Re: [Leica] Xtol newbie

[Rolfe Tessem <rolfe@ldp.com>]

> 
> Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2001 14:52:05 -0400 (EDT)
> From: Rei Shinozuka <shino@ubspainewebber.com>
> Subject: Re: [Leica] Re: Xtol newbie
> Message-ID: <200110021852.OAA20959@tigercat.nyfir.pwj.com>
> References: 
> 
> > From: Guy Bennett <gbennett@lainet.com>
> > 
> > According to Anchell and Troop, "dilution increases speed and sharpness
> > with XTOL. Dilutions of 1:3 or more are frequently recommended. At these
> > dilutions XTOL is effectively a nonsolvent developer, but because of its
> > careful buffering, grain is still fine." (Film Developing Cookbook, p. 50)
> > 
> > So with XTOL in dilutions of at least 1:3, you get both the fine grain of a
> > solvent developer *and* the sharpness of a non-solvent developer, something
> > that has been remarked by a number of folks on this list. And as for not
> > having enough developer at dilutions greater than 1:1, I don't believe it.
> 
> 
> i guess you are referring to the kodak-recommended "100 ml rule":
> 
> From Kodak J109:
> 
>    We recommend always starting with at least 100 mL (3.5 fluidounces) of
>    full-strength developer to prepare the diluted solution for each 135-36 or
>    120 roll (or the equivalent of 80 square inches [516 square centimetres]).
> 
> in practical terms, this would imply that with a dilution of 1+3, you would
> need 100x4=400ml of diluted solution per roll.  this is roughly equivalent
> to one reel in a 2-reel (16 oz) tank full of 1+3 XTOL.
> 
> > While there is much to be said for following manufacturers' instructions,
> > personal experience suggests that it is simply not true. (Like having to
> > mix XTOL at 20° when other temps will also work.) Why not try it yourself
> > and compare?
> > 
> > Guy
> 
> 
> i do often break the 100ml rule.  does the 100ml rule have safety factors
> built-in, like making sure it will work with 1-year-old developer made
> with rusty tapwater, developing muddy-dense negatives, etc?  with fresh xtol
> made with distilled water, can we get down to 70-75 ml per roll?
> 
> do others break the 100 ml rule?

When the stuff costs 7 bucks for 5 liters of stock, I don't understand
why anyone would want to push this. As is pointed out above, at 1:3
using Kodak's minimum of 100ml per roll, you wind up with 400ml of
solution per roll. While you might be able to pull this off with large
inversion tanks, you will not be able to do it with the Jobo 2500 series
tanks that my Autolab 100 is equipped with. The two reel tank accepts a
maximum of, I believe, 300ml. In general, the Jobo equipment is designed
to use the *minimum* chemistry needed to do the job, not the maximum.

But more to the point, can someone actually show or tell me what
advantage Xtol 1:3 has over a 1:1 dilution?

There is an article on the Jobo website in which the company reports its
tests of the 100ml rule and confirms that it exists, at least for some
films.

Rolfe Tessem
NYC
- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html