View Single Post
  #6  
Old August 1st 09, 07:35 PM
Keith Tapscott. Keith Tapscott. is offline
Senior Member
 
First recorded activity by PhotoBanter: Feb 2005
Posts: 112
Talking

Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Knoppow View Post
"Keith Tapscott."
wrote in message
...[color=blue][i]

Richard Knoppow;822714 Wrote:
"Keith Tapscott."
wrote in message
...-

Has anyone tried this developer?

http://tinyurl.com/kqegre
--
Keith Tapscott.


Kodak published a long technical paper in 1929 (I'll
get the citation if you want) detailing the research on
D-76.

There are alternate names for a lot of common chemicals
plus they can become different when in solution than when
dry.

Its possible that the current packaged version of D-76
is not exactly identical with the published D-76d but it is
the same stuff.


--
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles
WB6KBL
The 1929 publication mentioned has often been cited in topics concerning D-76/ID-11.
The increase in the activity of M.Q. developers is well known.
As the hydroquinone oxidises, it actually converts in solution to produce hydroquinone monosulfonate (HQMS) which is a much weaker, slower acting and more stable constituent than hydroquinone (HQ). HQMS is used in colour developers and is very expensive to buy and it requires a lot more HQMS in the formula to equal HQ. I have seen 5 parts HQMS to 1 part HQ cited as a very rough guide for making developers.
The downside is complexes formed with the sulphite which produces hydroxide and increases the activity of the developer. Thus the pH of an M.Q. developer can cycle down, then up and be variable making a difference of around +/- 10% difference in development time compared to fresh. This difference is usually with unused undiluted developer in partly fillled bottles. The common practise these days, is to dilute stock developers with water and use them as a one-shot solution where these variations often goes unnoticed.
What I can say having mixed D-76 and D-76d from scratch is that the standard D-76 formula seems to kinetically match Kodak`s commercial developer where as the D-76d buffered-borax version does not.
I have seen mentioned some Ilford patents where a developer which resembles D-76/ID-11 but has increased borax in the formula of either 3 or 4 grams per litre of stock which also provides greater buffering capacity.

I am not entirely convinced of Kodak`s MSDS either due to complexes formed when borax goes into solution which can form a whole myriad of boron ions in the developer.
As some of the photo-chemist have mentioned to me, MSDS`s are a good way of disguising what goes into solution for those with little experience in chemistry.

KODAK D-76 MSDS.

Weight % - Component - ( CAS Registry Number).
Concentrate:
85-90 Sodium Sulphite (007757-83-7)
1-5 Hydroquinone (000123-31-9)
1-5 Sodium Tetraborate (001330-43-4)
1-5 Bis (4-hydroxy-N-methylanilinium) sulphate (000055-55-0)
1 Boric Anhydride (001303-86-2)
1 Pentasodium (carboxylatomethyl) iminobis (ethylenenitrilo) tetraacetate
(000140-01-2)

Weight of concentrate = approximately 110 grams/litre. (This it self rules out D-76d formula which is 123 grams per litre of stock, not to mention sequestering agents etc).

From the book "Modern Photographic Processing" by Grant Haist, Volume 1:

Borate Alkali's: "Borax,Na2B4O7.10H2O, is the common name for sodium tetraborate, an alkaline compound used in the preparation of low-contrast, fine-grain developers. Borax may be written (NaBO2)2.B2O3, which shows the boric anhydride that limits the alkalinity possible from borax.
Borax acts as a buffer; that is, it maintains a reservoir of alkali but delivers only small quantities of hydroxyl ions at any one time. The alkalinity is maintained relatively unchanged until all of the borax has been neutralised."

As I don`t process as much B&W films these days, I no longer buy D-76 in the U.S gallon size packages and the 1 litre sizes are not as good value for money. I now make my own to the standard formula as and when required and I have found it to be very reliable despite what the 1929 publication says.
In fact, I actually prefer the scratch-mixed developer which I use diluted 1+1. Try it and you may be pleasantly surprised with the results. :-)

Last edited by Keith Tapscott. : August 1st 09 at 07:40 PM.