RE: xtol wrecked my HIE!

["Eric Boutilier-Brown" <ebb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi,

This wouldn't explain why the 1:1 dilution failed, but if you processed a
roll of 35mm at 1:3 in an 8 oz steel tank, then you were doomed to failure -
Kodak stares you must have 4oz (100 ml) of Xtol per roll of film - if you
diluted it 1:3, then there wasn't enough Xtol in an 8oz tank.

As I said before, I have had excellent results with Xtol straight - finer
grain and very smooth tones. I have tried diluting it 1:1, but even times up
to 15 minutes failed to give me the density I wanted...confusing,  but as I
have found what works, I am content. I guess another thought is that the
film might have been too under exposed - how was the density of the rebate
numbers?

Best of luck solving this problem,

Take care,

e.

Eric Boutilier-Brown
Halifax, Nova Scotia

Evolving Beauty
http://www.ebb.ns.ca

> Jaap,
>
> Glad you mentioned the MACO 820 film.
> I wanted to post my results of the MACO 820 rollfim to the group,
> but I already
> 'lost' 2 rolls because of too thin negatives.
> I used a 89b Filter and overexposed 3 stops on a sunny day (I
> rated the film ISO
> 100 and measured integral). Because I didn't have the recommended LP Grain
> liquid developper from the manufactor  I used XTOL 1:3 for 14
> minutes (as they
> recommend on their data sheet). As I already said, the negatives
> were way to
> thin. Now I'm waiting for their recommended developper (LP Grain
> liquid) in hope
> that I'll get better results.....
>

*
****
*******
******************************************************
*  To remove yourself from this list, send:          *
*         UNSUBSCRIBE INFRARED                       *
*       to                                           *
*         MAJORDOMO@xxxxx                            *
*----------------------------------------------------*
*   For the IR-FAQ, IR-Gallery and heaps of links:   *
*  http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/mainpage.htm  *
******************************************************