From: Toni Nikkanen on

All of the above suggestions are great but being the lazy person I am,
I just use Agefix in 1+5 dilution in quantity of 1 litre, for 10 rolls
of film and then make a new one. I am probably wasteful but it's not
that expensive around here in 1.25 litre bottles, which makes 7.5
litres of fixer that lasts for 75 rolls of film. I don't even adjust
fixing times..

From: sreenath on
On Apr 5, 3:24 am, Toni Nikkanen <t...(a)morgoth.tuug.fi> wrote:
> All of the above suggestions are great but being the lazy person I am,
> I just use Agefix in 1+5 dilution in quantity of 1 litre, for 10 rolls
> of film and then make a new one. I am probably wasteful but it's not
> that expensive around here in 1.25 litre bottles, which makes 7.5
> litres of fixer that lasts for 75 rolls of film. I don't even adjust
> fixing times..

Hi,

Thanks for all the information and suggestions.

Hi, I mis-spelt the name as "Agefix". Actually it is "Agifix"
When I searched on web for information, I thought it would be similar
to Adefix of Agfa, but then was not sure.

The bottle says "Rapid fixer for X-Ray and graphic industry". They
don't explicitly state it is for regular films.

It goes on to say : "Add 3.5 litres of water to the contents ....."
meaning a total volume of working strength
solution of 4.5 litres. So , I am not sure of the actual strength of
the working dilution.

I guess I will dump the fixer after about 20 rolls.

Thanks,
Sreenath
From: Richard Knoppow on

"sreenath" <sreenathbh(a)rocketmail.com> wrote in message
news:ba8de1b5-2b4c-4891-8f2d-aaea4af78ae9(a)w17g2000yqj.googlegroups.com...
> On Apr 5, 3:24 am, Toni Nikkanen <t...(a)morgoth.tuug.fi>
> wrote:
>> All of the above suggestions are great but being the lazy
>> person I am,
>> I just use Agefix in 1+5 dilution in quantity of 1 litre,
>> for 10 rolls
>> of film and then make a new one. I am probably wasteful
>> but it's not
>> that expensive around here in 1.25 litre bottles, which
>> makes 7.5
>> litres of fixer that lasts for 75 rolls of film. I don't
>> even adjust
>> fixing times..
>
> Hi,
>
> Thanks for all the information and suggestions.
>
> Hi, I mis-spelt the name as "Agefix". Actually it is
> "Agifix"
> When I searched on web for information, I thought it would
> be similar
> to Adefix of Agfa, but then was not sure.
>
> The bottle says "Rapid fixer for X-Ray and graphic
> industry". They
> don't explicitly state it is for regular films.
>
> It goes on to say : "Add 3.5 litres of water to the
> contents ....."
> meaning a total volume of working strength
> solution of 4.5 litres. So , I am not sure of the actual
> strength of
> the working dilution.
>
> I guess I will dump the fixer after about 20 rolls.
>
> Thanks,
> Sreenath

If you can manage to find a data sheet for this stuff
it would be worthwhile. X-Ray film has very thick emulsions,
some are coated on both sides. They are harder to fix out
that pictorial films so this fixer may be stronger than a
standard fixer. Evidently AGFA used the same trade name for
several fixers, the Agifix I am familiar with is a
non-hardening fixer for color work that is nearly neutral in
pH. That works fine for pictorial film and printing paper
except you can not use an acid stop bath with it.
A note: The potassium iodide test will show when there
is a certain amount of silver in the fixer but is not
quantitative. The test varies with the dilution of the test
solution. The only test which shows if the fixer is working
is to test the fixed emulsion for residual silver halide.
That is done with either a solution of sodium sulfide or a
1:9 dilution of KRST, as I mentioned in a previous post in
this thread. The iodide test may fail, that is, it may show
the fixer as being good when it is actually too diluted for
archival fixing. A two bath fixing method is a great help in
achieving permanent images and is economical because it
increases the capacity of the fixing bath by four to ten
times. The use of a sulfite wash aid such as Kodak Hypo
Clearing Agent will also help because it makes some not
quite completely fixed complexes soluble so they wash out.



--
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk(a)ix.netcom.com


From: sreenath on
On Apr 6, 7:56 pm, "Richard Knoppow" <dickb...(a)ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> "sreenath" <sreenat...(a)rocketmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:ba8de1b5-2b4c-4891-8f2d-aaea4af78ae9(a)w17g2000yqj.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
> > On Apr 5, 3:24 am, Toni Nikkanen <t...(a)morgoth.tuug.fi>
> > wrote:
> >> All of the above suggestions are great but being the lazy
> >> person I am,
> >> I just use Agefix in 1+5 dilution in quantity of 1 litre,
> >> for 10 rolls
> >> of film and then make a new one. I am probably wasteful
> >> but it's not
> >> that expensive around here in 1.25 litre bottles, which
> >> makes 7.5
> >> litres of fixer that lasts for 75 rolls of film. I don't
> >> even adjust
> >> fixing times..
>
> > Hi,
>
> > Thanks for all the information and suggestions.
>
> > Hi, I mis-spelt the name as "Agefix". Actually it is
> > "Agifix"
> > When I searched on web for information, I thought it would
> > be similar
> > to Adefix of Agfa, but then was not sure.
>
> > The bottle says "Rapid fixer for X-Ray and graphic
> > industry". They
> > don't explicitly state it is for regular films.
>
> > It goes on to say : "Add 3.5 litres of water to the
> > contents ....."
> > meaning a total volume of working strength
> > solution of 4.5 litres. So , I am not sure of the actual
> > strength of
> > the working dilution.
>
> > I guess I will dump the fixer after about 20 rolls.
>
> > Thanks,
> > Sreenath
>
> If you can manage to find a data sheet for this stuff
> it would be worthwhile. X-Ray film has very thick emulsions,
> some are coated on both sides. They are harder to fix out
> that pictorial films so this fixer may be stronger than a
> standard fixer. Evidently AGFA used the same trade name for
> several fixers, the Agifix I am familiar with is a
> non-hardening fixer for color work that is nearly neutral in
> pH. That works fine for pictorial film and printing paper
> except you can not use an acid stop bath with it.
> A note: The potassium iodide test will show when there
> is a certain amount of silver in the fixer but is not
> quantitative. The test varies with the dilution of the test
> solution. The only test which shows if the fixer is working
> is to test the fixed emulsion for residual silver halide.
> That is done with either a solution of sodium sulfide or a
> 1:9 dilution of KRST, as I mentioned in a previous post in
> this thread. The iodide test may fail, that is, it may show
> the fixer as being good when it is actually too diluted for
> archival fixing. A two bath fixing method is a great help in
> achieving permanent images and is economical because it
> increases the capacity of the fixing bath by four to ten
> times. The use of a sulfite wash aid such as Kodak Hypo
> Clearing Agent will also help because it makes some not
> quite completely fixed complexes soluble so they wash out.
>
> --
> Richard Knoppow
> Los Angeles, CA, USA
> dickb...(a)ix.netcom.com


Are there any alternatives to sodium sulfide for this test and in
general for toning etc? I had about 500 grams of this stuff, and it
absorbed water from air. I had to dispose it off.

I would like to avoid having this chemical around because of the smell
and its ability to fog photo emulsions.

I use two bath fixer made from hypo for paper and have no confusion
there as to degree of fixation.
When I fix fiber paper I also use a sulfite wash aid.

thanks,
Sreenath
From: Richard Knoppow on

"sreenath" <sreenathbh(a)rocketmail.com> wrote in message
news:bdb8d3bf-4c86-4e95-8871-8eceda12e281(a)5g2000yqj.googlegroups.com...
> On Apr 6, 7:56 pm, "Richard Knoppow"
> <dickb...(a)ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>> "sreenath" <sreenat...(a)rocketmail.com> wrote in message
>>
>> news:ba8de1b5-2b4c-4891-8f2d-aaea4af78ae9(a)w17g2000yqj.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Apr 5, 3:24 am, Toni Nikkanen <t...(a)morgoth.tuug.fi>
>> > wrote:
>> >> All of the above suggestions are great but being the
>> >> lazy
>> >> person I am,
>>>
> Are there any alternatives to sodium sulfide for this test
> and in
> general for toning etc? I had about 500 grams of this
> stuff, and it
> absorbed water from air. I had to dispose it off.
>
> I would like to avoid having this chemical around because
> of the smell
> and its ability to fog photo emulsions.
>
> I use two bath fixer made from hypo for paper and have no
> confusion
> there as to degree of fixation.
> When I fix fiber paper I also use a sulfite wash aid.
>
> thanks,
> Sreenath

Kodak at one time recommended a 1:9 dilution of Kodak
Rapid Selenium Toner. This has low odor. I don't know how
easy it is to get now. Its used in the same way as the
sulfide test except that it must be used on well washed
films or prints since it may fail to stain if there is an
excess of hypo in the emulsion.
Ideally, neither test solution should leave any stain
if the emulsion is fully fixed.
Micheal Gudzinowicz posted some very complete
explainations of how fixer works to this group several years
ago. I think Google will still find them. They are worth
reading because they will give you a better understanding of
the limits on fixer capacity.
Clearing time is a dangerous criteria to use in judging
fixer capacity since partially exhaused fixer will "clear"
film long after it has reached the point where it is no
longer fixing out completely. Because there are no longer
enough free thiosulfate ions to completely convert the
halide to water soluble form mearly extending the fixing
time will not compensate for this.
I use Kodak Hypo Clearing Agent on both fiber paper and
on film. Because the emulsion on RC paper is so thin it
washes out to archival level very quickly without any
special treatment. The use of KHCA on it may actually wash
it too much.
The older ideas about archival washing were based on the
idea that NO thiosulfate whatsoever should remain in the
emulsion, however, about 1960 T.H.James of Kodak Research
Laboratories discovered that very small amounts of
thiosulfate remaining in the emulsion would stabilize the
image silver resulting is some resistance to oxidation. This
was such heresy that James was reluctant to publishe his
results until similar findings from Fuji's lab were
published. The discovery caused Kodak to revise its washing
recommendations. KHCA can wash down too far if its applied
for too long and subsequent washing is carried on for too
long. Current Kodak recommendations for KHCA and washing
times in general take cognizance of this. Its interesting
that a great many "drugstore photofinisher" snapshots have
survived because they were fixed OK but not overwashed where
materials given "archival" washing treatment but no toning
have developed the symptoms of oxidation, i.e., silvering of
the surface and staining of the image.
Toning is still the best protection. The Image
Permanence Institute currently recommends a polysulfide
toner like Kodak Brown Toner for this because it gives
uniform toning for partial toning. KRST, which used to be
the standard method was found not to be effective for
partial toning. It does, however, provide good protection if
some change in image density or color can be tolerated. The
recommendation is to use a dilution no weaker than 1:9 and
for not less than 3 minutes at room temperature for prints
and films.


--
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk(a)ix.netcom.com