Microphen clones

Discussion in 'Darkroom Developing and Printing' started by sreenath, Dec 20, 2005.

  1. sreenath

    sreenath Guest

    Hi all,

    I have a question aboue Microphen look-alikes. One is ID-68, published
    by Ilford. The other two are slightly different formulations (found on
    Internet)

    There arwe three main differences between these three:

    1. Quantity of phenidone
    2. Ratio of Borax to Boric acid
    3. Quantity of Sodium sufite

    Ilford ID-68 Clone 1 Clone 2
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Sodium Sulfite 85 g 100 g 100 g
    Hydroquinone 5 g 5 g 5 g
    Phenidone 0.13 g 0.2 g 0.2 g
    Borax 7 g 6.8 g 3 g
    Boric Acid 2 g 2.7 g 3.5 g
    Sodium metabisulfite -- 0.65 g ---
    Potassium Bromide g 1 g 1 g
    Water to make 1 L 1 L 1 L

    Clone 2 is also referred to as Kendal Microphen.

    "Kendal microphen" should be less alkaline because it has less of
    borax and comparatively more quantity of Boric acid.

    ID-68 has smaller quantity of Phenidone, but more borax.
    Clone-1 has small amount of sodium metabisulfite also, which is acidic.

    Now my question is, which would give "real" speed gain of the three?

    Would Clone-2 (Kendal microphen), with lesser alkalinity have any
    advantages over the others?

    thanks,
    Sreenath
     
    sreenath, Dec 20, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Clone 2 should be less active than the other two, perhaps
    slightly finer grained. Kendall invented an economical way
    to produce Phenidone for Ilford. It was known as a
    developing agent before this but was not practical because
    of its high price. I think this must be a predecessor to
    ID-68.
    ID-68 has closer to the optimum amount of sulfite and no
    bromide so should deliver the highest speed of the three.
    There is probably not much practical difference between it
    and Clone 1.
    From the MSDS Microphen appears to be close to ID-68.
    Essentially, this is a Phenidone version of buffered D-76.
    In comparison to packaged D-76 packaged Microphen yeilds
    slightly higher speed (less than a stop) and somewhat
    coarser grain. Ilford DDX appears to be a liquid concentrate
    version of Microphen, although probably not identical to it
    in working solution. Kodak T-Max is also a similar
    developer.
     
    Richard Knoppow, Dec 20, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. sreenath

    dan.c.quinn Guest

    RE:sreenath wrote: Hi all,
    Clone 2 is, according to my book Classic B& W Formulas
    by Patrick Dignan, the exact same as Microphen AND Ilford
    Universal Developer; PQ-FGF. PQ is a PQ D-76.
    For upping the ISO mix up the Acufine substitute. The
    formula listed is the same as Crawley's FX-4. Dan
     
    dan.c.quinn, Dec 20, 2005
    #3
  4. sreenath

    nailer Guest

    On 20 Dec 2005 06:53:28 -0800, "sreenath" <>
    wrote:

    #Hi all,
    #
    #I have a question above Microphen look-alikes. One is ID-68,
    published
    #by Ilford. The other two are slightly different formulations (found
    on
    #Internet)
    #
    #There arwe three main differences between these three:
    #
    #1. Quantity of phenidone
    #2. Ratio of Borax to Boric acid
    #3. Quantity of Sodium sufite
    #
    # Ilford ID-68 Clone 1 Clone 2
    #--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    #
    #Sodium Sulfite 85 g 100 g 100 g
    #Hydroquinone 5 g 5 g 5 g
    #Phenidone 0.13 g 0.2 g 0.2 g
    #Borax 7 g 6.8 g 3 g
    #Boric Acid 2 g 2.7 g 3.5 g
    #Sodium metabisulfite -- 0.65 g ---
    #Potassium Bromide g 1 g 1 g
    #Water to make 1 L 1 L 1 L
    #

    pH will be mainly determined by ration of borax and boric acid. it is
    logarithmic dependance, so the difference between 1 and 2 would be
    ~0.15-0.2, between 1 and 3 ~0.6. sodium sulfite will balance it even
    more, so pH of all three should be quite similar.

    I do not thing 85 or 100 g of sodium sulfite would matter that much in
    terms of fine grain. for all practical purposes, an image should be
    similar.

    smaller quantity of Phenidone in 1 (ID68) will be compensated by
    higher pH.

    sodium metabislfite seems to be unnecessary, considering 100 g of
    sulfite and borax/borix acid buffer. skip it.

    KBr would have the biggest effect, particularly on fog/min density and
    speed. for more uniform results I would recommend addition of KBr.

    Well, ene mene mini mo, any of these three is as good as the others.


    #Clone 2 is also referred to as Kendal Microphen.
    #
    #"Kendal microphen" should be less alkaline because it has less of
    #borax and comparatively more quantity of Boric acid.
    #
    #ID-68 has smaller quantity of Phenidone, but more borax.
    #Clone-1 has small amount of sodium metabisulfite also, which is
    acidic.
    #
    #Now my question is, which would give "real" speed gain of the three?

    it depends, how you determine speed. ISO says 0.1 above the Dmin,
    confusing but these with KBr may be more efective due to keeping Dmin
    low. EI as per Kodak, may be higher with developers without KBr.
    Don't expect too much difference anyway, particularly with properly
    agitated developer.

    #
    #Would Clone-2 (Kendal microphen), with lesser alkalinity have any
    #advantages over the others?

    no.

    Merry Christmas and Happy New Year

    #
    #thanks,
    #Sreenath
     
    nailer, Dec 21, 2005
    #4
  5. sreenath

    sreenath Guest

    Thanks for all the responses.

    So I guess I have to test before using any of this for "serious :)"
    work.

    -Sreenath
     
    sreenath, Dec 21, 2005
    #5
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.