Response to Discussion TMX in Xtol or T-Max developer...

Actually I have found the XTOL to be consistent as long as I adhere to the following methods and parameters. #1 Use a 200 ml minimum stock solution per 80 sq. inches of film. #2 Use fresh distilled water to mix the stock and working solutions. #3 Use film that is well within date and has been stored below 55 f. #4 Develop within 48 hours of exposure. #5 Use developer that is not more than 90 days old and has been stored in a non-osmotic container. #5 Use a laboratory quality thermometer NOT a dial thermometer. #6 Assure that the process temperature is maintained throughout the development, or use a calculated drift-by held to a minimum of less than +/- 1.0 F. #7 Do Not Over Fix. Films age on a continuum, tap water is not a constant. Developers AND Distilled Water oxidize. All this may seem extravagant but isn’t a 1500 mile photographic excursion or Black and White as a Fine Art. Also Kodak has seldom if ever admitted a mistake or a problem publicly namely the 100 ml minimum stock recommendation in this case. Another problem, Kodak does not date their packaging and states 2 years, which is also a continuum, as the shelf life of any dry un-mixed developer package. So it is necessary to find a retailer who rotates and turns their inventory. The packaging itself is probably flawed as well since there have been numerous recalls, particularly of the 1 liter package which seems to be prone to hydration of Part B. Sound like a lot of trouble? These properties are all essentially analog in nature, with time being the major player here. Is XTOL more sensitive to these variables than other developer? I have not really found that to be the case The other day I made an 11x14 print of a 35mm TMX negative developed in T-Max developer in 1989. I also made a print of a 35mm TMX negative developed in XTOL 1:1, the differences were striking!

[ Previous | Next ]