I agree Rudeofus "something is rotten in the state of stabilizer"!
According to Tetenals homsite, the C-41 stabilizer should contain something like:
Alcohols, C12-15, ethoxylated
Unfortunately, my knowledge in chemestry is not enough to have an opinion on the matter; the only thing I can have made wrong, as far as I can see, is my water, though "my water" is supposed to be the best tasting water in the north of Sweden, BUT tasting good in not the same as "good water for C-41".
Sounds nice that Tetenal is communicative even if it take some time. I will let you hear what they have to say. Waiting for their response I will do some B/W work!
I can't exactly claim to know what these chemicals are supposed to do, but your remark with the water rang a bell: you are aware that there should be absolutely no wash step after the stabilizer. For this reason I always use deionized water for mixing the stabilizer bath to make sure that I don't end up with water residues on my film after drying. It would be interesting to measure the pH value of your stabilizer bath before and after stabilizing a roll of film.
Originally Posted by Bertil
Long time ago!!
Never got any comment, any explanation, from Tetenal, gave up!
Anyhow, when I started to filter the stabilizer after each run (ordinary coffee filter!), or before a new run, I have no problems of the kind that started this thread. Very Good – end of story!
Quite another thing: some time ago I had another problem with C-41, my Jobo CPE-2, running with tank 2553 and 120-film at 38° C (100°F) at 3'15", and at the fast speed #2. No doubt the edges of the 120 film was, compared to the center, overdeveloped – thus uneven development (hate that kind of shit).
Now, still using Tetanal C-41, I run at the other recommended temperature, 30°C (86°F) at 8 min, with the lower speed, #1, and each minute I loosen the tank and agitate the ordinary way for some minutes, up and down and so fort. In my judgment the result is quite OK perhaps even good! (well, I don't make analog prints from my negs, just scan and print the digital way – have never liked colour prints, save some "dye-transfer prints" by among others Irving Penn!!
Recent experiences in the land of Tetenal C-41 stabilizing bath:
New 1 liter Tetenal C-41 kit. Stabilizing bath made with deionized water. Developed 5 120-rolls without problems: no "flakes"! Filtered the stabilizer and run 6 more rolls. The first 3 rolls no "flakes", small amounts of these "flakes" on the roll 4, 5 and 6, more on 6 than 5 than 4!! Developed yesterday 6 Ektar 4x5 sheets. Stabilzing bath filtered: some small "flakes"on the last stabilized sheets!
Obviously: when the stabilizing bath is really fresh no broblem with at least stabilizing 5 rolls 120 film. When used this "flake-problem" start happening unless filtered after just some use.
Why am I the only one with his problem, I process the rolls as everybody else! ???? I think!
PS. No problems anymore with overdevelopment of the edges following the agitation method above. DS
You're not the only one, I have seen many reports of Tetenal "stabilizer" causing problems. I think they changed it somewhere in 2008-2009. I used Tetenal then and the stabilizer suddenly changed from a clear, formalin-smelling liquid to a brownish mess. But I switched to Fujihunt kit then.
Tetenal and Rollei are just con artist companies selling crap that somehow barely works or may not work. They just have good marketing so it is easy to buy their products anywhere. It's a bit sad; good products (such as FujiHunt) are hard to come by and AG Photographic in UK is one of the very few who sell them.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
Many thank for your reply, hrst!
Don't feel that lonely anymore!!
Yes, Tetenal is easy to get, and for a nice price (at Impex Berlin among others), but would be more easy with a better stabilizing bath! My stab. is a clean non-smelling stuff, but something is wrong with it.
Thanks for the FujiHunt hint at AG in UK.
So, the key seems to be make your own stabilizer?
Yes Tony, but how?
Just adding formalin to a Photo Flo / Ilfotol / Agepon / etc. solution (prepared as instructed or to your taste) should be an appropriate old-style stabilizer which should work fine for both old and new films.
Search for posts from Photo Engineer on the subject to find how much. I think it is something around 5 ml/l of 37 % formalin solution.
Many thanks hrst for your reply.
Found the conversation below about stabilzer, you seem to remember quite well. Though modern C-41 films don't really need formalin it doesn't seem to make any a problem using "old-style" stabilizer, at least PE doesn't advice against it's use in modern C-41 films. This conversation ends with:
04-13-2012, 11:35 PM
I am preparing a lengthy and hopefully definitive post on stabilizers. I am working on it.
but that definitive post is not yet on line as far as I can see.
04-12-2012, 04:45 PM
As you can see below, the positive and negative stabilizers are nearly the same. The negative (C-41) one has a bit more formaldehyde.
Kodak S-16 stabilizer
Used in Process VNF-1 for Ektachrome color reversal motion picture film
Water (21 – 27C) 800 ml
Kodak Stabilizer Additive 0.14ml
Formaldehyde (37%) 3.5 ml
Water to make 1 l
Treat film for 30 seconds at 35C.
Note: Kodak stabilizer additive contains polyethylene 12 tridecyl alcohol.
Not quite the same as E-6 stabilizer, but close.
This was listed as the “semi-official” formula for the Kodak C-41 process
Water 800 ml
Formaldehyde (38%) 5 ml
Kodak MX812 0.8 ml (wetting agent)
Water to make 1 l
Ref: Dignan Photographic Newsletter, July 1974
04-12-2012, 05:11 PM
The stabilizing additive and wetting agents are virtually identical and are equivalent to Photo Flo 200.
In E6 films and in older C41 films, the Formalin served two purposes. First, it was a biostat that reacted partly with gelatin and remained in the coating for a long long time, killing microorganisms. The second, and main purpose was that it reacted with leftover coupler and linked it together with itself in a bond called a methylene bridge. This prevented serious dye fade. That latter problem has been solved in modern C41 films, but has not in E6 films due to lack of R&D.