Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/01/20

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] xtol results?
From: Rolfe Tessem <rolfe@ldp.com>
Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2002 17:11:16 -0500
References: <3C4A8730.3010000@attinasi.org> <3C4AE36C.109@ldp.com> <3C4AEA10.3030609@attinasi.org> <3C4B221F.2050108@ldp.com> <3C4B2ABB.1ECB070C@markrabiner.com>

Mark Rabiner wrote:

> Rolfe Tessem wrote:
> 
>>Marc Attinasi wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Rolfe Tessem wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Marc Attinasi wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>The negs look a little thin, and much flatter than I expected from
>>>>>that film, especialy the pushed roll.
>>>>>
>>>>>Is this normal XTOL behavior, or is something wrong with my times /
>>>>>technique / camera / expectations?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>The results are consistent with developer exhaustion. How much stock
>>>>did you use per roll?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>I used 4oz of stock, the stock soln is two weks old, in an air-free bottle.
>>>
>>Assuming you mean 4oz stock per roll, that should have been fine.
>>
>>The TMAX films seem to require somewhat more energy out of the developer
>>than traditional films. I would try a roll or two in straight stock to
>>confirm that your stock is good and, if so, you've narrowed the problem
>>to the dilution.
>>
>>Here are Kodak's current recommendations on using dilute Xtol. I
>>particularly direct your attention to the portion which pertains to
>>problems with TMAX films at greater than 1:1 dilution.
>>
>>http://www.kodak.com/cluster/global/en/professional/support/techPubs/j109/j109.shtml#948211
>>
>>--
>>Rolfe Tessem      |     Lucky Duck Productions, Inc.
>><Snip> 
>>
> 
> Rolfe about half the people on this list use Xtol at way below the
> recommended Kodak daily requirements we went thought this two weeks ago
> and it's still a big issue you choose to rudely ignore. You might at
> least vaguely allude to the fact that some might not agree with this on
> the list.
> It's T Max 100 (TMX) which needs a stronger dilution. So they changed
> the literature in case other films turned out to be also the case.
> T Max 400 (TMY) is long proven by many people to work great with Xtol
> 1:3 which in a metal tank renders it @ 62.5 Xtol per roll. Way less than
> the 100 ml per roll now said to be necessary for straight white hair and
> yellow curly teeth!


Mark,

With all due respect, I don't read every single post to the LUG and it 
is reasonable to expect that not everyone else does either. I have no 
intention of rehashing the debate of a couple of weeks ago, but the 
results described are consistent with developer exhaustion so I thought 
it was worth pointing out the Kodak link. Is that rude? I don't think so.

Obviously, the original poster is free to digest all available 
information and draw his own conclusions.

Equally obviously, *something* went wrong in his case.

Regards,

Rolfe

- -- 
Rolfe Tessem      |     Lucky Duck Productions, Inc.
rolfe@ldp.com     |     96 Morton Street
(212) 463-0029    |     New York, Ny 10014

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

In reply to: Message from Marc Attinasi <marc@attinasi.org> ([Leica] xtol results?)
Message from Rolfe Tessem <rolfe@ldp.com> (Re: [Leica] xtol results?)
Message from Marc Attinasi <marc@attinasi.org> (Re: [Leica] xtol results?)
Message from Rolfe Tessem <rolfe@ldp.com> (Re: [Leica] xtol results?)
Message from Mark Rabiner <mark@markrabiner.com> (Re: [Leica] xtol results?)