id-11 developer : LUSENET : B&W Photo - Film & Processing : One Thread

I am new to using ID-11. I followed the directions for making one gallon of stock solution--package says to make one gallon. When I read the development times, I see dilutions of 1+0, 1+1, and so on. Do I read this as (1) using the stock solution with no dilution, (2) 1 part stock solution and 1 part water, ... ? Thanks in advance.


-- david myers (, January 21, 2002


Yes. 1+1 means 1 part of stock solution plus the same amount of water.
ID-11 is identical to D-76, if that's any help.

-- Pete Andrews (, January 22, 2002.

"ID-11 is identical to D76" -- I've heard this many times, yet Ilford recommends different development times for the two (on their film boxes). Does that just mean the stock solutions are of a different strength?

-- Steven Lawrance (, January 22, 2002.

Id-11 properties and effects are the same as D76 is what he meant. Ilford uses Phenidone where as Kodak uses their Metol. The grain sharpness is the same for the two developers. If you get to a point where you start getting an allergic reaction on your hands when using D76, switch to IDll because you are allergic to metol... it is a common occurrence! Cheers

-- Scott Walton (, January 22, 2002.

No, I meant that the published formulae for the two are identical.
Both ID-11 and D-76 use Metol. This can be verified by the MSDS data sheet for ID-11, which specifies p-methylaminophenol sulphate (Metol) and Hydroquinone as the two notifiable constituents.
Why two different times should be given for D-76 and ID-11, I can't explain.

-- Pete Andrews (, January 22, 2002.

Here's Richard Knoppow's explanation from Pure Silver: The published formulas for ID-11 and D-76 are identical but the packaged developers are not. One big reason for the difference in recommended time is that Kodak and Ilford use different contrast indexes or average contrast to determine the contrast. Kodak bases all of its pictorial film development times on a CI suitable for contact printing. For average condenser enlargers the time should be reduced from 15% to 25% (depending on the film) with a consequent decrease of film speed of about 3/4 stop. Ilford bases its times on an average CI midway between diffusion and condenser times. Plus, Ilford does not use the ISO method for determining speeds. They don't say what system they use but claim their speeds are more nearly practical. Oh, dear; so much for standardisation in the modern world. The CI required by the ISO speed method is actually close to that required for diffusion printing on normal grade paper given an "average" scene brightness range. Lots of room for qualification there. Lots of film makers give times for D-76 these days, but not all indicate what CI they are developing to. Heigh-ho, time to dig out that old densitometer again. ---- Richard Knoppow Los Angeles, CA, USA

-- Chauncey Walden (, January 22, 2002.

To the first part of this discussion, 1+0 means using the stock solution; 1+1 means 1 part stock, 1 part water.

In regards to ID-11 vs. D-76, the published formulas are identical, but neither Kodak nor ILFORD produces a product exactly like the published formual. Both commercial products have additional buffers and preservatives. In some films, they will produce slightly different results. Sometimes, the differences are enough that ILFORD ends up with different recommendations for the two developers, but because of rounding, the difference may not be as much as it appears.

In practical applications, it is safe to use the published time for ID-11 with D-76, and vice versa. If you are doing precise work, you will need to pick one developer and stick with it.

David Carper ILFORD Technical Service

-- David Carper (, January 24, 2002.

Perhaps David can answer this:
If it's true that Ilford don't use the standardised ISO methodology for determining film speed; then what gives them the right to print an ISO rating on their film packaging?

-- Pete Andrews (, January 25, 2002.

OK. I see from the MS data sheets that there is a small difference. Ilford include a water softening agent similar to 'Calgon', and Kodak has added some 'Boric Anhydride', presumably as a buffering agent. This makes Kodak's current formula closer to D-76b, I would guess.
They're still both fundamentally the same M-Q Borax developers of yore, though, with my vote going to ID-11 as having the edge on 'authenticity'.

-- Pete Andrews (, January 25, 2002.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ