Film Developing With Kodak D-76, Dilutions 1+1, 1+3, 1+5, Push and Pull

SASHA KRASNOV MENU
P H O T O G R A P H Y
FILM DEVELOPING WITH KODAK D-76
Kodak D-76 is a classic and truly versatile developer which

�rst entered the market in 1927. It provides full emulsion
speed, long density range and excellent shadow detail with
normal contrast and produces �ne grain with a variety of
continuous-tone black-and-white �lms.
D-76 DILUTIONS
Kodak recommends using D-76 as a full-strength stock
solution. But there is no reason to use it undiluted. For
greater sharpness, but with a slight increase of grain, a 1+1
dilution is typically used, which is also recommended by
Kodak. It gives a long density range and allows push
processing with relatively low fog.
This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on the website. By continuing to use
the website without clicking "Accept" then you are consenting to this.
If it is diluted to 1+3 it becomes
Accept
a non-solvent high acutance
developer. Non-solvent
developers produce a coarser
grain structure but the image
will look sharper. It is because
there are not many solvents
with such dilution to dissolve
the edge of the grain.
Fresh solution should be prepared just before developing

from certain parts of stock and water. However, I personally
recommend diluting it 1+3 for a better compensating effect.
Once Kodak included charts for this dilution. But a few years
ago they were removed from its of�cial data. For normal
processing of low contrast scenes I usually use it diluted 1+1.
PULL AND PUSH PROCESSING WITH D-76

For pull processing up to -2EV I recommend a 1+5 dilution
that gives a great compensating effect and lowers contrast.
It is very good for processing high-contrast scenes. For pull
processing only to -1EV I usually use a 1+3 dilution and
sometimes 1+5.
For push processing up to +2EV I prefer a 1+1 dilution. To

push it even more I use it undiluted, but do it quite rarely.
Also, for push processing only to +1EV I use either a 1+3
dilution or 1+1 one and never 1+5.
For push processing, I prefer a 1+1 dilution up to +2EV. To

push the
it even
websitemore
withoutIclicking
use it"Accept"
undiluted,
then youbut do it quite
are consenting rarely.
to this.
Also, for push processing only to +1EV I use dilution 1+3 or

Accept
1+1 and never 1+5.
PROCESS STABILITY
The key to stable results is strict compliance with the same
rules every time you develop the �lm. Do not modify
temperature and agitation until you get stable results with a
certain dilution. If you need more or less �lm density, �rst
try to increase or decrease developing time. If it doesn’t
help, other dilution may be used. But the more diluted the
solution gets, the lower the contrast becomes, and vice
versa.
By the way, any dilution other than stock can be used only
once. This is very convenient. As a result, you always get the
fresh solution just before developing and you do not need to
put the used one back into a separate bottle after the
process is over and calculate the developing time for the
next �lm, which is absolutely unpredictable. This is another
key to stable results.
DEVELOPMENT TIMES
The times in this chart are given for the temperature of 20°C
with no pre-soaking and the following agitation: 2 inversions
of tank or �lm reel rotation for 4 sec per every 30 sec. To
remove air bubbles from the �lm I tap the tank a few times
immediately after the developer is poured inside. I have
been using the sealed Jobo UniTank 1500 tank system for
manythe
years.
website without clicking "Accept" then you are consenting to this.
Accept
And, of course, this chart re�ects my own experience. Also
you may refer to the Massive Dev Chart for other �lms and
times.
Ilford Pan F Plus 50
25 — 9 15
50 23
Kodak T-Max 100
50 — 17
100 25
200 13 —
Fuji Neopan 100 Acros
50 — 10 17
100 10
200 17 23 —
Fomapan 100
50 —
100
200 —
Ilford FP4 Plus 125
64 —
125
250 —
Arista EDU Ultra 400
400 13 —
800 — —
1600 23 — —
Kodak T-Max 400
400 —
800 —
1600 — —
Kodak
This website Tri-X
uses 400to ensure you get the best experience on the website. By continuing to use
cookies
400 the website without clicking "Accept" then you are consenting to this. —
800 Accept —
1600 — —
3200 — —
Ilford HP5 Plus 400
400 —
800 16 —
1600 19 — —
KODAK D-76 FORMULA

Kodak published the formula of D-76 developer in some of
its photographic handbooks, for example on page 15 in
Kodak Chemicals and Formulae. Below is the original formula
of Kodak D-76 �lm developer for preparing 1 litre of stock
solution.
Water 50°C 750 ml
Metol or Elon 2 g
Sodium Sul�te anhydrous 100 g
Hydroquinone 5 g
Borax 2 g
Cold water to make 1000 ml
Despite the fact that Kodak D-76 developer is supplied in a single packet in which
all ingredients are mixed together it is better to add chemicals in the speci�ed
order if you prepare the developer yourself.
STAND DEVELOPMENT WITH D-76

Kodak D-76 is not a typical developer to be used for stand
development, with Rodinal developer being most often used
for this purpose. I personally do not practice this
development
This website uses cookies toprocess
ensure youwith
get theD-76 because,
best experience in website.
on the my opinion, it to use
By continuing
does the
notwebsite without clicking "Accept" then you are consenting to this.
have any advantages compared to the usual
Accept
development in a 1+3 dilution, unlike, for example, stand
development using Rodinal. Anyway, the key reason for
stand development process is developing shadows while
preserving highlights.
However, using Kodak D-76 for stand development is

possible and I personally tried it. I used a 1+7 dilution, which
is a highly dilute developing solution: just 60ml of the stock
is used to prepare 480ml of working solution for my Jobo
UniTank 1500. Probably, it is possible to use an even weaker
solution, however, it must be noted that there is a limit as
regards the minimum amount, which practically depends on
the �lm emulsion. I guess if the dilution ratio is more than
1+7 a real �lm speed will be hard to achieve.
The initial temperature of the solution should also be kept at

20°C, although in this development method it won’t be
decisive. But, I prefer the initial conditions for the
development to always be the same. The average
development time is 1 hour. It can also vary depending on
the background temperature but one hour usually should be
enough. I always use my standard agitation: 2 inversions of
tank (or �lm reel rotation for 4 sec) per every 30 sec, but
only for the �rst two minutes. Further agitation is not
carried out.
It is important to note that in the stand development

method I always develop only one �lm at a time, despite the
fact that my Jobo Unitank 1520 allows me to develop two 120
or 135 �lms simultaneously.
Theuses
This website stand development
cookies creates
to ensure you get the best many opportunities
experience forcontinuing
on the website. By one’s to use
own the website withoutand
experiments, clicking
one"Accept"
couldthen write
you are consenting
a separate to this.
article
Accept
about it. For example, if negative images have insuf�cient
density, you can try semi-stand development or agitation for
every 15th or even 10th minute. It’s up to you.
I prefer to get a stable result. So, I use stand development

mainly as an experiment. Unfortunately, my experience also
showed that not all �lms are suitable for stand development
with Kodak D-76. In particular, when it comes to Foma �lms,
probably gas bubbles appear on the emulsion surface during
the stand development, which leads to insuf�cient
development in these areas. When scanning, this effect
appears as a myriad of small black dots throughout the �lm.
I did not observe this phenomenon on Kodak T-Max 100
�lms though. However, Foma seems to be improving its
emulsion from time to time, so it is quite possible that the
situation has changed.
ILFORD ID-11
Ilford ID-11 �lm developer is
equivalent to Kodak D-76. It is
clear from the Ilford ID-11
formula, which was published
on page 14 in Ilford Formulae &
Packed chemicals photographic
book.
Unlike Kodak D-76, which is

sold as a single package, Ilford
ID-11 involves two separate
packages
This website thatto need
uses cookies ensure to
you be added
get the best experience on the website. By continuing to use
and mixed one after the other. Probably this is exactly what
Accept modern Kodak D-76 and
gives rise to questions whether
Ilford ID-11 are really identical.
There is an assumption that the difference was in the

chemical that maintains pH, and perhaps their modern
formulas are somewhat different. But, it’s not so important
to me as I use both these developers and have not noticed
any difference. Even if it exists, it will be offset with a 1+1
dilution, and even more so with 1+3 and 1+5.
STORING THE DEVELOPER

Kodak says that the storage life of D-76 stock solution in a
tightly sealed full bottle is 6 months and 2 months for half-
�lled. I pour the freshly prepared stock solution into several
Jobo 1-litre black bottles, and use them one by one, which
increases the shelf life of the developer.
In practice, the stock solution can be stored in a black

tightly closed full bottle for much longer than Kodak claims.
For instance, I once forgot about the last full bottle of the
Kodak developer because I switched to developing in
Rodinal. And I had it in this state, without access of oxygen,
standing for about two years! The developer itself turned
yellowish, but its properties almost did not change. Unlike
Kodak XTOL, which does not change color during its storage
but can completely lose its properties. I can with a certain
degree of con�dence speak about its preservation based on
the color of D-76 solution — it is better not to use it if it
turned brown or very yellow.
Another good without
the website way toclicking
always havethen
"Accept" some fresh
you are developer
consenting to this. is to
prepare it yourself in the amount

Accept that can be used within
2-3 months. which depends on the number of �lms you
shoot. I rarely mix it myself, but I usually use the
prepackaged Kodak D-76 developer to prepare 3.8 litres of
stock solution, which I use up within a year, while
simultaneously using Rodinal. During this period the
properties of D-76 don’t usually change for worse.
OTHER RESOURCES
A good database listing recommended developing times is
the famous Massive Dev Chart. You may use it as a starting
point in your own experiments with �lm developing.
P.S.
Thanks for reading! I would be happy to share my
experience of shooting on �lm, its development, and other
practices of using this photographic material. Please, ask me
questions in the Leave a reply section below the post.
Answers to your questions give me new ideas and allow me
to piece better organize my experience.
Jul 7, 2016 © Sasha Krasnov
HOME > BLOG > FILM DEVELOPING WITH KODAK D-76
#�lm
Accept
53 COMMENTS
DAVID LYGA
This is rather interesting especially because you are not afraid of

stating diminutions up to 1+5 for D-76. ‘Of�cially’ you are not
supposed to do that but, trust me, it does work with consistency.
There are many old wives tales with processing. Your data is more
real than most.
I would have preferred that you had stated dilutions as I had) 1+?
rather than 1�?. Why? Because in some literature a, for example, 1�3
can mean one part developer MAKES three parts working solution.
Ilford’s way, using the ‘+’ instead of the colon, removes any
lingering ambiguity.

SASHA KRASNOV
I use the colon as ‘+’. So, the 1�X means — to prepare working
Accept
solution take one part of the stock and add X parts of water.
But you are right. To avoid misunderstanding I’ve changed ‘:’
to ‘+’. Digitaltruth also uses the same symbol too. Thank you,
it makes my post better!
ERIC JAMES
Interesting to see someone use D76 other than the ‘stock’ or 1�1
dilution. I have been using D76 at 1�3 almost exclusively on
HP5+/Delta 400/TMax 400 over the years, but lately have
attempted to develop FP4+ at 200iso, and at a D76 1�1 dilution for
12minutes at 24C. It worked �ne, perhaps a little contrasty, but the
day’s lighting was high in dynamic ranges too, so I cannot give a
de�nitive comment yet. I look forward to diluting D76 a little
further at 1�3, to compress the highlights and shadows together a
little more.
Many years ago, I experimented with 1�4 and 1�5 dilutions, but since
have lost my data. As I recall, I think I was developing for about 60
minutes in some cases!? I cannot remember.
Incidentally, I do not invert the tank during development, but

instead rotate the spiral 3-4 times per minute. No spillage to worry
about.
Many thanks for your article, очень интересная статья!
TIM
Maybe a bit late for the discussion but not for the topic.
Accept
To some photographers dilution equates to using less chemistry for
an area of �lm to save money. Others, to obtain a shift in
resolution, sharpness or maybe grain. Perceived or real is of no
importance to this input. The process still requires the energy to
get’er done.
Example: Using Kodak’s data sheet, a gallon of stock D76 will do 16
unit areas of �lm UNREPLENISHED (single shot). A unit area is a
roll of 35mm/36 exposure, 120 rol, four 4×5 negatives, or two 8×10
negatives. That is 8 ounces per roll. (128 ounces divided by 16 rolls)
If you do it straight (stock) 1�1, or 1�50, …no difference in the energy
needed… it is still requires 8 ounces to provide the necessary
energy to full and consistent properly exposed negatives. Meaning
8 oz. of D76 stock and 8 oz. for the water (1�1).
if you were to try 1�50 (ratio is exaggerated for clari�cation only )

you need 8 oz. of D76 …BUT 400 oz. of water… If you want to
develop a single roll of 35mm �lm. Result… a very BIG, TANK and
Long, very long wait.
Another example… TMAX developer, as I recall is 2.7 oz… 1�4 ration

means 2.7 oz of developer and 10.8 oz of water. Then the question,
will that even cover the roll? In this case you may actually need to
increase the total solution (keeping the ratio the same, just to get
the �lm covered for processing… A little easier for rotation
processing for sure.
Each developer has it’s own capacity and that is where you need to
start for consistent developing of your negatives. I am sure you can
adjust down if you wish… but you will not get the negative the boys
in the lab got when settling on the number that established the
capacity they but on the container.
For me to follow this capacity issue is this: When I get a negative

that is too thin or too dense… I no longer have to ask myself if it
wasuses
This website the cookies
development
to ensureor
youthe
getexposure.
the best experience on the website. By continuing to use
Tim
Accept
MIKHAIL
Hi Tim, hi Sasha,
Tim, thanks for bringing this information up! According to what

you says it is already impossible to “properly” develop a roll of 120
�lm in a 500 ml development tank (the one that normally �ts only
one 120 reel) with 1+1 dilution of D-76. According to Kodak’s
recommendations it will require 16oz (473ml) of undiluted stock to
process one 120 roll. Hence the only “correct” way to develop a 120
�lm using a small development tank is to use undiluted stock,
right?
I believe this might be the case, however I also want trust the
results determined by practice
Sasha, if you could tell how many milliliters of diluted D-76 you use
per 1 roll of �lm for each dilution you listed in the table, this would
be perfect. I mean only three values:
X ml for 1+1 dilution;
Y ml for 1+3 dilution;
Z ml for 1+5 dilution.
Thank you!
Best,
Mikhail

SASHA KRASNOV
Hello, Mikhail!
Accept
I use Jobo tank that is required at least 480ml of liquid. For
the dillution 1+1 I use 240ml of undilluted stock, for 1+3 —
120ml of stock and for 1+5 — 80ml of stock. It is OK, don’t be
afraid. So for the 500ml tank you may use 250ml, 125ml and
83ml. But I prefer to prepare 480ml solution because it is
more convinent to measure stock wich I will dillute. And of
course you need to be sure that the �lm reel will completely
�lled with the solution.
Kodak recommends such a strange 473ml because it is 16 �uid

oz in US measurement system. So, in this case you need 8oz,
4oz or 2.66oz. I prefer metric system.
MIKHAIL
Sasha, thank you for the detailed answer!

I am curious to try the highly diluted versions of the
developer and see if it brings about some highlights
compensation effect and softness, hence my question.
Ansel Adams book (already very old) recommends HC-110
for the work and tells to use larger tanks, so the
recommended by the manufacturer amount of the
chemicals is present in the tank. This is what Tim speaks
about…
I am up for trying to do it your way though, I have no big

size tank anyways and I de�nitely see that it works from
your work. In the end it is always a bit schizophrenic:
reaching the desired result and at the same time
enjoying the uncertainty of the experiment
Many
This website uses cookies to greetings and
ensure you get congratulations
the best experience onon
theyour work!
website. By continuing to use
Best,
Accept
Mikhail

SASHA KRASNOV
You are welcome! Being based on my experience… I

rarely use dillution 1+5, only when shooting high
contrast scenes and do not recommend higher
dillution. The reason – I do not know what I need it
for. So, my standard is 1+3 and 1+1 if I need more
contrast especially to make prints. But Tim is right.
There is a minimum amount of developer that
should be used.
If you are going to develop medium format �lm you

do not need a big tank – 500ml is enough for most
dillutions even for Rodinal 1+100 and 1+200. As for
Rodinal, Agfa many years ago recommened to use at
least 10ml of concentrate. It means you are able to
use only 1+25 an 1+50 with 500ml tank. But in real
practice I’ve used 1+100 for stand development with
great results. Such development requires only 5ml of
concentrate. Anyway, any dillution should be tested
by you to �nd your own development work�ow.
Thanks for noticing my works!
NOAH
thanks for sharing your thoughts on D76 Sasha, I have very similar
Accept
experience with this developer. I mix my own from raw chemicals
and I use it pretty much for all BW �lms. I mostly use it 1+1 or
undiluted though as 1+3 seems to be too grainy for my taste. Do
you use diluted developer as one shot developer or do you re-use
1+1 for more �lms? Keep it up buddy.

SASHA KRASNOV
Thank you for the comment, Noah. Typically I use 1+1 dilution
for normal contrast scenes and 1+3 to get slightly lower
contrast when shooting high contrast scenes. So, too much
grain is not so big problem for me and thus I like to use it 1+3
for studio portraits especially made with the �ashlight setup.
I never use diluted developer for than once. So, it is only one
shot developer for me regardless of dilution.
WILLIAM HAMBLEN
Kodak published the recipe for D-76 on page 236 of the 1943
edition of “How to Make Good Pictures” and in other guidebooks.
The proportions in “How to Make Good Pictures” are the same as
you quote, except the amounts are for 4 liters instead of one.

SASHA KRASNOV
Thank you,without
the website Bill, for sharing
clicking thisthen
"Accept" info.you are consenting to this.
Accept
MARIANO
Hello, hope you read this. I’ve pushed a kodak T-Max 400 �lm 3
stops (@3200ASA). Is there any chance to develop it with D-76?
I’can �nd information about the develop times anywhere!! Hope
you can help me.
Sory about my English, I’m from Argentina. Thanks!!

SASHA KRASNOV
Hello, Mariano
Yes, I think it is possible to develop T-Max 400 @ 3200 ISO.

But you will need to use a stock solution instead of a diluted
developer. Using D-76 1+1 dilution for +3EV push processing
sill seriously increase development time.
As for the development times, I would try to develop T-Max

400 for 12-13 minutes in a stock solution for 3200 ISO.
Anyway, you must remember that is better to overdevelop the
�lm while push processing. So, I consider to develop it rather
for 13 min. If you decide to use 1+1 dilution, the development
time should probably be increased to 33-35 minutes.
Please, let me know about the result.
theTHASIN JEELANIclicking "Accept" then you are consenting to this.
website without
Accept
Hello Sasha…
How many no. of 35mm and 120 mm �lms can be processed with
1+3 dilution using Paterson Super system 4 tank…

SASHA KRASNOV
Hello Thasin,
It does not depend on a dilution of the developer, at least 1+1,

1+3 or even 1+5. But, considering your question:
1) type 135 — as many as you may put �lm reels in this tank.
2) type 120 — depends on the feature of a �lm reel to hold two
120 �lms in the same spiral. I’ve nothing to say about this
feature on Paterson reel but for instance, Jobo 1520 reel does
it well — it has a special stopper which is allowed to insert
two 120 �lms one by one into the same spiral. If Paterson reel
does it too, you may also expect to develop the same number
of 120 �lms as 135 �lms in this tank.
JOHN
Sasha, great post, thanks for all the great info. I enjoyed reading
your work in this area. Makes me want to try D76 again.

SASHA
the website KRASNOV
without clicking "Accept" then you are consenting to this.
Accept
Thank you, John, for reading the article! I’m updating it from
time to time, keep tracking
TOMAS
Nice article as usual. Which �lm do you prefer for outdoor

portraits please?

SASHA KRASNOV
Thanks for reading. The choice of a �lm depends on exposure.

I like to use Ilford HP5 Plus or Kodak Tri-X, Ilford FP4 Plus or
Fomapan 100 if exposure is suf�cient to shoot w/o tripod.
MALCOLM
Very interesting discussion. What seems to be missing from the

discussion about 1+3 dilution is that the developer is no longer
super-additive and has far less solvent action. Sodium Sulphite acts
as the solvent and at 1+3 dilution the solvent action diminishes
greatly. This has two results: �rstly, the negative will have much
higher acutance and the silver grains will be much more sharply
de�ned, and thus more “visible”. This results from the loss of
solvent
This website actiontowhich
uses cookies softens
ensure you get thethe
bestedges of on
experience thethesilver grains.
website. The to use
By continuing
increased acutance
the website is clicking
without due to the enhanced
"Accept" then you areedge effect
consenting which is
to this.
caused by the silver grains atAccept

the border between high and low
contrast areas being more sharply de�ned. Second, the contrast
will be reduced due to the lost superadditivity process between the
Metol and Hydroquinone. Hydroquinone is the agent that produces
higher contrast and Metol lower contrast. D76 used at 1+1 dilution
has a “softer” grain structure due to the solvent action. Rodinal has
no silver solvent and thus delivers negatives with more acutance
and more visible grain. Rodinal was originally formulated for use
with large plate negatives and didn’t require any solvent, whereas
D76 was designed speci�cally for 35mm movie �lm and was the
�rst commercially available developer to include a silver solvent. So
D76 diluted 1+3 is a very different developer to that diluted 1+1 and
the resulting negatives will be sharper, grainier and lower contrast.

SASHA KRASNOV
Thank you, Malcolm, for the comment. It’s a really great and
important addition to the article. I’m not a chemist, but use
D-76 for many years, more than 20 I think. And, my
experience of �lm developing with D-76 gives similar
conclusions about sharpness and contrast. I usually start off
from the understanding of contrast — do I need it a bit to
lower or to higher. Considering this decision I choose
appropriate dilution.
EUGENE
Hello
This website Sasha!
uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on the website. By continuing to use
thefor
Thanks website
yourwithout
great clicking
article!"Accept"
Wouldthen
youyoube
areso
consenting
kind to to this.a clue
give
how to calculate times for 1+3 Accept
– 1EV pull processing if I only have
times for 1+2? I prefer to shoot on Kodak Double-X 5222 135 and
pulling high contrast scenes 1+2 for 9 minutes (formula which I got
on massive dev chart). It works �ne for me, but now I really
interesting in your 1+3 pulling solution. Thanks!

SASHA KRASNOV
Hello Eugene!
I’m sorry for the late answer. Your question is interesting and
dif�cult to answer. Why do you need the formula? Massive
Dev chart already contains all necessary data for pull
processing of Kodak Double-X 5222� 13 min at 18C for 100 ISO.
It’s about -1.3EV. If you develop �lms at 20C, as most people
do, you may convert it with Time/Temp Converter available
on Massive Dev Chart website — it’s about 11 min.
If you still need a formula you may consider these

calculations. Usually, switching from dilution 1+1 to 1+3
increases developing time by x1.5 ~ x1.7 and up to x2 keeping
the same ISO at the same temperature and agitation. But in
practice, it seriously depends on the �lm. Developing time
tends to be increased by x1.6 ~ x2 for the classic �lms, and to
x1.5 ~ x1.6 for modern �lms. So, having only data for dilution
1+2 you may try to decrease/increase the time by
sqrt(multiplier). For Kodak Double-X 5222 you use sqrt(x1.6) ==
x1.265, and multiply by this value the developing time for
dilution 1+2. Use it only as a starting point.
NIGEL LEE Accept

From Kodak’s point of view it makes more economic or
pro�table sense to encourage users of D-76 to dilute less, and use
more developer than they would otherwise. And as you’ve rightly
pointed out, Kodak used to give the development times for a
number of different �lms using their D-76 diluted 1+3 (including for
perhaps their most popular �lm – Kodak Tri-X 400 too), but they
don’t any longer.
However, given that Ilford’s ID-11 Film Developer is of course

IDENTICAL to Kodak’s D-76 when it’s made up (notwithstanding its
2-parts formula as opposed to Kodak’s 1-part), it’s worth noting
that Ilford ID-11 – at least when I last looked – still quotes
development times for �lms using 1+3 dilutions; and this of course
means that times will be the same when using Kodak D-76 diluted
1+3.

SASHA KRASNOV
Thank you for this comment! As far as I know, Ilford ID-11 may
slightly differ from Kodak D-76 by the type of buffering agent.
Kodak modi�ed the original D-76 formula adopting it for tap
water. As for now, I use Ilford ID-11, it is a bit cheaper and
easier to �nd in a local store. And, yes, you are right, there is
no difference (or much difference) in these developers.
NIGEL LEE
Thankwithout
the website you Sasha
clicking…"Accept"
I darethen
say you
you’re right thattothese
are consenting this. two
developers differ very slightly in formulation, but as you
Accept
acknowledge, the differences between them must be
totally negligible in practical use. I’ve used them
interchangeably over the years – buying whichever of
them is the cheaper or whichever one I can get my hands
on!

SASHA KRASNOV
Thank you Nigel for this information! It’s extremely

important to have statistics of the interchangeability
of Kodak D-76 and Ilford ID-11 proved by time for all
who will read this article!
KRZYSZTOF
Hello Sasha!
Thank you for sharing here your experience in D-76 development

procedures. I work with FOMAPAN 100 and I have tried 1+1 and 1+3
dilutions so far. I like the results I got. Right now I would like to
experiment with @400 exposure and push D-76 development
process. I have two questions:
1. How to calculate development time for such pushing? I came

across with this formula http://www.digitaltruth.com
/devchart.php?doc=pushproc (I assume D-76 is a “Standard
Developer”). Does it follow your experience? Is 24 min (10*2.4) of
This website uses cookiestime
development to ensure you get the
reasonable best
for experience 100@400
FOMAPAN on the website. By continuing
developed in to use
D-76 (1+1)?
Accept
2. Does this formula also applies for higher dilutions? For example:
does it make sense to develop the same �lm in D-76 (1+3) for 42.5
min (17*2.5)?
All best,
Krzysztof

SASHA KRASNOV
Hello Krzysztof!
Thank you for visiting my website and for the question.
This is a general formula for calculating the starting point

only. And, this time depends on the �lm emulsion type rather
than the developer type.
1) But 23-24 min seems to be ok and I think it should be

enough in the case of D-76 diluted 1+1! Anyway, it is only a
starting point, you should understand it. You will need at least
2-3 rolls to test before you will get stable results.
2) Personally, I could not recommend using Kodak D-76

diluted 1+3 to push the �lm more than +1EV for some reason.
You may get too thin negatives which are more suitable for
scanning rather than darkroom printing. In this case,
probably, you will have to increase this calculated time a bit
more to get an appropriate �lm speed. So, the total time may
be too long. Developing �lm for more than 30 min in D-76 is a
bit too long in my opinion. Anyway, I think you need your own
experience. Why not try push +2EV in Kodak D-76 diluted 1+3?
And, I’m so
the website sorryclicking
without for the late then
"Accept" answer.
you areLet me know,
consenting please,
to this.
about your result. It’s quite interesting!

Accept
MICHAEL IVES
Hi Sasha
I’ve just discovered your website and I am very impressed with all
the information you and your visitors have supplied, particularly
regarding Kodak D76.
As a newcomer to darkroom developing and printing I would just

like to ask a very basic question? can developers be used more than
once or is a fresh solution needed for each session/use?
Sorry if it’s a little basic but the answer would be a great help.
Many thanks.

SASHA KRASNOV
Hi Michael
Thank you for visiting my website and for the question. So, in
the case of using the stock solution, the developer will be
reusable. But you will need to add about 25% to the
development time for each next �lm. After development you
need to store the developer in a separate bottle, not in the
same bottle where you prepared the stock solution. But in
practice, it is better to additionally dilute D-76 making it a
one-shot, i.e. single-use developer. It makes the whole
process stable because you always make a fresh solution just
before thewithout
the website development.
clicking "Accept" then you are consenting to this.
Accept
Do not hesitate to ask me more questions. I will help with all I
can!
MICHAEL IVES
Hi Sasha
Many thanks for the information and for your prompt reply. It’s
really helpful and I will be putting it into practice very soon.
While I was on your site I also looked at the various pictorial stories
you have uploaded. I like them very much indeed; you make what
seems like a very ordinary shot into something quite special.
Particularly when you provide accompanying text. I found looking
at your work quite inspirational.
Please keep up the great work – I will be visiting your site many
times.
Many thanks – Michael

SASHA KRASNOV
Hi Michael
Thank you for this comment, I really appreciate it!
JOHN to ensure you get the best experience on the website. By continuing to use
This website uses cookies
Accept
Sasha, do you have any experience of the value (or otherwise) of
pre-development ‘seasoning’ of B&W �lms. Some photographers
recommend �lling the tank with 20C plain water and leaving the
�lm to soak for 10 minutes before emptying (apparently one is not
to worry about the now-coloured waste), before adding the
developer.
John

SASHA KRASNOV
Hi John,
thank you for this interesting and complex question! It may be

hard to give a simple answer to it. Yes, I do pre-soaking for
the extremely speci�c �lm development. But for common
cases, I see no big reason for it. The �lm pre-soaking may be
suitable for this:
1) to remove the air bubbles on the �lm completely when the

developer is poured into the tank after pre-soaking. But, if
you use a sealed tank you would better remove the air
bubbles by tapping the tank from the bottom a few times
right after the developer is poured into the tank. But, in the
case of developing a large format �lm, you might still need
pre-soaking. The LF �lms sit in the guides not so �rmly as
35mm and 120 �lms in the reel. And tapping the tank from the
bottom might be not a good idea. It depends on the tank. For
LF �lm development I use Jobo 2520 sealed tank which I tap
from the bottom right after the developer is poured into the
tank and I have no issue with air bubbles.
2) cookies
This website uses to temper theyou
to ensure developer tank
get the best and �lm.
experience Again,
on the for
website. By general
continuing to use
the website
�lm without clicking
development, you "Accept"
do notthen
needyouitarebecause
consenting to this. you
typically
would better choose the Accept
development time at least 9 min to
keep the results stable. The optimal time is about 13-17 min. It
depends on the developer dilution and desired contrast of
course but this period of time is quite enough for the
temperature not to be an issue. So, you do not need to
temper the tank with pre-soaking. The only reason for me to
temper the tank using pre-soaking is when I do a rapid �lm
development in the stock solution or in a highly concentrated
developer. I mean development time of 3-4 min. A separate
article may be written about this. But, this technique allows
producing �lm negatives with higher contrast, sometimes
much higher. The pre-soaking shortens the development time
by preventing sudden temperature change of the developer
and also making the chemistry interaction with the �lm a bit
better right after pouring the developer into the tank.
3) to develop a really old �lm having delicate (weak?)

emulsion. But in this case, it is better to use the stand
development in a cold developer instead of pre-soaking.
So, practically you do not need the pre-soaking unless you

will get a speci�c case in my opinion. Do not worry about
coloured water after pre-soaking — the anti-halation layer
makes it coloured.
Btw, a typical time for pre-soaking is about 2-3 min, not 10

min. I hope it will help you!
JOHN
Brilliant. Thank you so much for all that helpful

information
This website uses cookies – particularly
to ensure you the shorter
get the best experience pre-soaking
on the time. to use
website. By continuing
the website without
Just one clicking
more "Accept" then
question (for you are consenting
now!). Using atoD76
this. stock
solution (138g powder to 1 litre of water), is there any
Accept
estimate of its reusable life, in terms of weeks, if stored
in a concertina bottle or of how many 120 �lms, for
example, one batch of stock solution can process before
it becomes exhausted? Thanks again.
John

SASHA KRASNOV
Not at all, it is my pleasure.
In a 250ml batch of stock solution, you might

develop about four 35mm �lms, in a 500ml batch —
eight medium format �lms. You would increase by
25% each next development time starting from the
second �lm. For example — 10 min; 12.5 (10×1.25)
min; 15.5 (10×1.25×1.25) min; 19.5 (10×1.25×1.25×1.25)
min. For medium format, it is better if two �lms can
be �tted into the same reel. Otherwise, you will
need to increase the development time by 12.5% for
500ml batch per each �lm unless you have a 250ml
tank for MF �lms which is quite rare. This rule is too
approximate and depends on many factors like a
�lm emulsion type or even the scenes you
photographed. The last one means — the more black
tones on the negative the more developer is
exhausted. Storing the used developer for a long
time also increases the development time for the
next �lms. You are cannot precisely predict the
amount of development time to increase for each
next �lm after the �rst one. But it is up to you.
It is hard to say how long you may store once used
Accept
developer. But Kodak recommends two months for a
half-�lled bottle of fresh (!) stock solution. I think
you should fully use the batch within a month or
less.
If you are talking about 138g to 1 litre of water, I

suppose you intend to make a stock solution from a
part of the prepackaged D-76 developer. Am I right?
If so, I personally do not recommend to do this. The
reason — you do not know the amount of each
chemical in this 138 g. It does not mean that you do
not get an acceptable result but it just decreases the
stability of the whole process like using stock
solution many times. The stability of the whole
process is the key to successful �lm development.
I cannot recommend these techniques. Anyway, you

would try it and get your own experience! It is quite
important!

SASHA KRASNOV
Sorry, I forgot about this.
4) Also, please pay your attention to the case when you are
going to process a new �lm that you have never developed
(tested) before. Almost certainly, you would refer to a third-
party chart like digitaltruth.com or else for a starting point.
So, you will get the development time with no pre-soaking in
99% of cases. Thus, you would probably be required to test
this �lm a bit more, increasing the development stability if
you
This website uses choose
cookies pre-soaking.
to ensure Itbest
you get the is quite important
experience to remember.
on the website. As to use
By continuing
the me,
for website withoutto
I choose clicking "Accept" then
no pre-soak theyou
�lmareinconsenting
almost allto cases.
this.
Accept
JOHN
Again, more clear and invaluable guidance. Many thanks.

John
ROBERT ŁYSAKOWSKI
Hello Alex, I am reading your blog with much interest. I am just

starting the analog development journey so I still need to �gure out
what and how. The information I your blog is very helpful ?.
Can you share which chemicals you use for the rest of you
development process?
I am also interested to know how you’re digitising your negatives.
Best regards,
Robert
ROBERT LYSAKOWSKI
I meant Sasha, sorry ?

SASHA KRASNOV
the website without
It’s Ok, clicking
the same "Accept"
name, youthen you are consenting to this.
know
Accept

SASHA KRASNOV
Hi Robert,
thank you for reading my articles and for the question I

use chemicals only available in a local photo store and do not
order them over internet. So, I use Foma�x or Compard Fix
AG Plus as �xer. The last one is a stronger than Foma’s �xer. It
allows to �x 8-10 �lm rolls in 500ml over 6-8 rolls for Foma�x.
I use dilution 1+9 for both concentrates. However, Foma�x is
much cheaper and easier to �nd. After washing the �lm I do
�nal bath in wetting agent. I use Ilotol Wetting Agent duluted
(1+250) in distilled!!! It allows to eliminate the water spots
completely. Do not use �lm squeegee like Paterson or Kaiser,
they produce scratches on �lm rather than spots removing
GUNNAR GRAFF
Hi!
I am reading your info with interest. I have used D76 as a standard
developer together with Tri-X, back in the 60-ties when I was a
young journalist. I also tried Rodinal, but stopped due to more
grainy negatives. Then I began experimenting, bying chemicals and
made D76 to a 2-component developer – with exellent results of
grain-structure and contrast. Developing time was no longer
critical, due to the developing substance (borax) was in bath nr. 2.
The negatives got a softer contrast, with details both in highlight
and shadows. How contrastful I wanted to make the �nal print was
determined
This website bytothe
uses cookies copy-paper.
ensure you get the best experience on the website. By continuing to use
Accept

SASHA KRASNOV
Hi!
Thank you for the information! Could you, please, share the
recipe of two-component D-76? It’s quite interesting. I guess
it should also have a longer shelf life than original one.
SANTIAGO ARRAGA
He’s probably referring to divided D76 – 1st bath

developing agent, 2nd one alkali, left there to
completion. Google ‘divided D76’.

SASHA KRASNOV
And, what’s the bene�t of dividing D-76 and

developing in two bathes?
WAYNE DUERFELDT
Sasha,
I just
This website getting
uses cookiesback intoyou
to ensure �lmgetprocessing. I started
the best experience in website.
on the 1962 orBy3 continuing
in high to use
schoolthe website
with without
a Speed clicking "Accept"
Graphic then you are
and a Rollei�ex consenting
and D-76. Into an
this.earlier
reply, someone discussed the Accept

role of sodium sul�te. As a retired
chemist, I wonder what the advantage would be of adding sodium
sul�te to a 1+3 dilution of D-76. By the way one of my pet peeves as
an analytical chemist was the use of 1�X nomenclature. Using the
1+X leaves no ambiguity.
Wayne

SASHA KRASNOV
Wayne,
are you talking about mixing a D-76 1+3 solution without
sodium sul�te just before �lm development each time?
PETER CHRISTENSEN
Thx for the article.
I have returned to �lm after a 20 year “break”.

Back in the late 90’s I used to shoot Tri-x or agfa 100 developed in
D76.
When I returned to photography, I skipped the Tri-x due to the
cost, and I started shooting agfapan APX 100 and 400, developed in
X-tol. Sadly, I did not know that the Agfa �lms are not the same
anymore since Agfa went bankrupt. Therefore I have been
struggling with the new emulsion, It seems I get very thin negatives
with very underwhelming contrast.
After reading your article, I will return to D76 and give it a try, as It
This website
neveruses cookiesme
caused to ensure you get the back
any problems best experience on the
in the day, website.
when By continuing
I always shot to use
a box speed and the speci�ed dev. times.
Accept
Best Wishes
Peter

SASHA KRASNOV
Hi Peter,
D-76 has never disappointed me. All new or unknown to me

�lms I develop in D-76. Keep shooting!
1 PINGBACK
Developer Review Blog No. 01 – Kodak D-76 – Alex

Luyckx | Blog
LEAVE A REPLY
Your email address will not be published. Required �elds are

marked *
COMMENT *
Accept
NAME * EMAIL *
WEBSITE
Post Comment
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your

comment data is processed.
← LIQUID EMULSION EXPOSURE WITH

PRINTING PROCESS IN EXTENDED SUNNY 16
A NUTSHELL RULE →
Accept

Film Developing With Kodak D-76, Dilutions 1+1, 1+3, 1+5, Push and Pull

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Film Developing With Kodak D-76, Dilutions 1+1, 1+3, 1+5, Push and Pull

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Film Developing With Kodak D-76, Dilutions 1+1, 1+3, 1+5, Push and Pull

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

SASHA KRASNOV MENU

FILM DEVELOPING WITH KODAK D-76

Kodak D-76 is a classic and truly versatile developer which

Fresh solution should be prepared just before developing

PULL AND PUSH PROCESSING WITH D-76

For push processing up to +2EV I prefer a 1+1 dilution. To

For push processing, I prefer a 1+1 dilution up to +2EV. To

Also, for push processing only to +1EV I use dilution 1+3 or

Ilford Pan F Plus 50

Kodak T-Max 100

Fuji Neopan 100 Acros

Ilford FP4 Plus 125

Arista EDU Ultra 400

Kodak T-Max 400

Ilford HP5 Plus 400

KODAK D-76 FORMULA

Water 50°C 750 ml

Sodium Sul�te anhydrous 100 g

Cold water to make 1000 ml

STAND DEVELOPMENT WITH D-76

However, using Kodak D-76 for stand development is

The initial temperature of the solution should also be kept at

It is important to note that in the stand development

I prefer to get a stable result. So, I use stand development

Unlike Kodak D-76, which is

There is an assumption that the difference was in the

STORING THE DEVELOPER

In practice, the stock solution can be stored in a black

prepare it yourself in the amount

Jul 7, 2016 © Sasha Krasnov

HOME > BLOG > FILM DEVELOPING WITH KODAK D-76

This is rather interesting especially because you are not afraid of

Incidentally, I do not invert the tank during development, but

Many thanks for your article, очень интересная статья!

if you were to try 1�50 (ratio is exaggerated for clari�cation only )

Another example… TMAX developer, as I recall is 2.7 oz… 1�4 ration

For me to follow this capacity issue is this: When I get a negative

Tim, thanks for bringing this information up! According to what

Kodak recommends such a strange 473ml because it is 16 �uid

Sasha, thank you for the detailed answer!

I am up for trying to do it your way though, I have no big

You are welcome! Being based on my experience… I

If you are going to develop medium format �lm you

Thanks for noticing my works!

Sory about my English, I’m from Argentina. Thanks!!

Yes, I think it is possible to develop T-Max 400 @ 3200 ISO.

As for the development times, I would try to develop T-Max

Please, let me know about the result.

It does not depend on a dilution of the developer, at least 1+1,

Nice article as usual. Which �lm do you prefer for outdoor

Thanks for reading. The choice of a �lm depends on exposure.

Very interesting discussion. What seems to be missing from the

caused by the silver grains atAccept

If you still need a formula you may consider these

NIGEL LEE Accept

However, given that Ilford’s ID-11 Film Developer is of course

Thank you Nigel for this information! It’s extremely