Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,949   Posts: 1,585,937   Online: 1004
      
Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 54
  1. #21

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Montreal, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,116
    One minute with agitation in a fresh rapid fix should be enough fixing. So if this is happening with TF4 I suspect developer carryover into the fixer. Since TF4 is alkaline, development can start up again. This is a potential risk when there is no acid stop bath and the fixer is alkaline.

  2. #22
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    23,560
    Images
    65
    Bruce, did you mean TF-3 instead of TF-2? I'm trying to get things straight here.

    Now, the purpose of a wash is also to remove HQ and Metol for example. If they remain behind, then prints can turn brown or black depending on the post process baths. If you use an MQ developer, Metol is best washed out with a touch of acid somewhere. HQ comes out in water or alkali at about the same rate as Hypo and the Silver complexes. Unfortunately there is no test for these. You can test for residual Silver and Hypo with the test kits.

    I suggest that you get those two kits somewhere and use them on your print borders.

    PE

  3. #23

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Montreal, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,116
    Seems he WAS using TF4 (alkaline, ammonium thiosulfate), saw the problem, and is now using TF2 (alkaline, sodium thiosulfate) and seeing the same problem. I'm not clear on whether the fixing time he's using with TF2 is still one minute. So if he was only seeing the problem with TF2 I'd have said it could be under-fixing and/or developer carryover. But since he saw the same problems with TF4 I'm thinking the problem is just developer carryover. That would be the case with TF3 as well.

  4. #24
    Bruce Osgood's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Brooklyn, N.Y. USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,463
    Images
    47
    OOOOOPS...

    Yes, I meant TF-3 in place of TF-2. In fact my source was Ruji's spin off of TF-3 where he uses 5g of Sodium metabisulfite in place of 5g Sodium metaborate.

    The actual formula I used is:
    Ammonium thiosulfate, 57-60%..200.00 mL
    Sodium Sulfite........................15.00g
    Sodium metabisulfite................5.00g
    Dilute to 1 Ltr.

    Right now I plan to stick with TF-4 and insure that well rinsed prints go into it.

  5. #25
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    23,560
    Images
    65
    Bruce, that formula may be part of the problem, IDK. The only substitute for TF3 is Bill Troop's formula given in Anchell and Troop. But, TF-4 should work.

    PE

  6. #26
    Thomas Bertilsson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Minnesota
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    14,560
    Images
    300
    Why not just use a stop bath and take the guess work out of neutralizing all of the developer? I do not understand.

    There are prints of mine that I have made with water as stop bath, and those that I've made using an acid stop bath. The acid stop bath ones never exhibit any problems, while I recently had to replace five prints I sold in 2006 using water stop bath and alkaline fixer that were starting to deteriorate in spite of an otherwise archival process. Acid stop = peace of mind, and it is so easy to do.
    "Often moments come looking for us". - Robert Frank

    "Make good art!" - Neil Gaiman

    "...the heart and mind are the true lens of the camera". - Yousuf Karsh

  7. #27

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Montreal, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,116
    +1. Why people wouldn't use an acid stop bath in printing is beyond me. Of course it depends on the fixer. A poorly buffered alkaline fix will get ruined pretty fast. Then again you could use a water rinse after the acid stop. Or if one is bent on using a non-acidic fix, use one that will work with an acid stop. TF-4 should be ok. Better yet, TF-5 (essentially neutral in pH and also compatible with an acid stop).

  8. #28
    ROL
    ROL is offline
    ROL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    California
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    794
    Quote Originally Posted by Michael R 1974 View Post
    +1. Why people wouldn't use an acid stop bath in printing is beyond me.
    Uh, because the manufacturer of the fix in question, TF4, who I assume did some sort of testing to support their water "stop" stipulates a water rinse to prevent premature and unnecessary exhaustion of the fix. Perhaps an acid stop followed by a water rinse may be more effective, but so far, I've seen nothing here other than untested opinion. Objective questioning and testing of proper fixing of prints using TF4 might actually be of some importance to those of us who have thus far used it, per manufacturer's recommendations, reliably for some years.

  9. #29
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    23,560
    Images
    65
    Quote Originally Posted by Michael R 1974 View Post
    +1. Why people wouldn't use an acid stop bath in printing is beyond me. Of course it depends on the fixer. A poorly buffered alkaline fix will get ruined pretty fast. Then again you could use a water rinse after the acid stop. Or if one is bent on using a non-acidic fix, use one that will work with an acid stop. TF-4 should be ok. Better yet, TF-5 (essentially neutral in pH and also compatible with an acid stop).
    You can use an acid stop with an alkaline fix or a neutral fix. That is what the buffer in them is for, to prevent pH changes (rise).

    As for the recommendations for using a water rinse, as noted by ROL, it says "RUNNING WATER RINSE" and it also suggests the use of an acid stop bath. I have used a running water rinse and a static rinse. With a static rinse, the rinse becomes more and more alkaline and contaminated with use, and finally I got prints that had gray highlights.

    Yes, I ran all of those tests including time of fixing and washing and a 5 year keeping test. This was to verify the capability of TF-5 vs TF-4 and KRLF.

    PE

  10. #30
    ROL
    ROL is offline
    ROL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    California
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    794
    Thanks for the clarification, although I would note that I have not until now seen the manufacturer's recommendation of an acid stop bath. I was probably misled by the Tech Info sheet, in which it says, partially in bold, "Do not use a stop-bath". Absent any other information, I guess I can assume that means only, and that followed by a water rinse, would then be no problem.
    Last edited by ROL; 07-23-2013 at 12:54 PM. Click to view previous post history.

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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