Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,478   Posts: 1,571,049   Online: 1093
      
Page 27 of 43 FirstFirst ... 172122232425262728293031323337 ... LastLast
Results 261 to 270 of 422
  1. #261
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    23,370
    Images
    65
    Yes, Kodak and others sell stop baths, but you can use white vinegar!

    PE

  2. #262
    Ian Grant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    West Midlands, UK, and Turkey
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    16,392
    Images
    148
    Note Mason's words in the third paragraph;

    THIS STOP BATH IS SUPERFLUOUS when talkingg about fixers like Hypam & Ilford & Kodak Rapid Fixer. Most people use this type of fixer, only a very small percentage use Neutral or Alkaline fixers. none of the reputable large manufacturers make them for B&W film/paper use.

    None of it gets away from the fact that the film manufacturers say water is OK instead of Stop bath which is the whole point of this thread, and we can't contradict what the manufacturers say

    Ian
    Last edited by Ian Grant; 07-22-2010 at 05:21 PM. Click to view previous post history. Reason: typq

  3. #263
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    23,370
    Images
    65
    Ian;

    Read the whole paragraph. There is a "BUT" in that sentence and he goes on to say something else by the end of the paragraph! And, look at the photo in my last post.

    PE

  4. #264
    Ian Grant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    West Midlands, UK, and Turkey
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    16,392
    Images
    148
    In many posts in this thread I've addressed that but, the extended fixer life so that's a another crass comment.

    Quote Originally Posted by Photo Engineer View Post
    Ian;

    Read the whole paragraph. There is a "BUT" in that sentence and he goes on to say something else by the end of the paragraph! And, look at the photo in my last post.

    PE


    This is what I mean you deliberately post paper processing images when we are talking about film.

    It's completely irrelevant.

    No-one is saying that for optimum fixer life a stop bath doesn't need to be used. Rather that water can also be used if you want.

    So you read the Kodak data, YOU CAN'T DISAGREE, you accepted it in the other post and you still argue with the facts.

    Ian


    Quote Originally Posted by Photo Engineer View Post
    This is a scan of a page from one of the early photo books from Kodak. It describes developing Film, making contact prints and making enlargements.

    In it, they describe the best methods to process and wash films and papers.

    Take a look at the middle tray and consider the implications in the face of the supposed BS. This shows that Kodak was teaching the use of a stop bath as far back as the 40s. The book is not clearly dated but implies a print date in 1947. I certainly had this book in 1950.

    PE
    Last edited by Ian Grant; 07-22-2010 at 05:00 PM. Click to view previous post history.

  5. #265
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    23,370
    Images
    65
    Pages from 2 more Kodak publications on processing. And, in these they specifically mention film and also bring up calcium sludge which is a problem with some hard water supplies.

    PE
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails stop bath 1.jpg   stop bath 2.jpg  

  6. #266
    Ian Grant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    West Midlands, UK, and Turkey
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    16,392
    Images
    148
    It now makes ZERO difference what else you post Ron about this in this thread, Kodak themselves say right now that you can use a water rinse for films, instead of stop bath, so cut the one-upmanship you're not arguing with me rather the data a company you once worked for until you retired has published.

    Kodak publish the data, If you don't or can't agree with it take it up with them directly, it's not relevant to APUG.

    Ian
    Last edited by Ian Grant; 07-22-2010 at 05:39 PM. Click to view previous post history. Reason: add

  7. #267
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    23,370
    Images
    65
    And here is Haist on Stop Baths. He mentions both film and paper. And consequences of not properly stopping development. Please note what he says of a water rinse!

    In actual fact, manufacturers recommendations have not changed. They have recommended a stop as did Mason and Haist if you read my posts carefully. They say it is mandatory for paper and recommended for film but you can use a water rinse for film if you must. Then all 3 sources, EK, Haist and Mason list some of the consequences of not using a stop bath.

    From your post #108:

    "FINAL STEPS
    Rinse at 65 to 75°F (18 to 24°C) with agitation in KODAK
    Indicator Stop Bath or running water for 30 seconds."

    Fuji and Ilford state much the same.

    So they all published similar data and Mason and Haist along with Kodak data books agree. A stop is strongly recommended but a rinse can be used with film. A stop is not recommended with paper!

    PE
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails haist stop 1.jpg   haist stop 2.jpg  

  8. #268
    Ian Grant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    West Midlands, UK, and Turkey
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    16,392
    Images
    148
    I TOLD you whatever else you add or say is totally irrelevant and yet again it is, yes they have recommended a stop bath, and then ALSO said you can use a water rinse instead (talking about films).

    You KEEP contradicting Kodak's own current data. I guess you just can't be bothered to read what Kodak actually say in the Tmax Data-sheet and accept they may know a bit more than you.

    Take that up with them not me. It's KODAK'S suggestions & methodology not mine, I just use it sometimes and it works.

    Ian



    Quote Originally Posted by Photo Engineer View Post
    And here is Haist on Stop Baths. He mentions both film and paper. And consequences of not properly stopping development. Please note what he says of a water rinse!

    In actual fact, manufacturers recommendations have not changed. They have recommended a stop as did Mason and Haist if you read my posts carefully. They say it is mandatory for paper and recommended for film but you can use a water rinse for film if you must. Then all 3 sources, EK, Haist and Mason list some of the consequences of not using a stop bath.

    From your post #108:

    "FINAL STEPS
    Rinse at 65 to 75°F (18 to 24°C) with agitation in KODAK
    Indicator Stop Bath or running water for 30 seconds."

    Fuji and Ilford state much the same.

    So they all published similar data and Mason and Haist along with Kodak data books agree. A stop is strongly recommended but a rinse can be used with film. A stop is not recommended with paper!

    PE

  9. #269
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    23,370
    Images
    65
    Ian;

    I'm sorry that you keep misreading those posts of mine and others who posted instructions from Fuji for example. I did not misquote them. I even posted some of them.

    They all say Stop or Rinse for film and Stop for paper. The texts go on to state that a Rinse with film may cause problems and they enumerate those problems. What more can I say?

    In the case of HQ and Metol washing out of films and papers, Haist has a small bit on this in the Monobath chapter referring to work on the removal of Hypo vs HQ from film during washing. He shows in the data he used, that HQ washes out more slowly than Hypo and the Silver complexes. It also uses 12 deg C wash water, which is cold.

    BTW, the level for archival quality of HQ vs Hypo is also shown. Reference: A. Green and M. G. Rumens, J. Phot. Sci., 19:149 - 150 (1971). And this work was on Monobaths, but, as I mentioned above, I have seen similar work on normal B&W and color processes.

    There are other studies, but I cannot locate any publications, just this reference which is related to Monobaths. But it does clearly show limits to HQ for archival keeping and this is well known for all developing agents.

    PE

  10. #270

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    113
    PE, I again commend your patience and diplomacy. Does this forum have a moderator? Is he sound asleep? pk



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin