Support our Sponsors, they keep FADU free:   AG Photographic   Keyphoto   The Imaging Warehouse   Process Supplies   RH Designs   RK Photo   Second-hand Darkroom Supplies   Silverprint Ltd

Notices

Go Back   Film and Darkroom User > Chemistry > Chemical formulae

  ***   Click here for the FADU 2015/2014 Yearbooks   ***

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 21st December 2021, 09:44 AM
pentaxpete's Avatar
pentaxpete pentaxpete is offline
Friend
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Brentwood, Essex UK
Posts: 366
Default Discrepancies with D76 and ID11 dev times

I have mixed my own ID11 formula for a long time and have found the times quoted for ID11 in ILFORD literature are TOO LONG for most films -- so I looked and found their times for 'D76' which is supposed to be the SAME formula were SHORTER - I have started to use the 'D76 times for ILFORD films. NOW I have a FRESH AGFA APX 400 to process and on checking Massive Dev Chart it gives 16.5 Mins for ID11 1+1 dilution and only 14 mins for D76 !!! So WHY are the TIMES Different when the Formula is supposed to be the SAME?
__________________
Computerised and Slightly DIGITISED but FILM still RULES with ME !
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 21st December 2021, 10:08 AM
BuzzNL BuzzNL is offline
Friend
 
Join Date: Jan 2021
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 131
Default

As you probably know, everyone can submit their dev times to the massive dev chart and they will be added after approval/verification.
But I'm sure that the MDC maintainers do not test every submission themselves before adding the data to the chart. They'll probably just make an estimation whether the entry is not total bulls**t.
That would make it possible for two people to submit different times, even for the same film and developer / dilution combination.
So possibly both could give satisfactory results?

In the datasheet for ID-11 I find 14:30 for Agfa APX400, but this is probably the older "Genuine Agfa" APX400 and not the newer AgfaPhoto branded film. They're very different.
Kodak only lists Kodak films in their datasheet for D-76.
Anyway, I think Massive Dev Chart would still be your best resource.

I've used Kodak's D-76 (1+1) 14 minutes for the new Agfaphoto APX400 in the past and it gives me good results. I do both scanning and darkroom printing btw.
This 14 minutes also works just fine for me with Kentmere 400 which is said to be highly similar to APX400, if not the same.
Now I must admit I don't have any sophisticated gear like densitometers and whatnot, the above is just my user experience.

If you would want to see what works best for you, you could shoot a test roll in controlled light, cut the roll in half and develop half of it for 14 minutes and half for 16:30.
Hope it helps a little anyway!
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 21st December 2021, 10:20 AM
Lostlabours Lostlabours is online now
Friend
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: West Midlands/Aegean
Posts: 1,814
Default

The commercial versions of D76 and ID-11 are no longer exactly the same as the published formulae. Over the years the buffering has changed part of the reason for this is that far more people now use it dilute rather than full strength and replenished which was how it was formulated to be used.

Increasing the buffering helps eliminate issues with varied water supplies particularly when use 1 + 3, an Ilford Patent shows the Borax level increased to 3g per litre, in Kodak;s case they use Borax and Boric acid this will lower the pH slightly meaning slight increases in development time.

A Kodak Australia box actually listed the formula as having 4g Borax and 2g Boric Acid.

So you aren't comparing like with like.

Ian
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 21st December 2021, 11:21 AM
Terry S Terry S is offline
Friend
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Southend on Sea, Essex, England UK
Posts: 3,162
Default

Pete, I too have found my HP5+ films, in home mixed ID11, to be a little too dense when printing. I develop the films at 1+1 and when using the new generation of Ilford's MG paper, but also when using other papers as well, the times needed are a bit longer and the contrast grade a bit lower.

I've kept to the published times on the MDC for the whole of the last made up stock solution, to see how it performs over time. I'll be mixing up a new batch very soon, and will continue to use the film at box speed. I think I will try going at minus 10% of the published development time and see what happens then.

Terry S
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 21st December 2021, 02:42 PM
Mike O'Pray Mike O'Pray is offline
Friend
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Daventry, Northants
Posts: 8,412
Default

I recall this question or a variation thereof being asked on Photrio, concerning the fact that for, I think, HP5+ at box speed the times were the same for both developers and yet at 1600 they differed

The usual suspects were offered such as each manufacturer gave figures for its own contrast target. In this respect, I note that Ilford uses a thing called Gbar and Kodak a thing called Contrast Index or C.I.

Ilford's Gbar is 0.62 and Kodak's C.I. is 0.58. If these are different contrasts then you'd expect each development times to be different and yet at box speed most times for most films are the same and backing this up is the usual assertion that ID11 and D76 are different names for the same developer

Ian has given reasons why they are not quite the same and why this might lead to different times which also makes sense. So why don't they all differ? Well maybe they do in theory but by so little in most cases that it is not worth stating it i.e. I don't think that manufacturers consider differences of as little as 15 secs to be worth mentioning so that might explain a form of rounding down or up which equalises most times but may not if the two theoretical times are sufficiently far apart to make say a 30 secs or even a minute more accurate - just a speculation on my part, of course

Personally I don't think I could see a difference of as little as 30 secs in the same two negs developed in ID11 or D76 over say 10-12 mins but that's not to say that some others cannot

When I tried to dig down further for a incontrovertible answer on Photrio that stood up to analysis which included all the know facts I eventually got the answer I had expected which was: experiment until you find the time that suits you

This can often be the cope-out answer that indicates boredom/ annoyance at what is often regarded as a from of annoying "nit-picking" but in terms of results desired for the negatives as opposed to a quest for the scientific answer to the question of "why", it may be the best advice

Mike
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 21st December 2021, 02:53 PM
Martin Aislabie's Avatar
Martin Aislabie Martin Aislabie is offline
Friend
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Stratford-upon-Avon, England
Posts: 1,853
Default

I have always treated manufacturers film speed and developing times as a reliable starting point - rather than the final destination.

If you have a reliable and consistent development method there is absolutely no reason why you cannot make your own personalised adjustments to both film speed and development times.

I have conducted some Beyond the Zone System film speed and development tests for both HP5 and Delta 100 in for both intermittent agitation (rolls of film in a Paterson Tank) and continuous agitation (sheet film in a Jobo CPP).

The results look nothing like the manufacturers recommendations.

Martin
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 21st December 2021, 07:11 PM
John King John King is offline
Friend
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: County Durham
Posts: 2,847
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pentaxpete View Post
I have mixed my own ID11 formula for a long time and have found the times quoted for ID11 in ILFORD literature are TOO LONG for most films -- so I looked and found their times for 'D76' which is supposed to be the SAME formula were SHORTER - I have started to use the 'D76 times for ILFORD films. NOW I have a FRESH AGFA APX 400 to process and on checking Massive Dev Chart it gives 16.5 Mins for ID11 1+1 dilution and only 14 mins for D76 !!! So WHY are the TIMES Different when the Formula is supposed to be the SAME?
I thought about this as well. However if you can get a certified copy of the formulas, they are slightly different. I say certified formulas because I have seen different versions of both.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 21st December 2021, 08:36 PM
Keith Tapscott.'s Avatar
Keith Tapscott. Keith Tapscott. is offline
Friend
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,002
Default

For myself, I just buy the packaged products as supplied by Kodak or Ilford whichever is cheapest at the time of purchase.
I noticed that ID11 also contains sodium sulphate which I guess helps when processing in hot climates.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 22nd December 2021, 08:08 AM
Lostlabours Lostlabours is online now
Friend
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: West Midlands/Aegean
Posts: 1,814
Default

Keith, Metol is the only Sulphate in ID-11 they list it as bis(4-HYDROXY-N-METHYLANILINIUM) SULPHATE

This is one of the alternative ways of naming the chemical structure. Synonyms: Metol , p-(Methylamino)phenol sulphate , 4-Methylaminophenolsulphate , 4-(Methylamino)phenol hemisulphate salt , 4-Methylaminophenol sulphate.

Typical Tropical developer use Sodium Sulphate at levels like 40 to 199 grams per Litre.

Ian
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 22nd December 2021, 08:55 AM
pentaxpete's Avatar
pentaxpete pentaxpete is offline
Friend
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Brentwood, Essex UK
Posts: 366
Default

WoW !! GREAT ANSWERS ! Well I processed my FRESH 2023 dated Agfa APX 400 for 14 mins @ 2oC D76 time and got GREAT NEGS just RIGHT -- ID11 time of 16.5 Mins would have been OVER-Developed -- I will make some PRINTS for this Site.
__________________
Computerised and Slightly DIGITISED but FILM still RULES with ME !
Reply With Quote
Reply
Support our Sponsors, they keep FADU free:   AG Photographic   Keyphoto   The Imaging Warehouse   Process Supplies   RH Designs   RK Photo   Second-hand Darkroom Supplies   Silverprint Ltd

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

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

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Old v New ID11 Martin Aislabie Monochrome Film 2 10th May 2021 06:44 PM
Ilford hp5+ in id11 1+2 times soulstar Monochrome Film 20 18th February 2020 07:04 PM
T-Max 400 in ID11 vincent Monochrome Film 9 22nd August 2017 06:50 PM
HP5 and ID11 1:3 alexmuir Monochrome Film 10 4th May 2016 05:52 AM
ID11 or D76 cliveh Photography in general 7 23rd October 2010 08:39 PM


All times are GMT. The time now is 05:59 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.