D76 or XTOL. Why?

D76 or XTOL. Why?

  • D76

    Votes: 160 44.1%

  • XTOL

    Votes: 203 55.9%
  • Total voters
    363
With D76, Xtol and Rodinal, do you guys find any real difference in how big the prints can go?
Xtol is slightly shaper than D76 = slightly bigger prints?
Rodinal has grains which although nice with smaller prints, how are they with big prints?

All 3 are nice classics !!! (Gee... i am having a hard time choosing one to begin my journey into the world of film development)
 
fixbones said:
With D76, Xtol and Rodinal, do you guys find any real difference in how big the prints can go?
Xtol is slightly shaper than D76 = slightly bigger prints?
Rodinal has grains which although nice with smaller prints, how are they with big prints?

All 3 are nice classics !!! (Gee... i am having a hard time choosing one to begin my journey into the world of film development)
Click to expand...

Fixbones, It all depends on the film. I find some films give lovely grain with rodinal and look good big and some dont. Xtol is smoother than D76 in many cases but for every film the grain structure will be slightly different. I use Xtol not becvause D76 is worse per se but because I get more speed and it is cheaper as well as easier to mix. The grain I get is fine so I am not too concerned by precise differences in grain between it and D76. John Hicks on APUG always says Xtol gives more coarse grain than D76 but in my experience it is always the other way round. BUT grain structure has a big impact on the aesthetics of a large print and to make that call, you have to see it in person, first hand.
 
Turtle: Thanks for the input!! Don't think i'll have the opportunity of seeing any of them in large print in person. So will have to go with word of mouth i suppose.
Will be shooting mostly trix
 
Cant go wrong with TriX in any developer really, though Rodinal is very grainy. You might like it for certain things tho, even big. Xtol 1+anything and D76 are both fantastic in D76/Xtol. Xtol, diluted 1+2 has good bite to it, but a softer tonality than D76 in my experience. great for harsh light and more speed (about 1/2 stop)
 
I use xtol 1:1. Read that it was sharper and gives finer grain than D-76 and thats why I bought it. I like it alot and it works great for me so I´m sticking to it.
 
I have found that X-Tol 1:1 works best for me. I love the tones it produces with TMAX 100 and Tri-X.

I'm on my last 400ml or so of my X-Tol that I mixed last June 2008. I used 300ml or so last week and it seems fine. I normally decant the 5l mix into 2x1.5l, 1 x 1l, and 3x330ml+, making sure that I fill them up to the brim and minimise gaps as much as possible. So 16 months after mixing it, I've still got a working solution!

I've decided to try Rodinal after I finish my X-Tol.
 
My stock of ID11 (D76 ish?) is nearly out. I've wanted to give XTOL a spin for a while but didn't want to chop and change my process. Now it is nearly half the price of ID11 (in the UK), I'll order up a few packs and make the change.
 
Another vote for D-76. I tried Xtol and it does seem to give slighter smoother grain, but I prefer the `look` I get with D-76. Classic stuff. :)
I also like Paterson FX39 which I use occasionally.
 
Monokrome said:
Another vote for D-76. I tried Xtol and it does seem to give slighter smoother grain, but I prefer the `look` I get with D-76. Classic stuff. :)
I also like Paterson FX39 which I use occasionally.
Click to expand...

Yes, I agree that it gives smoother grain but it's rather fuzzy IMHO. The nice thing about Xtol is that it's difficult to blow the highlights and here in the UK it's quite cheap. But I agree, when I've finished the 3 litres or so of stock that I've got sitting around I'll go back to D76...or Aculux...or TMax...or....
 
I did a side by side comparison of the two once, and decided that both could be excellent developers. I could see a small difference in grain and tone rendition with XTOL, and decided to stick with it because of that. XTOL is slightly less harsh than D76, and in 35mm it's a good thing.

In 120 I use it with TMY to get those glassy, perfectly smooth tones.
 
I use both all the time, and to be honest, I don't see a massive difference. Some people with a technical eye might, but both work great for me. I don't use any other type of developer.
 
D-76 1+1. Fine grain? Not so much, but if I wanted fine grain I would not be shooting Tri-X. (And when I want fine grain, I use Microdol) D76 is available at the corner store, cheap, and easy to work with. Until they come out with a cheap standard developer available as a concentrated liquid, I think I will stick with it.

XTol I have tried. it is not that I didn't like it, just that it was not worth the effort to find / order it.

I can use up a gallon long before it goes bad.

Also, lately, I have been using rodinal 1+100 as well. There is a completely different look for you.
 
degruyl said:
What, like now? I will live without it. (I believe that was in last weeks "announcement").
Click to expand...

It was only one (very large) package size that was discontinued. Microdol-X is still available. If it becomes unavailable, D23 is similar and very easy to make. So is a D76 or Xtol substitute, for that matter.

Marty
 
xtol produces flat thin negs for me, really don't like it and it's NOT a question of the developing time. Much prefer D76.
 
Years ago I used ID-11 and HP5 almost always: that's the combo "officially" recommended for the first three years of B&W in the place where I cursed my career... ID-11 is very close to D-76... When I tried Xtol after that, I didn't like it at all. Grain had no clear, classic presence, and prints were fuzzy and flat.

Cheers,

Juan
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom