Pre-wash Tmax 100 prior to developer?

Discussion in 'B&W: Film, Paper, Chemistry' started by Robland, Apr 19, 2009.

  1. Robland

    Robland Member

    Messages:
    57
    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2008
    Shooter:
    4x5 Format
    I pre-washed my Tmax 100 MF 120 for 30 seconds with water, when I dumped the wash into a bucket it was very dark/purple. I developed as normal and when the developer was added to that bucket the purple water was cleared (or was it when I added the fix?), either way there was undeveloped material in that pre-wash water. My negs were a little flat. I'm wondering if pre-wash with roll film is not required. I always prewash my 4x5 TriX 320 with great results.

    Is Prewash recommended with sheet or roll film? Would it have mattered, i.e. does the developer "stick" the image to the base, or can that undeveloped latent image be washed away or degraded in 30 seconds of water prewash?
     
  2. jnanian

    jnanian Advertiser Advertiser

    Messages:
    20,097
    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2003
    Location:
    local
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    hi robland

    i pre wash everything, no matter what the film type and developer, before my film goes
    into the developer. the short time that i used xtol, i stopped prewashing because
    it was recommended not to by kodak. i don't use xtol anymore...
    maybe your image seemed flat because you under developed or under exposed them ...

    john
     
  3. bdial

    bdial Subscriber

    Messages:
    5,435
    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2005
    Location:
    NE U.S.
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    The purple color of the pre-rinse is normal, it's the antihalation dye. There was no emulsion or latent image in your prewash water. Though Kodak doesn't specifically call for a pre-wash with roll film and Xtol, I've been doing it routinely using Xtol and I get good results. The flat negs would be an indication you needed more development time.
     
  4. Christopher Walrath

    Christopher Walrath Member

    Messages:
    7,114
    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2005
    Location:
    In a darkroo
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Wirelessly posted (BlackBerry9000/4.6.0.167 Profile/MIDP-2.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 VendorID/102 UP.Link/6.3.0.0.0)

    Do it or don't do it. Those 'for' say it gets film closer to processing temp. Those against say it blocks absorption of the developer. It's not necessary. Not harmful either. Good luck.
     
  5. ic-racer

    ic-racer Member

    Messages:
    7,484
    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2007
    Location:
    Midwest USA
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    That dye is not light sensitive. Its not part of your latent image. Your negatives were thin because the prewash inhibits the initial development. Increase times by 20% and see how they look. Or just eliminate the pre-wash and keep the time the same.
     
  6. Paul Verizzo

    Paul Verizzo Member

    Messages:
    1,261
    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2008
    Location:
    Sarasota, FL
    Shooter:
    35mm
    And how many film makers suggest prewashing?

    Thought so.
     
  7. Jeff Kubach

    Jeff Kubach Member

    Messages:
    6,930
    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2007
    Location:
    Richmond VA.
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I have done both for 120 film and seems the pre-wash does better for me.

    Jeff
     
  8. RalphLambrecht

    RalphLambrecht Subscriber

    Messages:
    8,246
    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2003
    Location:
    Florida
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    As Christoph already said: Do it or don't!

    However if you do it, do it long enough, or you risk uneven development, which is the exact problem presoaking is trying to prevent. Presoaking has to be long enough for the water to evenly soak into the emulsion. In my tests, this was between 3-4 minutes with Kodak and Ilford films. Consequently, don't presoak for less than 5 minutes, or you will risk water spots.

    The other problem is, presoaking does extend the required development time. The developer has a harder time to get to the silver in a swollen emulsion, hence, slightly flat negatives can be the results, unless this was compensated for through an extended development time (10% rough guess).

    my opinion:
    Presoak or not. I think it's a waste of time but doesn't hurt. But, whatever you do, test your films either way, and never switch, because film development is visibly affected by presoak.