D76 or XTOL. Why?

D76 or XTOL. Why?

  • D76

    Votes: 160 44.1%

  • XTOL

    Votes: 203 55.9%
  • Total voters
    363
John Bragg said:
D76 because it is capable of incredible sharpness if used right and lovely tones. Xtol is too smooth. plastic almost.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but the claim that XTOL looks plastic is really odd. Fine grained with gentle tonal gradations, yes. But plastic?

I wonder how may people could really tell the difference in a properly designed double blind test.
 
RObert Budding said:
Sorry, but the claim that XTOL looks plastic is really odd. Fine grained with gentle tonal gradations, yes. But plastic?

I wonder how may people could really tell the difference in a properly designed double blind test.
Click to expand...

I could, though not from shots people post online. 90% of people who post BW film scans don't know how to properly post-process the scans to get the most out of them tonally, and many don't have their screens calibrated right. I can see the differences between developers in my own work, and I choose developers for each project based on how I want the image to look.

That said, I agree with you that Xtol does not make pictures look "Plastic", whatever the heck that means. I suspect people who say such things just have not learned to use it correctly.
 
david3558 said:
What's the best way to use XTOL with Tri-X or HP5+
Click to expand...

1:3 according to the old German PDF available online. Don't worry about translating from German. The numbers are the same in English. You may need to ask GOOGLE to translate "small tank". I think that is listed on Page 13.
Continuous agitation in rotating Jobo tanks.

http://wwwfr.kodak.com/AT/plugins/acrobat/de/professional/xtolEntwickler.pdf

Chriscrawfordphoto said:
I could, though not from shots people post online. 90% of people who post BW film scans don't know how to properly post-process the scans to get the most out of them tonally, and many don't have their screens calibrated right. I can see the differences between developers in my own work, and I choose developers for each project based on how I want the image to look.

That said, I agree with you that Xtol does not make pictures look "Plastic", whatever the heck that means. I suspect people who say such things just have not learned to use it correctly.
Click to expand...

Some of us occasionally manage to muddle through.





Wayne
 
Chriscrawfordphoto said:
I could, though not from shots people post online. 90% of people who post BW film scans don't know how to properly post-process the scans to get the most out of them tonally, and many don't have their screens calibrated right. I can see the differences between developers in my own work, and I choose developers for each project based on how I want the image to look.

That said, I agree with you that Xtol does not make pictures look "Plastic", whatever the heck that means. I suspect people who say such things just have not learned to use it correctly.
Click to expand...

I do see differences in developers, too, but I print with an enlarger.

What I really love about XTOL is that I can shoot several different films at box speed and still capture shadow detail. Great developer. D76 is very good, too (I used it for over 5 years), but I do prefer XTOL.
 
Another vote for D-76 here. I have being used both, have made prints using both (not larger than 50x60cm tho') and to my taste and tonality on the negative I prefer the D-76. Eventually I find T-Max developer to suits me perfectly when pushing Tri-X to 1200/1600
 
I tried Xtol and kind of remember liking it. However, I stopped using it because the quantities did not work for me. They sell it in 1 liter and 5 liter mixes. 1 liter is not enough when I am working on a B/W project. 5 liters?? Maybe a bit too much, but also I don't have a container large enough to mix it in! So I settled on HC110 and Rodinal.
Loving Rodinal with Tri-X.
 
They are both good in their own way. As are Microdol-X, Lc29, DDx, Rodinal, 510 Pyro, etc. etc. Why do internet forums aways turn things into an either/or decision? Lots of talk about the grey tones in film but what about the grey areas in life, where most of use live and work?
 
Ansel said:
Why do internet forums aways turn things into an either/or decision? Lots of talk about the grey tones in film but what about the grey areas in life, where most of use live and work?
Click to expand...

Agreed. From that point of view, a better way to frame the discussion would be: "In what ways do you prefer XTOL? In what ways do you prefer D-76?" "When do you use each?" That could encourage an integrative discussion, rather than a dichotomous one. Still, I think the merits and limits of each have been well reviewed in this thread!

A good result of this thread, is that it has stimulated ongoing interest and experimentation. Several have written something like, "I think I'll now go get a package of ---- and try that one some more!" As for me, as soon as I use up my new gallon of D-76, I think I'll have to try some XTOL again . . .
 
When I buy a pair of shoes, it takes a while to "break" them in so as they feel comfortable, fit my feet, well, kind of like a good pair of leather gloves.

I've used lots of different developers, still have a bunch of them. I was on the Rodinal, then Pyro kick for a while.

Like my old pair of shoes that are comfortable to wear, I feel the same way about D-76. It's been at my side for most of my photography life. The negatives just look and feel good to me!
 
I've used both D-76 and XTOL quite a lot, also HC-110. I found that the task of producing negatives for scanning showed XTOL a distinct advantage over D-76 due to finer grain structure, higher acutance, flatter contrast curve, and more detail in the highlights. In essence, it produces more data to work with ... the best negative for scanning is highly detailed, has low grain, and has a relatively flat contrast curve. All the magic happens in doing the image processing.

HC-110 produces a negative quite similar to D-76. I tend to use it instead of either of the others because it comes in a liquid concentrate form which I can mix one-shot at the time I process film, which is very infrequently these days.

D-76 and Tri-X produces a sharp, contrasty, grainy negative ... the signature look of the 1960s and 1970s in 35mm B&W. It is best when you're making wet lab prints IMO. I have to punch it around a little bit to tame the contrast for scanning as I only render and print through digital means these days.

G
 
I've only got experience with D76, but have really been wanting to try XTOL for a while now. I've seen great stuff from it.
I always get the D76 one gallon bags and I just mix it up in two batches. Is there any disadvantage to that? I was planning on doing the same for XTOL. What's the shelf-life of mixed XTOL, granted they're stored oxygen-free?
 
You're really supposed to mix the entire D76 bag up; you really can't ensure that you'll getting the correct proportions of the powder when you divide like that
 
I use Xtol because I always push my film, for that it's perfect. If I was shooting @400 D76 is nicer and less flat than Xtol, the most beautiful is Fuji Neopan 1600 (@1600) in D76
 
The assertion that XTOL is "flatter" than D-76 is just odd. Sensitometry says otherwise.

I suspect that this perception has to to with the fact that XTOL gives you more real film speed. As a consequence, you need to shoot ⅓ to ½ stop higher EI than with D-76 to get equivalent contrast. Similarly, the notion that D-76 is sharper is wrong. XTOL gives measurably higher acutance than D-76. All while delivering fine, sharp grain structure.

Here's an extremely useful technical summary of XTOL's properties, taken from one of Freakscene's posts to a related thread:

http://leica-users.org/v35/msg07982.html
 
Tijmendal said:
I weight the powder with a kitchen scale, so that's not a problem.
Click to expand...
I think he means that the D76 pack contains different chemical powders which may separate out slightly in transport so that if you take a small sample from the D76 pack, the different constituents may be present in the wrong proportion.
Pete
 
Chriscrawfordphoto said:
I'v tried Xtol and prefer D76. Xtol does give finer grain but I have never liked its tonality, and I really tried to like it because of the finer grain and the less toxic formula. Just couldn't make it work for me as well as D76. I use Rodinal a lot and Tmax Developer too, and prefer both of them to Xtol as well.
Click to expand...

Same here, tried XTOL, works fantastic on Acros - super sharp and modern but I find it too clinical and I get better tonality from Rodinal. I just bought D-76 for the first time. Can't wait to develop Tri-X with it soon!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom