D-76 Powder Availability?

I’ve found that 2 liter empty soda bottles works best for me to keep the stock solutions. I keep the full bottles in a cupboard in the basement.

Maybe you already do this but thought I’d mention it.
 
donkee said:
I'll be starting to mix my own soon. I figure with the way Kodak has been just figure they will discontinue everything that we like the most......

I mix up parts of my B&W positive chemistry and find it enjoyable. Kinda gives me a mad scientist feel too...!
Click to expand...

Don,

When they decommisioned some labs at work, I secured a triple beam scale and a set of brass calibrated weights. I have an ultrasonic tank to aid in making solutions as well as a chemistry hot-plate. This stuff otherwise would of gotten thrown out.

I wonder about the cost savings of home brew developers. Maybe a fraction or half the cost?

Cal
 
DIY photo chemistry

DIY photo chemistry

"When they decommisioned some labs at work, I secured a triple beam scale and a set of brass calibrated weights. I have an ultrasonic tank to aid in making solutions as well as a chemistry hot-plate. This stuff otherwise would of gotten thrown out.

I wonder about the cost savings of home brew developers. Maybe a fraction or half the cost?"
_________________

We're talking a fraction, a very small fraction for the actual chemical cost. For example, I noticed that Freestyle sells a chem package to make D-23 for a bit over $20, the push being that it's like Ansel used. The actual chemical cost of that package is probably less than $2. However the start-up cost of buying the various chemicals required to compound your own developers, etc., can run anywhere from $50 to hundreds of dollars. Pick one or two formulas and stock up for them. If the idea works for you, then expand later. Tied into the cost savings is that you have fresh developer whenever you want it. Caution: do not try to make real Rodinal, it's tedious and expensive (no loss IMO). The YouTube videos re how to make Rodinal are all totally fake.
 
randy stewart said:
"When they decommisioned some labs at work, I secured a triple beam scale and a set of brass calibrated weights. I have an ultrasonic tank to aid in making solutions as well as a chemistry hot-plate. This stuff otherwise would of gotten thrown out.

I wonder about the cost savings of home brew developers. Maybe a fraction or half the cost?"
_________________

We're talking a fraction, a very small fraction for the actual chemical cost. For example, I noticed that Freestyle sells a chem package to make D-23 for a bit over $20, the push being that it's like Ansel used. The actual chemical cost of that package is probably less than $2. However the start-up cost of buying the various chemicals required to compound your own developers, etc., can run anywhere from $50 to hundreds of dollars. Pick one or two formulas and stock up for them. If the idea works for you, then expand later. Tied into the cost savings is that you have fresh developer whenever you want it. Caution: do not try to make real Rodinal, it's tedious and expensive (no loss IMO). The YouTube videos re how to make Rodinal are all totally fake.
Click to expand...

Randy,

Thanks for the reply.

Of course there are safety concerns. Since I already own much of the hardware it seems to be the way to go.

Currently I concentrate on only using different two developers, although I have been experimenting also. Good advice.

Seems like economy of scale works.

Cal
 
Freakscene said:
Using less than 120mL of D76 stock per roll is a quite reliable way to get uneven development and streaking, particularly in high-key scenes.

The spectral sensitivity and tonal curve of FP4+ is very different to Plus-X. It is not a replacement, and you cannot develop it to look like Plus-X.

Like others, I have lots of Plus-X in the freezer.

D76 hasn’t been D76 for a long time. Kodak changed the formula several times. ID11 is functionally the same (if chemically a little different), Freestyle makes a copy, and you can mix it yourself from the original formula.

Marty
Click to expand...

So using 1+1 for 1 35mm roll, 1+1 dilution, about 125ml got me on the safe side then?

Yeah agree on you about Plus X. To be honest, no idea what spectral sensitivity is but yes, FP4 looks different than Plus X. FP4 looks more "perfect" so to speak. Plus X make it look more vintage, old, so use it on portraits that I want to have an old look.

Marcelo
 
mpaniagua said:
So using 1+1 for 1 35mm roll, 1+1 dilution, about 125ml got me on the safe side then?

Yeah agree on you about Plus X. To be honest, no idea what spectral sensitivity is but yes, FP4 looks different than Plus X. FP4 looks more "perfect" so to speak. Plus X make it look more vintage, old, so use it on portraits that I want to have an old look.

Marcelo
Click to expand...

Marcelo,

I'm finding FP4 to be more like 100 ISO.

HP5 likes more exposure too, like say 320. With Tri-X I get an honest 400.

Cal
 
Cal
Yeah you may be right about that about FP4. Probably even a bit slower.

Haven't used HP5 much, and when I did I pushed to 800 most of the time so not sure how it behave at box speed.

I guess the only trait they share is that they (FP4 and Plux X) are the same "old school" emulsion kind, unlike T grain films like Deltas.

Regards

Marcelo
 
Cal, too bad you couldn’t have gotten some of the chemicals when the lab was decommissioned. I had something similar happen when the photo group where I worked packed it in. I was in the chemistry department and they stored their reagents in our chemical bunker.

All their stuff was going for disposal and was allowed to divert some of the useful ingredients. Stuff like Metol, hydroquinone, KBr, sodium sulfite, etc.

These were fairly large quantities, kilos in some cases so should be good for D76 in the foreseeable future. I may have one foot in the analog past but one of the modern digital scales sure makes weighing easier than a beam balance.

Cheers, Glenn
 
Glenn2 said:
Cal, too bad you couldn’t have gotten some of the chemicals when the lab was decommissioned. I had something similar happen when the photo group where I worked packed it in. I was in the chemistry department and they stored their reagents in our chemical bunker.

All their stuff was going for disposal and was allowed to divert some of the useful ingredients. Stuff like Metol, hydroquinone, KBr, sodium sulfite, etc.

These were fairly large quantities, kilos in some cases so should be good for D76 in the foreseeable future. I may have one foot in the analog past but one of the modern digital scales sure makes weighing easier than a beam balance.

Cheers, Glenn
Click to expand...

Glenn,

My labs are more nuclear and hospital related. We basically make nuclides using a cyclotron to then create nuclear pharmaceticals for PET Camera imaging.

Bombarding materials to transmutate them into radioactive isotopes is what I do with the cyclotron. Pretty much I add protons to atoms to make them unstable (radioactive).

A funny story is that there was this 40 gallon drum of Boron Nitrate that lingered in out lab for about two years. No body knew why it was there, but I would later learn that this was intended to be used in the shielding since Boron is a great moderator of neutrons.

Boron Nitrate is like Potasium Nitrate in that it is an oxidizer used to make explosives/bombs. I called safety and had them dispose of this potential hazard.

I recycle for my use these one gallon brown glass bottles that once held aclcohols to mix my chemistry. In my lab I have access to 18 Megaohm water that is scrubbed via reverse osmosis. Pretty much this water is so pure that it is unsafe to drink.

I use it for my stop bath and for mixing fixer. I use no Photoflow and I rarely get any drying marks.

Cal
 
Id-11

Id-11

One has to assume that if D-76 is no longer available, that ID-11 sales should increase to fill the void. When Kodak enlarging paper went extinct, I shifted to Ilford and have been a loyal Ilford user since then. My expectation is that with changes to HC110 and now the discontinuance of D-76, Ilford and others will be the beneficiaries.
 
I got D-76 running in my blood veins, I used that stuff for decades on end.

The raw materials to mix your own D-76 are not cheap to buy on their own and I would not want that amount sitting around for a long time to oxidize.
 
Our own survey shows that D-76 and Rodinal are the two most popular developers among RFF members. It seems absurd that Kodak would discontinue D-76! Can this be real?
 
sepiareverb said:
Mixing stock solutions and decanting them into glass bottles topped off with Bloxygen will eliminate the developer going bad in the bottle for a very long time.
Click to expand...

And I believe glass is superior to plastic, which apparently allows some air infiltration? I was trying out half-liter 7-Up bottles, but now I use 16 ounce glass brown beer bottles. Of course, you have to drink the beer--it's part of the ritual . . .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

J
Top Travel Accessories for Savvy Shooters on the Go16 must-have Items that’ll keep you operational away from home.
Replies
2
Views
1K
Jason Schneider
J
J
  • Article Article
What exactly is a point & shoot camera? Glad you asked!The Kodak of 1888 may have been the first, and even Leica got into the act!
Replies
17
Views
1K
Mos6502
Mos6502
J
  • Article Article
The Rise, Fall, and Resurrection of the 110 Format By 2009, 110 was kaput. Lomography brought it back! Part 2: A selection of fascinating 110 cameras.
2 3
Replies
41
Views
5K
Timmyjoe
Timmyjoe
Steve Ruddy
Thinking of changing Black & White Film Developer
2 3
Replies
46
Views
3K
presspass
P
Ted Striker
Reformulated: Kodak HC-110
5 6 7
Replies
139
Views
14K
ChrisPlatt
ChrisPlatt
Back
Top Bottom