Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,973   Posts: 1,558,725   Online: 744
      
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 25 of 25
  1. #21
    David Allen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Berlin
    Shooter
    Med. Format RF
    Posts
    443
    If you mix developer, fixer, wash-aid, etc yourself then there is no storage problem because they are so cheap to make from raw chemicals that you do not need to store working strength over long periods - you simply throw away after use. In addition, most liquid chemicals at stock strength will last for ages (HC110 for example will last more than 3 years if stored at stock strength and used one-shot). With working strength chemicals (with the exception of two-bath developers, selenium toner, etc) it is best not to store them over long periods because this is a false economy resulting in unpredictable results.

    The key question with storing working strength chemicals over long periods is whether you are actually being economical. For example, if you use Dokumol print developer, 1 litre at working strength (I use 1 + 6 strength) is enough to develop 10 final 16 x 12 prints including test strips and work prints - I always feel that I have 'had my monies worth' with 10 final prints and would not store for further use although Dokumol will deliver good results if you do store for a few weeks. Having achieved 10 good prints in a session why would you want to store the developer for further use?

    Don't get me wrong, I am not loaded and can't afford to just throw away good chemicals but after all of the effort in finding images I do not want to take risks with developing the film. With printing, a good testing regime for the fixer (two-bath) is far more important than trying to save a few bob by storing the working strength fixer for months before a new printing session.

    Perhaps if you could explain which chemicals you are trying to store over long periods, everyone here could provide better advice in terms of whether there is an appropriate storage method, whether it would be more economical to mix fresh chemicals (i.e. changing to HC110 one shot for film development) or whether you are trying to make a false economy (i.e Tetenal Lavaquick when mixed at 60ml + 1000ml water has an archival capacity of 30 prints at size 16 x 12 and should not be used beyond this).

    Bests,

    David
    www.dsallen.de

  2. #22
    RalphLambrecht's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Central florida,USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,626
    Images
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Smith View Post
    Then that's all you have to worry about.



    Once you have bought it, you can use it for whatever purpose you like.

    Sometimes there are suggestions to replace the air with CO2 but that will cause the developer to become more acidic as CO2 absorbed by water becomes carbonic acid.

    p.s. It's oxidisation, not oxidation - and don't let any Americans convince you otherwise!


    Steve.
    steve, you lost that battle hundreds of years ago, give it up.
    Regards

    Ralph W. Lambrecht
    www.darkroomagic.comrorrlambrec@ymail.com[/URL]
    www.waybeyondmonochrome.com

  3. #23
    Steve Smith's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Ryde, Isle of Wight
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    8,614
    Images
    122
    Quote Originally Posted by RalphLambrecht View Post
    steve, you lost that battle hundreds of years ago, give it up.
    If you can show me something which has oxidated rather than oxidised, then I will agree that oxidation is a word!


    Steve.
    "People who say things won't work are a dime a dozen. People who figure out how to make things work are worth a fortune" - Dave Rat.

  4. #24
    RalphLambrecht's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Central florida,USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,626
    Images
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Smith View Post
    If you can show me something which has oxidated rather than oxidised, then I will agree that oxidation is a word!


    Steve.
    a word is a word not because it's in the dictionary butwhen a group of people use it with the same understanding of its meaning;oxidation is a word, and you know that there is such a group; you possibly included.
    Regards

    Ralph W. Lambrecht
    www.darkroomagic.comrorrlambrec@ymail.com[/URL]
    www.waybeyondmonochrome.com

  5. #25
    fotch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    SE WI- USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,167
    I agree with Ralph.
    Items for sale or trade at www.Camera35.com

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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