Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,916   Posts: 1,521,861   Online: 1072
      
Page 9 of 28 FirstFirst ... 345678910111213141519 ... LastLast
Results 81 to 90 of 273
  1. #81
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    22,922
    Images
    65
    Quote Originally Posted by fotch View Post
    I remember reading an earlier thread that recommenced two test, not just one. Made sense for me.

    "And, the use of the silver nitrate test for hypo and silver sulfide for silver is a good pairing of tests to check the quality of the wash."

    http://www.apug.org/forums/forum37/3...ch-out-11.html

    I do not remember who made that statement, but it is prudent advice. A test for HQ and Metol might be warranted as well. In any event, you may note that Bill and I are banned from that thread. I am loathe to continue any discussion along these lines.

    PE

  2. #82

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Willamette Valley, Oregon
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    3,684
    OK, so it's whether, not weather. Dan

  3. #83

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    15,911
    thanks fotch,

    i really forgot what a train wreck of a thread that was.
    Ես այլեւս չի պատասխանելու իմ էլեկտրոնային փոստով
    եթե դուք պետք է ինձ դիմեք ինձ միջոցով իմ կայքը կամ բլոգում

  4. #84
    eli griggs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    NC
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    358
    I don't use a chemical stop-bath for film or paper, so when processing film, I change the tank water by fill-and-dump six times between developer and the fix and use the Ilford Method for a final wash.

    I prepare my wash water ahead of development by keeping gallon jugs of tap water with the prepared solutions and distilled water I use for mixing and processing, thus everything is in the same temperature range. This also means I am not running water while processing and a small, two reel steel tank can be processed with less than two gallons of tap water.

    If I needed to use distilled water only, I'd use the Ilford Method for both washes and reduce wash-water usage to under a gallon. I believe distilled water is currently 54¢ a gallon at WalMart.

    I use TF-4 fixer to reduce print wash times, as well as a wash aid, if doing paper base and I'm using a low-flow, battery-box 'archival' washer with the outlet feeding a common tray washer for an initial first rinse.

    Eli

  5. #85

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Willamette Valley, Oregon
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    3,684
    Quote Originally Posted by eli griggs View Post
    I don't use a chemical stop-bath for film or paper, so when processing
    film, I change the tank water by fill-and-dump six times between
    developer and the fix and use the Ilford Method for a final wash.
    Between the developer and fix, six changes of water. And myself,
    none. That goes for paper as well, no stop. I've only had good
    results from doing so. I attribute the good results from the
    use of very dilute one-shot fixer. Dan

  6. #86

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Willamette Valley, Oregon
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    3,684

    A Down Side

    Quote Originally Posted by dancqu View Post
    I call it the Alternate Two Tray Still Water Diffusion Method.
    THE LEAST water way to wash. See my just previous post
    this thread. Fred Picker endorsed. Dan
    I've repeated above only the last paragraph of my post 80 this
    thread. Although the developer may be of any usable strength
    the fixer used with the processing method I detailed is used
    one-shot. The very dilute fixer is down the drain after one
    or a few same time processed prints. That adds a little
    to the method's overall use of water.

    The volume of fixer used must be a multiple of the number
    of prints same time processed in order to maintain the
    fixer's silver levels within 'archival' levels.

    With one shot developer, single tray processing is possible.
    With one shot very dilute fixer a single fix yields 'archival'
    results. With fresh chemistry each or a few prints same
    time processed there is no carry forward build up of
    chemistry. I've found no need for a stop bath of
    any sort. All in all some big Pluses, +++. Dan

  7. #87

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    124
    Quote Originally Posted by dancqu View Post
    The very dilute fixer is down the drain after one
    or a few same time processed prints.
    Perhaps I'm missing something, but dumping used fix seems... counter-productive, especially in a thread focused on water-conservation. If I understand correctly, all the unexposed silver from all the prints you process goes down the drain instead of through some form of silver-recovery. Why is this a good idea...?

  8. #88
    CBG
    CBG is offline

    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    894
    Quote Originally Posted by Photo Engineer View Post
    ... A test for HQ and Metol might be warranted as well. ...
    I'm curious, how does one test for HQ or Metol?

    C

  9. #89
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    22,922
    Images
    65
    IDK. I think there probably is one for HQ, as one oxidation product is bright green. I'll give it some thought.

    PE

  10. #90
    Anscojohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,727
    Images
    13
    Quote Originally Posted by Photo Engineer View Post
    IDK. I think there probably is one for HQ, as one oxidation product is bright green. I'll give it some thought.

    PE
    *****
    Pardon, all, if I missed a point by reading the first few posts then skipping to the end. But I did notice one thing that was not made explicit early on: and what ye olde lab ratz taught me----take the film, or the prints, out of the water before you dump the water. That way, one is not redepositing some of the fixer back on. That's the way I have always done it, when not using a steady wash stream. Of course, I am fully ready for all the experts to tell me why the old guys who did this were wrong.
    John, Mount Vernon, Virginia USA



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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