Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/11/15
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Ted- At the risk of sounding too pedantic, I was pondering the ongoing discussion about developers and films over the years. Now, D-76 came out in the mid-20's- I have heard 19-24 and 1926 as being years of 'release' and that it was a motion picture film developer- in fact, all 35mm film then was essentially motion picture film! Now, from the time the Anthony brothers, and George Eastman were fighting over who had discovered the art and science of coating flexible film, in the 18880's, there had only been about three decades of technology involved in the making of film. Fast forward to the fifties- when Tri-X came to surplant Super XX Pan and there were another couple of decades, and Tri-X was a marvelous breakthrough. Since the 50's, I am sure that the improvements in film base manufacturing, with better machines and higher tolerances have been part of the many changes in Tri-X, as were no doubt the better techniques in the manufacture and application of the emulsions. Improvements in anti-halation coatings, and the vast improvements in the leuco dyes used to expand film's panchromatic response no doubt has contributed a great deal to the film we call Tri-X today. Developer technology, it seems has not been so advanced by modern technology- with the exception of Phenidone, and Ascorbic Acid, most developers still use the same basic aromatic cyclic hyrocarbon compounds that were used from the very beginning. I have found that the PMK formula from the Photographer's Formulary to be a modern revival of an Ole Tyme developer, that to me makes wonderful negatives for printing on VC paper! The yellow stain in the higher contrast areas seem to act as a low contrast masking filter, and even if I get a bit rambucntious with my agitation and the contrast index of mty negatives comes out a little high, I still get good prints! D-23 is even older than D-76, and is a very forgiving formula, and was not doubt useful for the same reason I like the PMK- if you got a little over zealous in exposing your film or agitating it in processing it, the results were not too extreme! This was useful when there were no real honest to goodness exposure meters, and shutter speeds were really 'iffy'! The Leica was based originally on a device to make test exposures of movie film so that the cinephotographer could determine how much exposure and how much developement to give his particular batch of film! In my own photgraphic career- as in a vehicle madly careering around the bend! - I have seen a time when I had to set up a new set of filter pack for each box of color paper as they varied quite a bit. That was 25 years ago- today- when I was working in a photofinishing lab- the paper and chemicals were and are so consistant that I could change rolls of paper, even using a different batch in mid order, and the results were so consistant that you could not tall which prints were made one one roll and which were made on the other! I personally think that the biggest improvement in photography in the last 50 years is that our choice of materials have become more consistant, and with less variation. I for one enjoy this as it removes a lot of the variable that made photography frustratingly haphazard before! Now, insofar as using D-23 or D-76, these formulas have been around since Methuselah was a pup, have been used on every concievable film and so are Tried and True- I even heard that every film made is tested on what is essentiall Kodak D-76 or Ilford ID-11 (Somewhere I have the Agfa adn Ansco equivalents- the formulas, that is!) If X-tol is having some teething pains, well, I can see where it might. Eventually it may joint the ranks of Para-aminophenol (Rodinal) or the ubiquitous Metol/Elon and Hydroquinone. #0 years hence, I imagine Kyle and some of the younger LUGgers will be extolling the 'OLD' X-tol in comparison to whatever may come along in the meantime! I can just imagine the thread comparing the Gigabit-Googolol-X developer to the old fashion X-tol12, and some of the Old Timers like Kyle telling the young Whippersbnappers that they could remember when! And that even if you use a Leica M13, you need Xtol12 to get that 'GLOW'! Dan (Yep, film will be here for a long time to come! ) Post NB- They said that photography would replace painting as an art! But man is still smearing ground up earth pigments mixed with various fatty materials on different surfaces- HE's done it for thousands of years, and will probably do it for a few thousand more. I figure that the silver and paper image will be around even after most of us are floating around as dust on somebody's negatives!! > Hi Mark, > > We used Tri-x and D23 all the time. I read sometime ago Tri x of those days has been > changed several times over the years, but I can't imagine why Kodak would change it. > > Kip Babington wrote: > > >>>>Photographers' Formulary catalog lists a Formulary Film Developer 23, > which they describe as "a metol-based semi-compensating film developer similar to Kodak > D23." It sounds like it comes in powder form, which mixes "to make a working solution > with a shelf life of 6 months."<<<<<<< > > Hi Kip, > > Thanks for the note re. D23. > > ted > >