Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,502   Posts: 1,543,379   Online: 756
      
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 27
  1. #11
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    23,007
    Images
    65
    Eric, in my experiment, the Clayton fixer cleared and fixed about 30% slower than TF4 and about the same as the Kodak fix. It was claimed that it fixed about 30% FASTER. That is not so.

    The extent of fixation is identical in all cases. It has to remove all silver halide.

    The wash rate with TF4 is about 2 - 4 x faster than with the Kodak and Clayton fixers.

    Therefore overall, the TF-4 is more effective. As I mentioned above, it is possible to do even better.

    PE

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    248
    Lowell is a good guy and someone we ought to stand behind and support whenever possible!

  3. #13
    kaiyen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    bay area, california
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    331
    Images
    4
    Lowell is a salesman more than anything else and can be really in your face about Clayton Chemicals. He also makes some claims that are pretty...incredible (in a literal sense).

    However, some of his products aren't so bad, and at least he's responsive.

    allan

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    248
    I think F-76 is a really fine developer. Can't knock that. Lowell has always been very helpful and willing to go the extra mile with regards to clayton products.

  5. #15
    MattCarey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,303
    Images
    31
    Quote Originally Posted by bobbysandstrom
    I think F-76 is a really fine developer. Can't knock that. Lowell has always been very helpful and willing to go the extra mile with regards to clayton products.
    My only trial of Rodinal was against F-76. I didn't pursue rodinal after that. Perhaps with more time, I could be initiated, but I just don't have the time.

    I do like F76.

    Matt

  6. #16
    titrisol's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Rotterdam
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,671
    Images
    8
    F76+ is almost identical to DDX in th way it behaves.
    Lowell was nice enough to send me some samples a while ago when we thought Ilford was going down the drain and both their F76+ and the odorless fixer are excellent products.
    I still have to try their low contrast developer (Extend +)

    Quote Originally Posted by MattCarey
    My only trial of Rodinal was against F-76. I didn't pursue rodinal after that. Perhaps with more time, I could be initiated, but I just don't have the time.

    I do like F76.

    Matt
    Mama took my APX away.....

  7. #17
    Hero!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Austin, Texas, USA
    Shooter
    Med. Format RF
    Posts
    13
    Quote Originally Posted by Photo Engineer
    Eric, all fixers are not born equal. TF4 is ....
    PE
    Photo Engineer, is TF4 a brand name? Are you advocating it as the quickest and best of the fixes? Please elaborate.

    Thanks!

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Fond du Lac, Wisconsin
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,065
    Images
    39
    TF4 is an alkaline fix sold by the Photographer's Formulary. I think Bill Troop developed it.

  9. #19
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    23,007
    Images
    65
    Quote Originally Posted by Hero!
    Photo Engineer, is TF4 a brand name? Are you advocating it as the quickest and best of the fixes? Please elaborate.

    Thanks!
    I neither advocate nor object to any product. I merely state how the product performs. The TF4 meets the advertized specs on the bottle. It is the fastest fix I tested (other than my own) and is the fastest to wash out to archival levels (other than my own - tests still pending).

    So, when compared to other fixes, I can say that TF-4 has no hype associated with it and neither does Kodak Rapid Hardening Fix. They perform up to the figures stated on the bottle. Even though the Kodak fix is slower, it meets its stated specs.

    OTOH, the Clayton fixes that I tested did not perform up to the standards posted by Lowell Huff, and there were no performance figures on the bottle. Posted information on several sites that sell Clayton gave conflicting information on treatment times and other critical information such as dilution.

    TF4 is an improved version of TF3 which is published in Anchell and Troop. It is indeed sold by the Formulary and does live up precisely to its specification.

    After many years of R&D in Bleach and Fix chemistry, I believe that I can speak with a certain degree of authority on the subject. Nothing is wrong at all with the Clayton product. It is a fine fix. It is just not a Super Fix. Isn't that what HYPE is all about? Overstatement of the capabilities of a product.

    The Clayton fix is an excellent work alike for the Kodak Rapid Liquid Hardneing Fix. No more, and no less. If that is giving you the value you want, then it is a fine product, but if you expect more from it based on some 'hype', it will not deliver.

    My tests show that TF4 does deliver what it says on the bottle. It is the quickest fix I tested of all but my own special formulation, and it washed out faster than any but my own formulation.

    PE

  10. #20
    craigclu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    NW Wisconsin, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    768
    PE... What are your plans with your fixer? Are you going to share the results and formula when you've finished or do you have other goals with it? Where does it fall on the pH scale, in general? Has it seemed compatible with staining developer processes? Sorry if this was answered elsewhere but I don't recall seeing it.
    Craig Schroeder

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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