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.

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

#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