D76 or XTOL. Why?

D76 or XTOL. Why?

  • D76

    Votes: 160 44.1%

  • XTOL

    Votes: 203 55.9%
  • Total voters
    363
Brown Xtol

Brown Xtol

I recently found a half full bottle of Xtol stock solution that I made up in 2006 in the back of my darkroom. It was brown in color and gooey in consistancy as I poured it out. Three year old Xtol definately exhibits color changes - but I didn't try to develop anything to prove that it had pooped out.
 
Tested D-76, XTOL and Rodinal with my favourite BW films.
Tri-X, HP5, TMax100, HP4.
XTOL was found better than D-76 on all films but one.
XTOL was clearly sharper and had more pleasant grains on large prints.
The exception was TMax100 where Rodinal (!) came out on top.
As usual: IMHO :)
 
Having used XTOL for a couple of years I stopped using it because it was a pain to make 5L of it everytime. I wish they sold it in 1L. Then I migrated to Rodinal which lasts forever and comes in a nice 500ml bottle, and lately ID-11 in 1L packages which proved quite convenient lately, so I voted for D76 which is similar, right?

ps I loved Xtol but then I loved Rodinal even more. time will tell about ID11, works ok at the moment
 
Pablito said:
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.
Click to expand...

So what is it a question of? I've tested XTOL pretty extensively, and if you underdevelop (or underexpose) I can confirm that you'll get flat thin negs.
 
I tried XTOL in college. I wasn't impressed or unimpressed. I stuck with D76 as I knew it like the back of my hand. That and I have a stockpile of it from a high school that closed down years ago (along with Microdol-X, Polydol, Dektol, Fixer, Hypo Clearing Agent, Photo-Flo). I always wanted to try Polydol but could never find any info on it.
 
I just ordered several packs from BH and will try. I only use D76 so far due to availability issue but is satisfied except the shorter shelf life. I wanted to order the 1D11 and Rodinal but it's in liquid form and might not be allowed to ship across the sea.
 
Keith said:
Far better off with the system in North Korea etc where the reigns to the country are just handed down from father to son! :p
Click to expand...

Here in the U.S. First the father was President (Bush) then the son is President.

Almost had first the husband (Clinton) and then the wife, but we call this democracy.

Our constitution states "for the people, by the people" but I don't really think so.

Cal
 
I use both of these developers quite often. I voted D76, as I prefer how it looks when printed wet. Scanned, I see only very slight differences that usually disappear once ran through photoshop. I use XTOL with my pushed (and high speed) film.
 
I can agree with Chris and the others who say that D-76 has the better tonality of the two. That is, with films such as Tri-X and Plus-X. But with Delta 100 and 400, I like what I get with XTOL. I have also gotten some excellent negatives with XTOL and Neopan 400. Granted XTOL is a PITA to mix. Storage properties in full, corked bottles are excellent. I have a 13 month old bottle I just opened, and it's perfect. And its speed-increasing effect is real!
 
I've now tried D-76 and I must say, with Arista EDU Ultra 100 (Foma) - a truly great combination, some of my best negatives I think.

Cheers
 
I switched to XTOL for many of the reasons stated above. I use replenished and get a lot of rolls from a gallon. The reason for looking at it originally, is that it is a bit better for the environment being ascorbic acid based and no hydroquinone.
 
XTOL
Because, because, because, because, because;
Because of the wonderful things it does.

If you were trapped on a desert island with 6,000 100-foot rolls of Tri-X and sufficient developer, either would get you where you need to go. I happen to like the grain with XTol and Delta 400/Tri-X/Neopan 400, but I used a D-76 equivalent for many, many years and still like my best negatives from that time.
 
Fomadon Excel by Foma is said to be exactly like Xtol but it's sold in a powder package for 1 liter of stock. Does someone have any experiences of using Fomadon Excel instead of Xtol?
 
There seem to be a lot of folks here saying that they like the tonality of D-76 better than XTOL. I don't doubt that there are differences, and I don't doubt that people have preferences, but this all seems a bit vague.

Can anyone describe in densitometric terms what's happening here -- what the differences in the characteristic curves produced by each developer are, for representative emulsions (Tri-X, Neopan, 2TMY, etc.)?
 
semilog said:
There seem to be a lot of folks here saying that they like the tonality of D-76 better than XTOL. I don't doubt that there are differences, and I don't doubt that people have preferences, but this all seems a bit vague.

Can anyone describe in densitometric terms what's happening here -- what the differences in the characteristic curves produced by each developer are, for representative emulsions (Tri-X, Neopan, 2TMY, etc.)?
Click to expand...

Xtol produces greater speed and a more s-shaped curve. Explained here: http://www.covingtoninnovations.com/xtol/ D76 tends to be straighter. I found it was fairly minor and varied more within developer by dilution than it did between them.

Marty
 
Mablo said:
Fomadon Excel by Foma is said to be exactly like Xtol but it's sold in a powder package for 1 liter of stock. Does someone have any experiences of using Fomadon Excel instead of Xtol?
Click to expand...

Fomadon Excel is indistinguishable from Xtol in use. I used a lot of it (hundreds of litres) when I lived in the Czech Republic. Use it as you would Xtol, including being careful about water quality, air exposure and dark storage and you'll be fine.

Marty
 
I'd like to have XTOL in a liquid concentrate, like HC-110! I'd probably seldom use anything else.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom