Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Rangefinder Forum > Image Processing: Darkroom / Lightroom / Film > Film / Developing / Chemistry

View Poll Results: Which is your main B&W film developer?
Kodak D76 / Ilford ID-11 (or equivalent) 26 20.63%
Kodak T-Max / Ilford Iflotec DD-X (or equivalent) 6 4.76%
Kodak XTOL / Ilford Ilfosol 3 (or equivalent) 19 15.08%
Kodak HC-110 / Ilford Ilfotec HC (or equivalent) 43 34.13%
Adox Rodinal (or equivalent) 38 30.16%
Pyrogallo Type 0 0%
Pyrocat Type 3 2.38%
OTHER - Commerical Product 15 11.90%
OTHER - Home Brew 5 3.97%
OTHER - Home Brew of Commerical Prods (e.g. XTOL+RO9) 2 1.59%
These Options are too limited!@#$%! 5 3.97%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 126. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

Most Commonly Used B&W Film Developer
Old 3 Days Ago   #1
roscoetuff
Registered User
 
roscoetuff is online now
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Washington DC
Age: 60
Posts: 264
Most Commonly Used B&W Film Developer

Unfortunately, we don't have the ability here (to my knowledge) to do compound polls the way I'd like to separate 35mm and 120 rolls film. In part, there seems to be a difference by film type that gets confusing when folks don't specify, and I'm also curious to see if there are any legs to the Pyro and Pyrocat "buzz" vs. "reality" question some bring up. I'm also curious about "Standard", "High Dilution/Low Agitation", "Semi-Stand" and "Stand" choices... but we can't add all of these possibilities into one poll. So maybe in series? if there's a stomach for it? I'd also be curious how many here roll their own chemistry versus mix it up from a commercial or semi-commercial kit (some suggest Photo Formulary isn't really a commercial company... and I get that).
__________________
"Go out looking for one thing, and that's all you'll ever find." Robert J. Flaherty, Cinematographer

"If a day goes by without my doing something related to photography, it's as though I've neglected something essential to my existence, as though I had forgotten to wake up." Richard Avedon, Photographer
  Reply With Quote

Beutler or D23
Old 3 Days Ago   #2
Pioneer
Registered User
 
Pioneer's Avatar
 
Pioneer is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Age: 63
Posts: 2,730
Beutler or D23

I use Beutler or D23 most of the time, both of which are mixed up when needed. Always having fresh developer available is nice.
__________________
You gotta love a fast lens;

It is almost as good as a fast horse!
Dan
  Reply With Quote

Old 3 Days Ago   #3
sepiareverb
genius and moron
 
sepiareverb's Avatar
 
sepiareverb is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: St Johnsbury VT
Posts: 7,582
I've gotten pretty set in my ways with developers. HC-110 for some films, Rodinal or Studionol for others. And then a few specialized developers for a few films.
__________________
-Bob
  Reply With Quote

Old 3 Days Ago   #5
Jake Mongey
Registered User
 
Jake Mongey's Avatar
 
Jake Mongey is offline
Join Date: May 2016
Age: 16
Posts: 372
Usually use rodinol although its fallen out of favor with me with a recent change of aesthetic and its moving in favour of ID11 microphen and percepetol but rodinol is outlasting them as i shoot so much I just find myself running out of the others very quickly.
__________________
Should probably spend less time talking more time shooting but unfortunately I dont have to leave my desk to talk
www.jmongeyphoto.co.uk
  Reply With Quote

Old 3 Days Ago   #6
phrons
Registered User
 
phrons is offline
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 9
I like the contrast of rodinal.
  Reply With Quote

Old 3 Days Ago   #7
roscoetuff
Registered User
 
roscoetuff is online now
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Washington DC
Age: 60
Posts: 264
Hey Dan: Which Beutler are you using (I think there's Red and Blue)? Shots I've seen with D-23 seem to show really well.

FWIW, I'm using HC-110 as my main squeeze. I like the flexibility to use it in any number of ways. Not my favorite results, but very dependable. I've liked the results of FP4+ with Pyrocat-HD, but I like them with HC-110, too. Looking forward to trying some Rodinal with 120 where I hear the grain issues ...are negated by the negative's size.
__________________
"Go out looking for one thing, and that's all you'll ever find." Robert J. Flaherty, Cinematographer

"If a day goes by without my doing something related to photography, it's as though I've neglected something essential to my existence, as though I had forgotten to wake up." Richard Avedon, Photographer
  Reply With Quote

Old 3 Days Ago   #8
johnf04
Registered User
 
johnf04 is offline
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Dunedin, New Zealand
Age: 66
Posts: 234
I use Agfa Rodinal - I recently bought 2 unopened 500ml bottles, and I have half bottle I bought when Agfa went under. There should be enough there to see me out.
  Reply With Quote

Old 3 Days Ago   #9
kiemchacsu
Registered User
 
kiemchacsu is offline
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Hanoi, Vietnam
Age: 36
Posts: 700
HC-110 is so easy to use, cheap and shelf life is forever.
T-max is also a cool developer, especially for pushing. The only downsize is cost.
Verdict: HC-110 is king.
__________________
Cheers,
Trung Nguyen

RF
F
photo essays: Hanoi | Hoi An | Ha Giang | Fish Market
  Reply With Quote

Old 3 Days Ago   #10
ellisson
Registered User
 
ellisson's Avatar
 
ellisson is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Elkins Park, PA
Posts: 429
Usually DDX, sometimes D76, occasionally Perceptol.
__________________
flickrgallery
Pbase gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 3 Days Ago   #11
kxl
Social Documentary
 
kxl's Avatar
 
kxl is offline
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Sunny SoCal
Posts: 2,787
Historically, I would think that D-76 would be one of, if not the most commonly used B&W developer of all time. Back in the day, that was usually what was available in my high school darkroom, as well as public darkrooms.

It probably continues to be one of the most commonly-used developers to this day, along with HC-110 and Xtol -- all very good all around developers.
__________________
Keith
My website
RFF feedback


"... I thought the only way to give us an incentive, to bring hope, is to show the pictures of the pristine planet - to see the innocence.” ― Sebastiao Salgado
  Reply With Quote

Old 3 Days Ago   #12
sreed2006
Registered User
 
sreed2006's Avatar
 
sreed2006 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Memphis, TN
Posts: 845
I am no expert, but for low speed films (below 100 ISO), I really like the results produced by Caffenol. For the last few dozen rolls of Tri-X, I've been using Rodinal. The results are not spectacular, but it's easy to mix up and use.
__________________
Sid

My favorite question is "What does this button do?"
  Reply With Quote

Old 3 Days Ago   #13
Rob-F
It's Only a Hobby
 
Rob-F's Avatar
 
Rob-F is offline
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: The Show Me state
Posts: 4,841
D-76; XTOL; and Other, specifically DD-X or Microphen.
__________________
May the light be with you.
  Reply With Quote

Old 3 Days Ago   #14
anerjee
Registered User
 
anerjee is offline
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Singapore
Posts: 271
I only shoot tri-x, usually at 250 (for daylight) or 640 (for indoors), and use Rodinal and Microphen respectively
  Reply With Quote

Old 3 Days Ago   #15
sazerac
Registered User
 
sazerac's Avatar
 
sazerac is offline
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: 817
Posts: 235
I've gone through a couple phases over the years. Currently I have a bottle of TMax developer for Tri-X 35mm. I had been on an XTOL kick for a while because I could also use it for the TMax 100 4x5 film. I've also developed a lot with the different dilutions of HC-110. If I had to pick I might say that XTOL has my favorite look.

Last edited by sazerac : 3 Days Ago at 21:44. Reason: Spelling errors
  Reply With Quote

Old 3 Days Ago   #16
Chris101
stubborn
 
Chris101's Avatar
 
Chris101 is offline
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Arizona
Posts: 4,215
I use HC110, dilution b at 20C for almost every roll of black and white film I shoot, which is on average one roll a week. Occasionally, in the summer, the temperature is too high, and I use a nomograph to determine the equivalent time. I use time to control contrast coupled with the effective film speed.

I also clicked some other choices: For delta 100, I use D76. I have also experimented with caffeinol, and some speed increasing developer in a little tin can, back in the 1970s. These days it's always the hc110 though, mostly because pushing and pulling is linear.
  Reply With Quote

Old 3 Days Ago   #17
Jockos
Registered User
 
Jockos's Avatar
 
Jockos is offline
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Sweden
Age: 29
Posts: 905
Right now were switching from XTOL (W27) to FX-39 for a while, to see which we like better.

For large format, I use HC-110 for economy
__________________
Don't trust anything I say or write before I get my morning coffee, at least I don't.

Da gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 3 Days Ago   #18
zuiko85
Registered User
 
zuiko85 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,440
For those of us who don't develop film regularly HC-110 has the keeping quality I need.
  Reply With Quote

Old 2 Days Ago   #19
Bill Clark
Registered User
 
Bill Clark's Avatar
 
Bill Clark is offline
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Minnetonka, Minnesota
Age: 69
Posts: 1,917
The developer I use varies.

Today I'm developing a 36 exp. roll of Pan F Plus in Adox (APH-09) similar to Rodinal.
__________________
I use my real name. How about you?
  Reply With Quote

Old 2 Days Ago   #20
Juan Valdenebro
Truth is beauty
 
Juan Valdenebro's Avatar
 
Juan Valdenebro is offline
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Barcelona and Colombia
Age: 45
Posts: 4,322
Rodinal & Microphen... Sharp grain or nothing!
__________________
F i l m means fun!
  Reply With Quote

Old 2 Days Ago   #21
presspass
filmshooter
 
presspass is online now
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Lancaster County, Pennsylvania
Posts: 916
For the past several years, it's been all D-23. Sometimes straight replenished, less often 1:1, and for certain films like Kentmere 400, 1:3 with reduced agitation. It gives me what I need when scanning and makes beautiful wet prints. Inexpensive, simple to make, and reliable - what's not to like?
  Reply With Quote

Old 2 Days Ago   #22
lawrence
Registered User
 
lawrence's Avatar
 
lawrence is offline
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: London, UK
Age: 65
Posts: 1,935
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jockos View Post
Right now were switching from XTOL (W27) to FX-39 for a while, to see which we like better.
I've used FX-39 for many years. It's very sharp indeed with moderately fine grain (think of it as fine grain Rodinal) however the keeping qualities aren't great so I strongly recommend that you decant into smaller bottles filled to the top. It's excellent with modern technology films like TMax and Delta.
  Reply With Quote

Old 2 Days Ago   #23
Rob-F
It's Only a Hobby
 
Rob-F's Avatar
 
Rob-F is offline
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: The Show Me state
Posts: 4,841
I'm surprised that HC-110 is leading by a wide margin, since people seldom talk about it here. Must be a lot of closet users. I thought D-76 or Rodinal would be on top.

Actually you would think XTOL would be close to the top, since Kodak's info says that XTOL has the best of everything: best sharpness, best film speed boost, and finest grain. The ideal developer, seemingly; except for "dreaded XTOL failure" and you have to mix 5 liters of it. And of course some prefer the tonality of D-76 or Rodinal.
__________________
May the light be with you.
  Reply With Quote

Old 2 Days Ago   #24
Rayt
Registered User
 
Rayt's Avatar
 
Rayt is offline
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,656
Acros @64 with Rodinal 1:50, and TMY box speed with HC-110 dilution B.
  Reply With Quote

Old 2 Days Ago   #25
Rob-F
It's Only a Hobby
 
Rob-F's Avatar
 
Rob-F is offline
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: The Show Me state
Posts: 4,841
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jockos View Post
Right now were switching from XTOL (W27) to FX-39 for a while, to see which we like better.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lawrence View Post
I've used FX-39 for many years. It's very sharp indeed with moderately fine grain (think of it as fine grain Rodinal) however the keeping qualities aren't great so I strongly recommend that you decant into smaller bottles filled to the top. It's excellent with modern technology films like TMax and Delta.
What is FX-39? WHo makes it? I am not familiar with it.
__________________
May the light be with you.
  Reply With Quote

Old 2 Days Ago   #26
ptpdprinter
Registered User
 
ptpdprinter is offline
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 254
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob-F View Post
I'm surprised that HC-110 is leading by a wide margin, since people seldom talk about it here. Must be a lot of closet users. I thought D-76 or Rodinal would be on top.
We only have 65 votes so far on the survey, so I don't think we have a representative sample. As time goes on, I expect D76, XTOL, and Rodinal to pick up adherents.

Developer choice is closely connected to film choice. I use Delta 100/400 and so use Ilford DDX, though I sometimes use Tri-X/Rodinal for effect.
__________________
ambientlightcollection.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 2 Days Ago   #27
J enea
Registered User
 
J enea is offline
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Los Altos, SF Bay Area
Posts: 82
pyrocat-MC or rodinal or Beutler for my slow films, acros, tmax 100, rollei retro 80s and APX 25, just depends on my mood and what I shot, but mainly Pyro-mc. I mix the pyro and beutler as needed and most people know about rodinal and its shelf life.

for faster films like retro 400s, tri-x and tmax 400 I use XTOL replenished. I do use tmax 400 and Pyro-mc if I shoot the film at 200 cause of the fine grain tmax 400 has

but the most used, for the poll purpose, would be pyro-mc
  Reply With Quote

Old 2 Days Ago   #28
roscoetuff
Registered User
 
roscoetuff is online now
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Washington DC
Age: 60
Posts: 264
Agree as I especially thought I'd see more XTOL - which I've not used but am eager to see how it, or it's Ilford work-a-like compare to HC-110. But it's summer shootin' time... that's why I left the poll open "forever".
__________________
"Go out looking for one thing, and that's all you'll ever find." Robert J. Flaherty, Cinematographer

"If a day goes by without my doing something related to photography, it's as though I've neglected something essential to my existence, as though I had forgotten to wake up." Richard Avedon, Photographer
  Reply With Quote

Old 2 Days Ago   #29
ptpdprinter
Registered User
 
ptpdprinter is offline
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 254
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob-F View Post
What is FX-39? WHo makes it? I am not familiar with it.
From the Adox website:

"FX-39 is based on Willi Beutler´s formula for Neofin Red, but was further developed by Geoffrey Crawley. Makes very good use of the film’s full ISO-rating. It’s possible to double the films ISO by adjusting the development times. FX39 can be used in various dilutions in order to develop low-sensitivity films with at least 6-minutes developing time. Especially good for films up to 200 ASA. Well suited for school-photography because of the high equalizing power, low toxidity (no GLS labeling necessary) and easy of use (liquid concentrated one shot developer)."

I have no idea what "high equalizing power" means.
__________________
ambientlightcollection.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 2 Days Ago   #30
julio1fer
Registered User
 
julio1fer's Avatar
 
julio1fer is offline
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Uruguay
Posts: 427
I use home-brewed Beutler, which I find excellent for TMX and very good for Pan F and FP4+.

For ISO 400 classic grain I switch to home-brewed D-76,
  Reply With Quote

Old 2 Days Ago   #31
roscoetuff
Registered User
 
roscoetuff is online now
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Washington DC
Age: 60
Posts: 264
ptprinter: That's the Beutler Neofin Red (FX-39) and then there's Photo Formulary's Beutler Neofin Blue which is a two-solution formula, "compensating developer that gives excellent sharpness, medium grain and low contrast", "bringing out the fine details in the shadows and decreasing the overall contrast of the negative." So Beutler alone... I don't know.
__________________
"Go out looking for one thing, and that's all you'll ever find." Robert J. Flaherty, Cinematographer

"If a day goes by without my doing something related to photography, it's as though I've neglected something essential to my existence, as though I had forgotten to wake up." Richard Avedon, Photographer
  Reply With Quote

Old 2 Days Ago   #32
Ko.Fe.
Me. Write ESL. Ko.
 
Ko.Fe.'s Avatar
 
Ko.Fe. is offline
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: MiltON.ONtario
Age: 50
Posts: 4,599
HC-110. Because it is very easy to store and work with. Small bottle only needed. And it is very neutral to the negative. Which is good thing for me. I'm adding drama with contrast filters on taking lens or on projecting lens. Or with lith developer.
Rodinal is my second choice for slow films only. Which I don't actually use. K400 and HP5+ are the only films I'm using now. HC-100 allows to push @ISO1600 the K400 and HP5+ @3200.

To be honest, HP5+ at @1600 in HC-110 has most appealing contrast to me on darkroom prints :

  Reply With Quote

Old 2 Days Ago   #33
ptpdprinter
Registered User
 
ptpdprinter is offline
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 254
Quote:
Originally Posted by roscoetuff View Post
ptprinter: That's the Beutler Neofin Red (FX-39) and then there's Photo Formulary's Beutler Neofin Blue which is a two-solution formula, "compensating developer that gives excellent sharpness, medium grain and low contrast", "bringing out the fine details in the shadows and decreasing the overall contrast of the negative." So Beutler alone... I don't know.
I am familiar with those developer properties. I'm just not sure what "high equalizing power" is.
__________________
ambientlightcollection.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 2 Days Ago   #34
:: Mark
Registered User
 
:: Mark is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Barcelona
Posts: 153
I use ID-11 mostly, mainly because in powder form it keeps forever (it is 35c here in Barcelona right now) and because D76 is harder to find.

Ideally, I would prefer to use DD-X but the cost is high, and storing partially used (concentrated) solution in these temperatures is impractical. I hope to have a dedicated refrigerator for the chemicals later this year...
__________________
Mark
PhotoBlog
  Reply With Quote

Old 2 Days Ago   #35
Juan Valdenebro
Truth is beauty
 
Juan Valdenebro's Avatar
 
Juan Valdenebro is offline
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Barcelona and Colombia
Age: 45
Posts: 4,322
One question:
As I see Microphen was not mentioned in the list, maybe I've been missing something...
Are you members using another developer good for pushing and for sharp classic grain?
Thanks!
__________________
F i l m means fun!
  Reply With Quote

Old 2 Days Ago   #36
anerjee
Registered User
 
anerjee is offline
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Singapore
Posts: 271
Juan, see my reply above, my approach seems to be similar to yours.

I don't push, but I do use Microphen for Tri-x @ 640. I've tried DD-X, X-Tol, Acufine, Diafine -- I just prefer the grain and look of Microphen.

Here is a thread I have bookmarked which maybe of interest to you as well:

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/foru...5&postcount=12



Quote:
Originally Posted by Juan Valdenebro View Post
One question:
As I see Microphen was not mentioned in the list, maybe I've been missing something...
Are you members using another developer good for pushing and for sharp classic grain?
Thanks!
  Reply With Quote

Old 2 Days Ago   #37
Juan Valdenebro
Truth is beauty
 
Juan Valdenebro's Avatar
 
Juan Valdenebro is offline
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Barcelona and Colombia
Age: 45
Posts: 4,322
Quote:
Originally Posted by anerjee View Post
Juan, see my reply above, my approach seems to be similar to yours.

I don't push, but I do use Microphen for Tri-x @ 640. I've tried DD-X, X-Tol, Acufine, Diafine -- I just prefer the grain and look of Microphen.

Here is a thread I have bookmarked which maybe of interest to you as well:

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/foru...5&postcount=12
That was interesting! Thank you very much!!
__________________
F i l m means fun!
  Reply With Quote

Old 2 Days Ago   #38
Pioneer
Registered User
 
Pioneer's Avatar
 
Pioneer is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Age: 63
Posts: 2,730
Quote:
Originally Posted by roscoetuff View Post
Hey Dan: Which Beutler are you using (I think there's Red and Blue)? Shots I've seen with D-23 seem to show really well.

FWIW, I'm using HC-110 as my main squeeze. I like the flexibility to use it in any number of ways. Not my favorite results, but very dependable. I've liked the results of FP4+ with Pyrocat-HD, but I like them with HC-110, too. Looking forward to trying some Rodinal with 120 where I hear the grain issues ...are negated by the negative's size.
I mix up my own Beutler.

Part A is 10g of metol and 50g of sodium sulfite in 1000ml of water, usually distilled but my water isn't too bad so I'm not a stickler for this.

Part B is just 50g of sodium carbonate in 1000ml of water.

Solution is mixed 1:1:8 and the development time is dependent on the film speed. I am using a lot of JCH Street Pan 400 and Arista EDU Ultra 400 (exposed at EI200) so my standard time is 11 minutes.

D23 is used for everything else although I do use a bit of Rodinal for some films and Adox Adotech II (now III) for my Adox CMS 20.

Rodinal is very long lasting. Beutler seems to last nicely as well, but I only mix up a liter of A and a liter of B at a time so it usually gets used up fairly quickly as Part A & B is mixed and then used one shot.

D23 lasts a very long time...or not...depending on how you look at it. I mix what I need for each session and then toss it so it is always fresh for each developing session. I actually prefer D-23 over D-76 and it seems to give a bit finer grain. Of course, I can't swear to that since I have done no serious testing.
__________________
You gotta love a fast lens;

It is almost as good as a fast horse!
Dan
  Reply With Quote

Old 2 Days Ago   #39
Juan Valdenebro
Truth is beauty
 
Juan Valdenebro's Avatar
 
Juan Valdenebro is offline
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Barcelona and Colombia
Age: 45
Posts: 4,322
Quote:
Originally Posted by anerjee View Post
I only shoot tri-x, usually at 250 (for daylight) or 640 (for indoors), and use Rodinal and Microphen respectively
Well, quite close as you said, anerjee! And even more... Before switching to HP5+ in Microphen perhaps two years ago, nearly all my life I used Tri-X in Rodinal... Both are close!
__________________
F i l m means fun!
  Reply With Quote

Old 2 Days Ago   #40
roscoetuff
Registered User
 
roscoetuff is online now
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Washington DC
Age: 60
Posts: 264
Juan: Didn't mean to slight Microphen by any means. Clearly I left out plenty of good stuff. Caffenol and a variety of good stuff, too. Worked off the Ilford-Kodak equivalent sheet on the web (and didn't add the ECO equivalents). My apologies.

FWIW, I'm glad folks mentioned the other developers... like Beutler and D-23 and hope that will continue. Would've liked to have seen FX-1/FX-2/TFX-2 and a slew of others as well (I have a bottle of TFX-2 I bought on a lark). The Barry Thornton Dixatol (Ultra) / Exactol Lux and some of the other good old stuff is of interest as well. But I keep going with what works and is dependable.
__________________
"Go out looking for one thing, and that's all you'll ever find." Robert J. Flaherty, Cinematographer

"If a day goes by without my doing something related to photography, it's as though I've neglected something essential to my existence, as though I had forgotten to wake up." Richard Avedon, Photographer
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:41.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.