Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
PhotoKB Home
Discussion Groups
Digital Photography
Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot Cameras
Film Photography
35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther Equipment
Photo Technique
Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique General
General Photo Topics
General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK Photography
DirectoryPhoto Clubs

Photo Forum / Film Photography / Darkroom / May 2004

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Perfection XR-1 - Information

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Dan Quinn - 25 Apr 2004 23:54 GMT
Obliging all those interested I've sourced some info on the film
developer Perfection XR-1.

From Google search for, "perfection xr 1" . A nice write-up at
Unblinking Eye.

Search this NG for, "perfection xr 1" fame .  Dr. M. J. Gudzinowicz
gives a chemist's view.

Also the June 1981 issue of Darkroom Techniques has an entire
article devoted to XR-1.

The December 1982 issue compares XR-1 with Technidol and FG7.

From that issue; "This developer stretches your ability to believe ---"

Up ISO to an EI two, three, even four stops greater.               Dan
Craig Schroeder - 26 Apr 2004 02:28 GMT
I didn't give it enough time and effort perhaps, but it always left me
unimpressed and looking at very thin negatives.  That was a lot of
years ago and that's about all I recall.  I suppose I could have been
doing something basic wrong but my old files and the original tech
sheets that came with it didn't seem to require anything too out of
the ordinary to handle the stuff.  

I scanned the info a few months for someone from the original material
packed with their developers and have it here somewhere if anyone is
interested.

>Obliging all those interested I've sourced some info on the film
>developer Perfection XR-1.
chmc - 27 Apr 2004 00:24 GMT
> I didn't give it enough time and effort perhaps, but it always left me
> unimpressed and looking at very thin negatives.  That was a lot of
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
> >Obliging all those interested I've sourced some info on the film
> >developer Perfection XR-1.

They don't make it anymore anyway, right?  Does someone know the formula?
John - 27 Apr 2004 06:54 GMT
>They don't make it anymore anyway, right?  Does someone know the formula?

    Yes but talking with the dead is more of a challenge than I
think the developer is worth. Of course YMMV applies.

Regards,

  John S. Douglas, Photographer -  http://www.darkroompro.com
             Please remove the "_" when replying via email
Dan Quinn - 27 Apr 2004 11:12 GMT
> > > Obliging all those interested I've sourced some info on the film
> > > developer Perfection XR-1.

> They don't make it anymore anyway, right? Does someone know the formula?

 They don't make it any more.
 You did'nt read my first post. Also from Google enter, 4083722.
 BTW, two or three stops of gain in EI looks to be more realistic.   Dan
Jim Phelps - 28 Apr 2004 14:15 GMT
> Obliging all those interested I've sourced some info on the film
> developer Perfection XR-1.
[quoted text clipped - 13 lines]
>
> Up ISO to an EI two, three, even four stops greater.               Dan

Dan,

  Have you tried this with TechPan?  If you have, how's it compare image
wise with Technidol or Delagi/POTA modifications?
Dan Quinn - 29 Apr 2004 07:52 GMT
> > Obliging all those interested I've sourced some info on the film
> > developer Perfection XR-1.
[quoted text clipped - 18 lines]
>    Have you tried this with TechPan?  If you have, how's it compare
> image wise with Technidol or Delagi/POTA modifications?

 I've been studying the patent. As I have all the ingredients on hand,
a few days from now will be a good time to mix some up.
 "This developer stretches..." That quote from the above 12/82 issue
does compare TechPan developed in the above three mentioned developers.
The writer/testor, J.H. Shelton was very impressed.
 Although I've also some Tech Pan a few weeks may pass before I can
test it. More likely some Pan F+ will be tested first.             Dan
Jim Phelps - 29 Apr 2004 08:22 GMT
>   I've been studying the patent. As I have all the ingredients on hand,
> a few days from now will be a good time to mix some up.
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
>   Although I've also some Tech Pan a few weeks may pass before I can
> test it. More likely some Pan F+ will be tested first.             Dan

I was about to mix up some modified Delagi and give that a try, but this
XR-1 may be something better.  Hey, if I can shoot the stuff at EI 80 and
get pictorial quality tonality, I all for that.  I've got a roll of TechPan
that's nearing expiration, maybe I'll do a set of speed test as well.  I'll
post the result here and if you will as well, I for one would be
appreciative.

Jim
Ed Buffaloe - 30 Apr 2004 14:28 GMT
I published that article "Perfection XR-1?" on my Unblinking Eye site
a couple of years ago, but have been pursuing alt processes for some
time and have never done any testing with the formulae I published.
I'd be very interested in any test results you might come up with.
Someone sent me some sealed packages of the original XR-1 product; I
wish I had the ability to analyze it chemically. If anyone out there
would like to do some comparisons with the commercial product and the
formulae on my site, I'd be happy to share the XR-1 with them.
Dan Quinn - 01 May 2004 09:37 GMT
> I published that article "Perfection XR-1?" on my Unblinking Eye site
> a couple of years ago, but have been pursuing alt processes for some
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> would like to do some comparisons with the commercial product and the
> formulae on my site, I'd be happy to share the XR-1 with them.

 I've been studying the patent. Heavy emphasis is placed on a developer
designed for slow high contrast films which will yield full gray scale
negatives. Also emphasized is it's ability to produce negatives of high
color fidelity.
 Now that's a new one on me. I had never thought of the developer being
a factor in a film's color response. What have you to say to that?
 An amount of preservative, sulfite, is added to bring the solution
to a ph of 9 or better; dual purpose sulfite.
 No restrainer is called for. The accelerator, " if any ". And just
what might one expect from 1/2 or 3/4 gram of borax anyway?
 So what's left? One to two grams of phenidone, thirty, give or take,
grams sulfite, and some fraction of a gram of metol and hydroquinone.
The patent allows for considerable variation.
 This is just a perhaps but I think the marketed version was a one-
size fits all formulation. The 86 degree temperature fit the slow and
high speed films. From the patent: slow high contrast films, 68 to 72
degrees; Pan F, KB 14, etc, 70 to 80 degrees; and Tri X, etc, 85 to
100 degrees.
 Perhaps three or four versions should have been marketed. In my
book the high temperatures needed call for a more active developer.
One would have to experiment.
 At your site I examined the N, N-, and N+ EIs. There is quite
a variation twixt the films. A few films may not work well with any
variation.
 Think SPEED!
 BTW, Mr. Anneman is alive, at least according to a post from Mr. B.
Troop this NG about a year ago. I don't know anything more than that
of the fellow.                                                   Dan
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2009 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.