Fomadon Excel (=xtol?)

Gast · 2004-11-24T18:28:25+00:00

Hallo, Kann jemand über Erfahrungen mit Fomadon Excel berichten? (evtl. sogar in Kombination mit Kodak HIE?) Laut Fotoimpex-Katalog soll der Entwickler dem...

Gast

Hello, Does anyone have any experience with Fomadon Excel? (Perhaps even in combination with Kodak HIE?) According to the FOTOIMPEX catalogue, the developer is said to be similar to Xtol. I’d be interested to know whether one can expect identical results to Xtol, i.e. whether Fomadon Excel is as similar to Xtol as, for example, D76 and ID-11. That would make it a viable alternative, as Kodak now only offers the 5-litre pack (which is, relatively speaking, considerably cheaper). I look forward to your replies Stefan R.

Gast

Stefan, The formula for D76 has always been in the public domain, as users (the film industry) did not want to rely on proprietary products. This does not apply to Xtol (patented); the exact composition is not known. There are, of course, publications of the patent, but its use for commercial purposes is prohibited. Best regards Ferdinand

Beef

Hello, It’s an age-old topic, but I’ve finally ordered the Fomadon Excel and LQN developers for my Fomapan films. There are NO instructions anywhere on the dilution of the Excel developer. Not even under the Dev Chart. For some reason, the Impex description lists the LQN details under Excel :lol: And the title says it’s enough for 1 litre... I’d only just be able to develop two films with that... that can’t be right, it must need dilution :rolleyes: And I’ve already read in another forum that Fomadon EXCEL and XTOL are absolutely IDENTICAL developers. The development times in the Foma data sheets are identical too. However, this all contradicts the previous comment. Can anyone give me a clue as to what dilution and time I need for the Fomapan films? Strangely enough, Excel isn’t listed in the Impex developer table :lol: And does anyone know for sure whether XTOL is the same as Excel? Then I’ll just order one of the two in future... it would be mad otherwise <_< Regards Andi

cfb_de

> The development times listed in the Foma data sheets are also identical. Any further comments would result in legal action in German courts. This statement is sufficient for me. And in conjunction with the analyses I have at my disposal (which are by no means to be published), I have no difficulty with these identical development times. The two approaches are not exactly the same. But they are *very* similar. Best regards, Franz

Beef

OK, thanks Franz. I’m looking forward to seeing how it goes. You said you already have some results… what dilutions of the stock solution (1L) would you recommend? Even in a document on the Foma website, where all the developers, dilutions and times are described in detail, there are NO DILUTIONS listed specifically for Excel. However, it does say that this 1L is enough for about 12 films. Could you perhaps give me a dilution tip for a single-use developer and a rough estimate of the time? Maybe 1L / 12 = 83ml per film? :rolleyes: :lol: <_< Regards Andi

cfb_de

You said you already had some results...

Hi Andi, I was referring to analyses. Not to development results. Analysis is science. Film development is more empirical. That means I now know exactly what’s in those solutions. It doesn’t necessarily mean I’ve ever conducted film development in them. My most frequently used developers have been public knowledge for years. It also doesn’t mean – to forestall any queries – that I’m now divulging protected recipes. After all, the manufacturers have to make a living from them. Stinginess may be cool, but it’s not appropriate here. The formulas for Beutler’s, Diafine and other developers are public. Even for Rodinal in its original 1+40 version. Best regards, Franz

Beef

Hi Franz, OK, I’d got the bit about the analyses wrong. I don’t want you to be giving out recipes or anything like that either :lol: The only thing I’d be interested in is a tip on what development time and dilution I should start with. It doesn’t matter whether it’s Xtol or Excel. The only info I have (from the Kodak data sheet): Single-use developer = 1:1, 1:2, 1:3. And the higher the dilution, the finer the grain and the better the result. That’s why I’d go for 1:3. But if no one has any advice, I’ll probably have to develop a few test strips again and work my way towards the right settings strip by strip (which is something I really wanted to avoid). That could take anywhere from 5 minutes to an hour :rolleyes: Cheers Andi

HenningH

And the higher the dilution, the finer the fine grain and the greater the sharpness of the result.

Are you sure? Normally (not with Rodinal...) it is the case that sharpness increases, but so does granularity... The German data sheet states: "When diluted, the developer offers slightly increased ISO sensitivity, better sharpness and slightly finer grain." The English version, however, states: "Dilution at 1:1 will provide slightly greater ISO sensitivity, enhanced sharpness and shadow detail, and slightly more grain." I would tend to trust the English version more... Covington also writes: “At high dilutions you can expect greater sharpness, more of an S-shaped curve, slightly higher film speed, and slightly coarser grain.” There is also quite a bit there about higher dilutions. Best regards, Henning

Beef

Hi Henning, Hmm... I'm not sure. I was just going by the information in the German data sheet (page 6) :lol: Phew, the data sheets really do vary a lot. Both say that dilution increases ISO sensitivity and improves sharpness. The statement about the grain, however, is contradictory <_< I still don’t really know how it is with Rodinal...some say 1+25 and some say 1+100 results in finer grain :rolleyes: (what’s the truth, then?...I’ve only ever seen results with 1+50) Regards Andi