microdol-x formula finally revealed?

J

J enea

Established
Local time
5:06 AM
Joined
Apr 30, 2015
Messages
180
Location
Palo Alto, CA
View My Gallery
after many years of pestering on photo.net and APUG/photrio, it appears that photo Engineer (ron) finally discloses what he has as the formula for microdol-x. I don't want to get him in trouble, so if this post needs to be removed, please do.

see post #115 from this latest thread that begged him for the formula. so anyone who wants to play mad chemist and improve on the already good perceptol home brew, have at it 🙂

https://www.photrio.com/forum/threads/microdol-x-homebrew-question.110991/page-5#post-2057961
 
He didn't really disclose anything. Just a list of chemicals. Without the amounts, that's pretty useless.

I don't get the obsession with Microdol-X anyway. When used fullstrength as a fine grain developer, it reduces image acutance and film speed. When diluted 1+3, you get full film speed back, but lose the fine grain.
 
Chriscrawfordphoto said:
I don't get the obsession with Microdol-X anyway. When used fullstrength as a fine grain developer, it reduces image acutance and film speed. When diluted 1+3, you get full film speed back, but lose the fine grain.
Click to expand...

And according to Anchell and Troop, Microdol-X diluted 1:3 also enhances acutance. The same is claimed for Perceptol and XTOL. The same authors indicate that " . . . a close approximation to the Microdol formula is 5 grams Metol, 100 grams sulfite, and 30 grams sodium chloride to a liter of water." They also reference Richard Henn, but no mention of resorcinol or sodium citrate. Instead, sodium chloride is claimed as the missing ingredient, rather than the sodium citrate listed by photo engineer.
 
Rob-F said:
And according to Anchell and Troop, Microdol-X diluted 1:3 also enhances acutance. The same is claimed for Perceptol and XTOL. The same authors indicate that " . . . a close approximation to the Microdol formula is 5 grams Metol, 100 grams sulfite, and 30 grams sodium chloride to a liter of water." They also reference Richard Henn, but no mention of resorcinol or sodium citrate. Instead, sodium chloride is claimed as the missing ingredient, rather than the sodium citrate listed by photo engineer.
Click to expand...


The original Microdol contained salt (sodium chloride), which does reduce grain, at the expense of sharpness. Maybe it was replaced by Sodium Citrate in Microdol-X?

Diluted Microdol-X does enhance acutance, but so do a lot of other developers (diluted Xtol, Rodinal, etc.). Why bother with an old discontinued formula when there are perfectly good acutance developers still available?
 
I've never understood the endless speculation and hand-wringing. On ebay there are numerous samples of original Kodak Microdol-X. Purchasing one of these and having it analysed by LCMS or GCMS is simple, and would provide absolute certainty, even if it was at cost. It's not like film or paper, where the formula is useless because you can't replicate the manufacturing process. Also, the Legacy Mic-X is essentially the same as Microdol-X, and cheaper than purchasing small quantities of unusual chemical components.

I wish all these hand-wringers would just go and take some more photos, then show us.

Marty
 
Freakscene said:
I've never understood the endless speculation and hand-wringing. On ebay there are numerous samples of original Kodak Microdol-X. Purchasing one of these and having it analysed by LCMS or GCMS is simple, and would provide absolute certainty, even if it was at cost. It's not like film or paper, where the formula is useless because you can't replicate the manufacturing process. Also, the Legacy Mic-X is essentially the same as Microdol-X, and cheaper than purchasing small quantities of unusual chemical components.

I wish all these hand-wringers would just go and take some more photos, then show us.

Marty
Click to expand...

YES!

Also, isn't Ilford Perceptol very similar to Microdol-X?
 
Microdol-X is one of those legends lost, like Plus-X. It was very widely used when I was learning, and has some very good properties when pulling films, and/or when fine grain is required. The formula is unusual in having been kept secret since time immemorial, so there is the set-up for a good quest.

Perceptol appears to be identical, I simply transferred all my times for Microdol-X after testing a few of the films I use.

I use Perceptol at 1:1. It is an extremely fine grain developer, that gives really lovely tonality on slow and medium speed films, especially ORWO UN54 at Box speed and on PanF+ at 25. As one who finds even ISO25 to be too fast on occasion I appreciate the speed “loss” I can get.
 
Chriscrawfordphoto said:
YES!

Also, isn't Ilford Perceptol very similar to Microdol-X?
Click to expand...

Only in that it is a metol-only developer, and as such has similar or the same development times. The formula apart from metol is different, and the tones it produces arenot the same. It is hard to make and use a Perceptol replenisher, whereas Microdol-X replenishes well and a replenisher is easy to make.

Anyone can also make D23 with spoon measures.

Marty
 
Freakscene said:
the Legacy Mic-X is essentially the same as Microdol-X, and cheaper than purchasing small quantities of unusual chemical components.
Click to expand...

001 by Nokton48, on Flickr

I agree with Bob and Marty, and I am a big fan of Legacy Mic-X. It's available fresh, a gallon runs about $10 from Freestyle, it's easy to mix Mic-X replenisher, and it seems to last forever as replenished stock solution. My stock solution is over four years old which is amazing to me. I develop 35mm XX to LF sheet film, and I happen to like the tonality I'm getting.

For me one of the best features of this developer, is that the processing times are -quite- long. For my uses this is a major benefit to me. I'm talking 25-35 minutes at 20C rotary processing. Works for me. Yes you lose some emulsion speed but frankly I could care less.
 
This is one of my favorite developers. I feel it's designed to use full strength to get the full benefit of the formula. Never had any problems w/ acutance when used that way, but then I always used it w/ very good Nikon, Leica or Rolleiflex lenses. You do lose a stop of exposure at full strength, but that's no big deal.

A Microdol X clone is available at Freestyle, and in my experience it behaves exactly like the Kodak version, so the formula has been around for a long time (although if you look at APUG threads, it would seem to be the Holy Grail of lost-developer formulas). You need good light for this developer if used at full strength or you'll end up w/ flat tonal values, which is why I always shot w/ a red or yellow filter.

It's almost grainless at full strength. One of my favorite films to use it with is Arista EDU Ultra 100, which I shoot at 25 ISO w/ a yellow filter (see shots below taken w/ a Nikon FG and a hacked H 50 2 lens. The bike wheel photo was taken wide open.) Be sure to click on the little + sign to see the sharpness and detail, especially the last shot. Things would look better if I had a dedicated film scanner, as these are flatbed scans on an ancient Epson 2450.

https://imgur.com/77WSRfr

https://imgur.com/2SD2jEF
 
Nokton48 said:
I agree with Bob and Marty, and I am a big fan of Legacy Mic-X. It's available fresh, a gallon runs about $10 from Freestyle, it's easy to mix Mic-X replenisher, and it seems to last forever as replenished stock solution. My stock solution is over four years old which is amazing to me. I develop 35mm XX to LF sheet film, and I happen to like the tonality I'm getting.
Click to expand...

If you keep using and replenishing Mic-X, the solution will last indefinitely. Eventually you may need to filter it, and eventually you may lose enough film speed that you decide to start again. If you stop using it for a while it will oxidise and you will need to start again, but otherwise just keep replenishing and periodically testing.

A few hundred mL of very old replenished developer is a good way to season a new batch if you ever decide to start again.

Nokton48 said:
For me one of the best features of this developer, is that the processing times are -quite- long. For my uses this is a major benefit to me. I'm talking 25-35 minutes at 20C rotary processing. Works for me. Yes you lose some emulsion speed but frankly I could care less.
Click to expand...

Lengthening times does make for better fine control.

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