Super Iron Out

Discussion in 'B&W: Film, Paper, Chemistry' started by Alessandro Serrao, Jun 18, 2013.

  1. Alessandro Serrao

    Alessandro Serrao Member

    Messages:
    997
    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2004
    Location:
    Rome, Italy
    Shooter:
    35mm
    I'm experimenting with Super Iron Out as a redeveloper in a reversal process.
    Two tablesppons in 300ml of tap water, use immediately.
    I've souped a strip of a 35mm Fomapan 100 classic, half exposed to daylight and half not for 4 minutes, constant agitation.
    Preliminary results: at reflected light the half exposed is darker than the half non-exposed but at transmission light the non-exposed part is darker than the exposed one.
    Any suggestions?
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 18, 2013
  2. Tofek

    Tofek Member

    Messages:
    70
    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2010
    Location:
    Paris
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I've used it at once tsp per 300 mL and it works fine.
     
  3. richyd

    richyd Member

    Messages:
    57
    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2012
    I have tried this. It works but wasn't sure about the density so I recently did the following test using Foma 100, 120 roll. I made exposures at 100, +1/2, +1. I developed in Suprol 1+4 for 6 mins. After bleach and clear I split the reversal part. The first 3 frames were exposed to light then second development and the next 3 with Iron Out, two teaspoons in 400ml water.

    When I was doing the development the light reversal strip developed blacks very quickly. With iron out the development took longer and whilst the film was wet the blacks looked less dense but when dry there was not much between them.

    I have enclosed scans, I know this brings in other variables but it was the same parameters for both strips.

    I have been experimenting with Foma 100 since last year and although it works quite well I am not happy with the density of the images compared to other films. I do not have the technical knowledge but think maybe it is not the best film for reversal. I found that rating it at 400 with longer development time gave slightly better results.

    I also now think that light reversal may be the way to go. I always thought it seemed a bit vague, uncontrolled and open to inconsistencies but seems to gave the clearest slides.
     

    Attached Files:

  4. mr.datsun

    mr.datsun Subscriber

    Messages:
    347
    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2008
    Location:
    The End of t
    Shooter:
    Sub 35mm
    Your scans both look very neutral in colour tone. Did you scan them greyscale or desaturate? I wonder, as some say they get a warmer or browner slide with Iron Out.

    Both look good, with the Iron Out being only slightly darker (from the posted scans). Have you tried increasing the hypo in the 1st dev (or whatever silver solvent you might use) a touch, to compensate?
     
  5. mr.datsun

    mr.datsun Subscriber

    Messages:
    347
    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2008
    Location:
    The End of t
    Shooter:
    Sub 35mm
    Alex. I don't quite understand. Did you develop, bleach and clear before the Super Iron Out? Super Iron Out reduces all silver halide, whether exposed to light or not (well, I as I understand!).
     
  6. Alessandro Serrao

    Alessandro Serrao Member

    Messages:
    997
    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2004
    Location:
    Rome, Italy
    Shooter:
    35mm
    @mr.datsun: I only souped the strip in Iron Out bypassing completely all reversal steps. This to assess if Super Iron Out could reduce all AgBr. But it seems there's a difference whether the film is exposed or not.

    Tonight I've carried out my second attempt as follows:
    1) Ilford Pq Universal 1+5, 10 min, +0,7g hypo anh, Kodak agitation style;
    2) dichromate bleach, 3 min, constant agitations;
    3) sulfite clearing (25g/lt), 2 min, constant agitation;
    4) Super Iron Out, 2tsp in 300ml, 6min constant agitation;

    For a Fomapan 100 classic exposed at 100 the DMax is finally there, although it's not going to make you scream. The highlights are quite blown up.
    Diagnosis: overdevelopment and/or overexposure.

    @richyd: I must agree with mr.datsun. Your slides are quite good. I just prefer your Iron Out process because the black are richer (for what I can see from a scan). I, however, must agree with your findings about the low DMax that the Fomapan 100 yields. It's probably inherent to the nature of the beast because also David Wood of dr5.com explicitly warns against using Fomapan 100 classic in his line.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 19, 2013
  7. mrred

    mrred Subscriber

    Messages:
    1,121
    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2009
    Location:
    Montreal, Ca
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    It would depend on how you want your reversals to be used. If you project develop less and the highlights will not blow. When you scan, you need a scanner with a high dmax.

    I find the foma100 curve natural for reversal. I do not use any silver solvent and am very pleased with the results. This might be your highlight issue.

    [​IMG]
     
  8. richyd

    richyd Member

    Messages:
    57
    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2012
    I realise I made a mistake with the notation of the scans. The exposure label should read minus not plus so the last frame is under exposed by 1 stop. I can't change the post now.

    @mrred. Yes, I am pleased with the results the tonal range is good and neutral. I scanned as greyscale. Another complete film I developed came out slightly yellow but a short fix in weak hypo cleaned it up. I don't use any halide solvent, every time I have experimented with that I get blown highlights and/or thinner blacks. I have just got some potassium thiocyanate and will experiment with that.

    @alessandro. My process is similar to yours but no hypo so developent time is shorter. I got good quite results at 8 mins but found the blacks a little too light and reducing to 6 mins works better. I used Suprol, a P&Q developer, because I had bottle and it is cheap.

    I use dichromate bleach at 4g/ltr. Even with this concentration the film leader is almost fully clear in 1 minute. Total time 1' 30". I think the emulsion is quite thin and have found it bleaches very quickly.
     
  9. Alessandro Serrao

    Alessandro Serrao Member

    Messages:
    997
    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2004
    Location:
    Rome, Italy
    Shooter:
    35mm
    @richyd: good info! I use 10gr/lt of dichromate and 10ml/lt acid and use 3min standard bleaching time. I will try reducing the dichro amount and the time as well as omitting the hypo in the first dev and reducing its time accordingly.
     
  10. AgX

    AgX Member

    Messages:
    11,925
    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2007
    Location:
    Germany
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
  11. Rudeofus

    Rudeofus Subscriber

    Messages:
    2,566
    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2009
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    And for those who still can't make much of this MSDS: The compound "Sodium Hydrosulfite" shown in the list of constituents is better known under the name Sodium Dithionite which is a known photographic developer. Since the second developer in reversal process has to develop all the Silver Halide it can find and all Silver Halide has been exposed to strong light, it doesn't matter much that Dithionite fogs and produces poor emulsion speed.
     
  12. mrred

    mrred Subscriber

    Messages:
    1,121
    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2009
    Location:
    Montreal, Ca
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Let me know how that works out. I have some here and I have not had any success.
     
  13. Alessandro Serrao

    Alessandro Serrao Member

    Messages:
    997
    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2004
    Location:
    Rome, Italy
    Shooter:
    35mm
    There's a fundamental difference.
    The developer reduces AgBr to Ag(0) if the silver halide grain has been exposed to light.
    Dithionite reduces AgBr in absence of light.
     
  14. Sponsored Ad
  15. Rudeofus

    Rudeofus Subscriber

    Messages:
    2,566
    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2009
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    That's what they call a fogging developer ...
     
  16. johnielvis

    johnielvis Member

    Messages:
    940
    Joined:
    May 21, 2010
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Good to see that others now see the benefits of no hypo in the first developer. Results speak volumes, don't they?
     
  17. richyd

    richyd Member

    Messages:
    57
    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2012
    @alessandro : " I use 10gr/lt of dichromate and 10ml/lt acid and use 3min standard bleaching time." Wow that's high concentration from the recipes I have seen. When I researched this last year I got the most useful info from 'mrred' who posts here, from his blog - My Fim Stuff - on blogspot, specifically using Foma classic and other films and my original source for the Iron Out info. He used 6gr/ltr dichromate. I use the sodium bisulphate, 55gr/ltr, acid substitute as it is easier for me to obtain.

    I have been paranoid about over bleaching. I found a thread on Apug last year fom someone quoting from a book by Haist about reversal development. I can't find the thread now maybe it is archived, but have copied the content so if you want that would be happy to email it to you. Quoting from the book he said that a dichromate bleach, 0.5% K dichromate & .5% H2SO4, should be done within one minute and time should not exceed 3 minutes.
     
  18. Alessandro Serrao

    Alessandro Serrao Member

    Messages:
    997
    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2004
    Location:
    Rome, Italy
    Shooter:
    35mm
    A pure speculation: if the bleach only renders water soluble (Ag-sulfate) the Ag(0) reduced by the first developer, how can be possible to overbleach?
    In other words: is it possible that the chromic acid will render also AgBr water soluble?
    I don't think it's possible at all.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 20, 2013
  19. mrred

    mrred Subscriber

    Messages:
    1,121
    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2009
    Location:
    Montreal, Ca
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    It's the first attempt that I will use no hypo. Experience has shown me that some hypo is usually required, if not for anything other than evening out the curve.

    But yes, too much hypo is usually the result in trying to make an unsuitable film usable or using a developer not up to the task. We still have choices, and the ones that use the least / none are usually the best.
     
  20. Alessandro Serrao

    Alessandro Serrao Member

    Messages:
    997
    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2004
    Location:
    Rome, Italy
    Shooter:
    35mm
    However there's a thesis work "INFLUENCE OF FIRST DEVELOPER SOLVENT LEVELS ON THE INFORMATION STORAGE CAPACITY OF NEGATIVE AND REVERSAL IMAGES" By W. R. Harrison B.S . St . Lawrence University, School of Photographic Arts and Sciences Rochester Institute of Technology, Rochester, N.Y.

    that states that a silver halide solvent must be present in the first developer to obtain a higher quality picture.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 21, 2013
  21. johnielvis

    johnielvis Member

    Messages:
    940
    Joined:
    May 21, 2010
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Well, my experience and research gives me the data to state firmly that I disagree with that. Besides, define "quality". He's got different standards for different things than I do. If you want to get down to it, some things are better off with solvant, some without solvant. No way can you make a claim one way or the other--it all depends on the application. It's just amazing how people usually always go with what's printed instead of what they're own senses tell them.
     
  22. Alessandro Serrao

    Alessandro Serrao Member

    Messages:
    997
    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2004
    Location:
    Rome, Italy
    Shooter:
    35mm
    My experience (as well as Kodak's, Ilford's, Orwo's) calls for hypo in the first dev,otherwise I cannot obtain a clead DMin.
    It's a tradeoff.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 22, 2013
  23. johnielvis

    johnielvis Member

    Messages:
    940
    Joined:
    May 21, 2010
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    well--it sounds like you've given up on it--it is certainly possible. You can also fix those with too much dmin with a post-bleach. You may be interested in how Steiglitz made his lantern slides--post bleaching, toning, etc. He was a REAL perfectionist.

    There's a million ways to do it depending only on the creativity of the person doing it--hypo in the developer isn't the only way. That's all I'm saying. They hypo in developer process was optimized for motion picture high speed processing--quite the opposit to slow speed home processing.

    Everyone seems to gravitate towards the one solution that "everyone else" is doing and misses the other methods--which may be better or more suited to the application at hand. Free your mind--lose the prejudices, and you shall see that there is ALWAYS more than one way to do something.
     
  24. mrred

    mrred Subscriber

    Messages:
    1,121
    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2009
    Location:
    Montreal, Ca
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    There are some good points discussed here.

    When I bench a film, I get as close as I can with a non hypo'ed developer. This goes as far as using a 1:1 mixture of dektol. I get it close, and then start adding various levels of hypo. This is also why I use a stock solution of hypo and only add it at development time; the optimum levels are different with each film and I don't like to stick with one film. The thing is, hypo is a general solvent. It will remove and lower your dmax too. The right amount is important and not developing enough is counter productive. using a weaker developer (like rodinal, d76, ..etc) will yield "thin chromes" or be too fogged or just too expensive on developer use.

    Sometimes I use a selenium toner for a final bath. This helps thicken the image when you can't build up enough silver. Most traditional processes to "fix" negs still apply.

    Ideally, you want a developer with ph 10 or greater to give you the activity you need. What you need to develop negs well is not what you need to develop chromes well. I have been playing with some concoctions targeting this. So far it's good, but dektol seems to get the best results for me.
     
  25. johnielvis

    johnielvis Member

    Messages:
    940
    Joined:
    May 21, 2010
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    I'll give you this, the solvant developers DO give finer grain--but they always appear "fuzzier" as a result to me--like they have resolution but somehow gain blurriness---it's apparent sharpness I guess at the micro livel--the more contrast (the bigger the dmax difference) the sharper it appears. But that's just me I guess. to each his own. Projecting images is different from light table viewing. I'm doing big sheets for light table viewing.

    projecting slides or movie film you can get away with losing a lot of dmax since there is more of a limit on dmax in projection--you can have something looking too light on a lighttable but it looks perfect projected.

    Like I said--it's all in the application. But I do see the people automatically gravitate towards "the book" which was basically written for cine film. People seem to want to follow the recipe as if it's the ONLY recipe that can work becase someone put it in print at one time.

    it reminds me of when I was in high school. They had a couple of video games outside the lunchhall. One one was a pacman game. I once saw a dude hit the coin box and get a free credit. I watched him a few times, the way he held the coin box with one hand and banged it with the other. I tried and tried a few times but every time the machine would reset itself from that whack. Finally, I got "the trick" of where to hit it and how to brace it to keep the machine from resetting itself. The problem is that for me to hit it, I would cut my wrist on the push button for the coin return. So I had a solution--I had a boyscout knife that I used the butt of to do the hitting with--more controllable and no pain on the hand.

    next day I was whacking credit after credit and getting very good at playing the game since they were all for free...people saw me. These same people had tried to bang the credits with their hands and failed at first, just like I did. So now they saw me doing it...and they saw the knife....

    the next day EVERYONE had a pocketknife and was hitting the game. The paint around the coin box was all smashed away and there were tiny dents in it. Everyone was hitting it with their knives but still the game was resetting itself.

    The people figured "it can't be that this guy has any special talent--the SECRET is the knife"...and they kept hitting it and failing. But they kept trying and trying and never got anywhere because they didn't understand how to hold the coin box to keep the game from resetting itself--it was a mixture of things that was "the secret" but everyone wanted the ONE thing that made it work.

    reminds me of hypo in developer...everyone think's it's "the secret"...it ain't.
     
  26. Alessandro Serrao

    Alessandro Serrao Member

    Messages:
    997
    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2004
    Location:
    Rome, Italy
    Shooter:
    35mm
    @johnielvis: what a great story! I agree with you 100%.