as he is. Minimizing
variables, especially those niggling 'intervening variable' that seem to pop
up goes a long way to making it possible to have more control over the
printing process. This, to me, is a natural extension of having control over
the negative making process- why else have a Leica? If you control  as many
of these variables- from fiddling with your aperture and shutter speed- to
getting the precise tone you want on the paper, means that you can more
often than not determine the outcome of the shot, rather than taking wheat
you can get!

Keep the faith, Erwin! If you didn't catch some flak, you'd have to figure
that your were 'preaching to the choir'! At least at the First Church of
Brother Euphemia of the Five Apertures we don't burn heretics at the stake-
We merely archivally fix 'em in ammonium thiosulphate! :o)

Dan ( HOLD IT! Lemme try again! I pushed the wrong button....) Post