Fresh XTOL from PSI and thin Negatives

Protest.

A
Protest.

  • 10
  • 5
  • 295
Window

A
Window

  • 6
  • 0
  • 136
_DSC3444B.JPG

D
_DSC3444B.JPG

  • 0
  • 1
  • 149

Forum statistics

Threads
197,247
Messages
2,756,282
Members
99,435
Latest member
ICU
Recent bookmarks
1

Joerg Bergs

Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2007
Messages
119
Location
near cologne
Format
Medium Format
After all the back and forth from and with Tetenal, I used up my old XTOL packs until 2020 in order to then use Mörsch chemistry exclusively. A test of the new US XTOL batch with a TX400 35mm film amazed me because the film did not reach its sensitivity or maximum density. I haven't tested another batch yet or testet films accurately to the new batch. What is your experience with current XTOL chemistry? Sino Promis XTOL was unusable and I haven't used Adox XT3 yet and don’t plan to for now.
 

Chuck_P

Subscriber
Joined
Feb 2, 2004
Messages
2,369
Location
Kentucky
Format
4x5 Format
After all the back and forth from and with Tetenal, I used up my old XTOL packs until 2020 in order to then use Mörsch chemistry exclusively. A test of the new US XTOL batch with a TX400 35mm film amazed me because the film did not reach its sensitivity or maximum density. I haven't tested another batch yet or testet films accurately to the new batch. What is your experience with current XTOL chemistry? Sino Promis XTOL was unusable and I haven't used Adox XT3 yet and don’t plan to for now.

I use XTOL and have had no issues with it, so I would have to wonder what else might be going.....are you sure the film was exposed properly?
 

radialMelt

Subscriber
Joined
Dec 3, 2022
Messages
247
Location
Canada
Format
35mm RF
Perhaps coincidence, or perhaps user error on my part, but I have some new XTOL that I'm currently using and experiencing the same thing-- very thin negs. Not unusably thin, mind you. They scan reasonably well. But thinner than I would expect for sure. I was assuming it was my fault since its only my second time running XTOL. Interesting to hear you're having the same experience.

For the record I most recently noticed this after processing a roll of Tmax400 in 120 format... 6:05 @ 20C, agitation according to Kodak's instructions

MODERATOR'S NOTE: radialMelt's subsequent post merged with this one:

It's too late to edit this post, so posting here to say ignore me. I just realized I was following timing for full strength (undiluted) XTOL, not 1+1 dilution. I technically should have been developing for 9:15min, not 6:15min. User error.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Sirius Glass

Subscriber
Joined
Jan 18, 2007
Messages
50,060
Location
Southern California
Format
Multi Format
I found that XTOL worked will with all black & white films, however I found that the Ilford films came out thin with the posted times. Therefore I add one minute to the 68 degree F [20 degree C] time for all Ilford films.
 

pentaxuser

Member
Joined
May 9, 2005
Messages
19,611
Location
Daventry, No
Format
35mm
Time is moving faster than responses are being posted. It looks as though the OP has moved on.

Yes some strange people who may not have understood the unwritten rules of Photrio think that having got an answer that is satisfactory to them or in this case found the answer from other sources simply tell us "problem solved" and move on😀

pentaxuser
 
OP
OP
Joerg Bergs

Joerg Bergs

Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2007
Messages
119
Location
near cologne
Format
Medium Format
Time is moving faster than responses are being posted. It looks as though the OP has moved on.

Sorry for the late reply, but the Christmas business at the Lab doesn't allow time for a quick response. The current batch, made in US, is not usable, as, after a retest, TriX and Tmax400 are coming out underdeveloped with our time. We would therefore have to retest all films. A test of 0.1 over fog showed a lower sensitivity for both films. Xtol was applied correctly and the temperature and time were exactly the same as in the old test. I may test a second bag in the spring, but this one, from a first batch, is unusable.
 

brbo

Member
Joined
Dec 28, 2011
Messages
2,017
Location
EU
Format
Multi Format
The current batch, made in US, is not usable, as, after a retest, TriX and Tmax400 are coming out underdeveloped with our time. We would therefore have to retest all films. A test of 0.1 over fog showed a lower sensitivity for both films.

This s*it again?!

Are there more reports of the new new new Xtol activity problem?

I switched to XT-3, but since I use so little BW films I liked the “unlimited” (for me thats sometimes more than 3 years) life of mixed stock Xtol. I hope I don’t learn about XT-3 longevity not being at least as good as Xtol the hard way (as I did with Foma Excel - another “100% trust me bro” clone of Xtol)…
 

uranylcation

Subscriber
Joined
Jan 23, 2024
Messages
52
Location
Salt Lake City
Format
Medium Format
I got very thin Tmax 100 and Acros II 100 from Xtol developed in recommended time and dilution. Had to increase time significantly to get what I like, for example 12 min for 1:1 dilution ISO 100 or 18 min for 1:2 dilution. Delta 100 or FP4+ come out more or less correct with the recommended time, from the same bottle, though.
 

Andrew O'Neill

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Jan 16, 2004
Messages
11,743
Location
Coquitlam,BC Canada
Format
Multi Format
No, because the Chinese powder hardly dissolved at up to 30C°. And higher temperatures are absolutely not recommended, as the vitamin C derivative is damaged.

I mix at temps between 20 and 24C, straight out of the tap. Never needed to go higher.But... once I've used up this stash, I won't be using XTol, or that XT-3 substitute, when I can easily mix up XTol-like developers from scratch.
 

Milpool

Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2023
Messages
549
Location
n/a
Format
4x5 Format
I suggest anyone who has had a problem or thinks something is off with the newer batches contact Photo Systems Inc. with whatever information you can provide.

 

Chuck_P

Subscriber
Joined
Feb 2, 2004
Messages
2,369
Location
Kentucky
Format
4x5 Format
But... once I've used up this stash, I won't be using XTol, or that XT-3 substitute, when I can easily mix up XTol-like developers from scratch.

I'm stepping into that realm of mixing from dry chemical and am currently waiting for my scale and what I need to mix BT2B. However, I currently do use the packaged XTOL (with no issues so far)..............it may be a topic for another thread but would be interested in trying an XTOL-like developer that you seem to favor, probably would be a good starting point.
 

xtol121

Subscriber
Joined
Jul 18, 2020
Messages
94
Location
Los Angeles, CA
Format
35mm RF
I’m curious if anyone on here uses a densitometer when testing or if everyone is eyeballing it off of scans?

I’ve been having a similar issue, not that it’s really an issue if you test for it, for the last year or so with XTOL (Kodak and the eco pro variant). Developing with XTOL 1+1 @ 20°C with inversion agitation every 30s for 400TX in 35mm requires a time of 13m30s to achieve a 1.25 range from zone I thru zone VIII. My base fog is 0.19, I is 0.29, and VIII reads 1.57 (close enough to my 1.25 target). This is considerably longer than the data sheet recommends, but the curves essentially match my old tests (2020) which were done at 10m to achieve the same range. Grain is similar and outside of taking longer everything is great.

I go through a full 5L bag of XTOL every month and XTOL has been this way since at least last summer. I changed darkrooms recently before that and assumed it was just something in the new water, but since I work out new times when I change location or chemistry it didn’t bite me.

Totally understand OP not wanting to test all of the different film stocks, but if you were at 10m and now you’re at 13m30s like me, you could try one other film at 35% longer than your old times and see if it’s on target. If so, you’re probably fine to use that time formula for all other films.
 

Andrew O'Neill

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Jan 16, 2004
Messages
11,743
Location
Coquitlam,BC Canada
Format
Multi Format
I’m curious if anyone on here uses a densitometer when testing or if everyone is eyeballing it off of scans?

I’ve been having a similar issue, not that it’s really an issue if you test for it, for the last year or so with XTOL (Kodak and the eco pro variant). Developing with XTOL 1+1 @ 20°C with inversion agitation every 30s for 400TX in 35mm requires a time of 13m30s to achieve a 1.25 range from zone I thru zone VIII. My base fog is 0.19, I is 0.29, and VIII reads 1.57 (close enough to my 1.25 target). This is considerably longer than the data sheet recommends, but the curves essentially match my old tests (2020) which were done at 10m to achieve the same range. Grain is similar and outside of taking longer everything is great.

I go through a full 5L bag of XTOL every month and XTOL has been this way since at least last summer. I changed darkrooms recently before that and assumed it was just something in the new water, but since I work out new times when I change location or chemistry it didn’t bite me.

Totally understand OP not wanting to test all of the different film stocks, but if you were at 10m and now you’re at 13m30s like me, you could try one other film at 35% longer than your old times and see if it’s on target. If so, you’re probably fine to use that time formula for all other films.

I use a densitometer. Are you including the base+fog in your readings, or subtracting them?
 
Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links.
To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here.

PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Ilford ADOX Freestyle Photographic Stearman Press Weldon Color Lab Blue Moon Camera & Machine
Top Bottom