PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare the qualities of the four different processing chemicals(solutions). MATERIALS AND METHODS: With EP 21 films(Ektaspeed plus film, Kodak Co., USA), nine unexposed and nine exposed films of a step wedge were processed utilizing automatic film processor(XR 24, Durr Co., Germany) for 5 days. During 5 days, the total number of processed films including out-patient's intraoral films were about 400-500 for each brand. Base plus fog density, film density, contrast of processed films were measured with densitometer(model 07-443 digital densitometer, Victoreen Co., USA). These measurements were analyzed for comparison. RESULTS: The results were as follows, 1. For the base plus fog density, there was significant difference among the four chemicals (p<0.05). The sequence of the base plus fog densities was in ascending order by Kodak, X-dol 90, Agfa and Konica. 2. For the film density, all chemicals showed useful range of photographic densities(0.25-2.5). The sequence of the film densities was in ascending order by Kodak, X-dol 90, Konica and Agfa. But there was no statistically significant difference of film density between X-dol and Kodak (p<0.05). 3. The sequence of the contrasts was in ascending order by Konica, X-dol 90, Kodak and Agfa. But there was no statistically significant difference of contrast between X-dol and Konica (p<0.05). CONCLUSION: These results indicated that the four processing chemicals had the clinically useful film density and contrast, but only Kodak processing chemical had useful base plus fog density.