Safelights and paper developer?
in [Darkroom]
|
From: Geoffrey S. Mendelson on 20 Aug 2007 04:14 I need to outfit my darkroom with safelights. I currently have red safelights, which I am not fond of, but seems to be all that I can find here. :-( Someone gave me a Kodak safelight (large cone-shaped thing with a 15 watt bulb in it) complete with an OA and an OC filter. It had not been used in many years, it still had a U.S. plug on it and a 120 volt bulb in it. I have yet to try to buy any paper, what I have is several years out of date Ilford Multigrade and Agfa Brovira. From what I have read, I probably will only be able to buy Ilford paper. Agfa and Kodak are "out of the game" and the more obscure papers have to be mail ordered from the U.S. or Germany and have little chance of surviving the trip, except when shipped via air express, which would be about $100 a box. I therefore might as well confine my questions to Ilford Multigrade paper. Will it work properly with a red safelight? Which filter (OA/OC) should I use in the Kodak? Any recemondations for a commonly available liquid paper developer? I plan to make up a tray full of developer and stop bath and throw them out when done. Fixer will probably be old, but still useable, film fixer. (should I dilute the fixer?) Thanks, Geoff. -- Geoffrey S. Mendelson, Jerusalem, Israel gsm(a)mendelson.com N3OWJ/4X1GM IL Voice: (07)-7424-1667 U.S. Voice: 1-215-821-1838 Visit my 'blog at http://geoffstechno.livejournal.com/
From: Richard Knoppow on 20 Aug 2007 19:08 "Geoffrey S. Mendelson" <gsm(a)mendelson.com> wrote in message news:slrnfcija6.7l7.gsm(a)cable.mendelson.com... >I need to outfit my darkroom with safelights. I currently >have > red safelights, which I am not fond of, but seems to be > all > that I can find here. :-( > > Someone gave me a Kodak safelight (large cone-shaped thing > with > a 15 watt bulb in it) complete with an OA and an OC > filter. > It had not been used in many years, it still had a U.S. > plug > on it and a 120 volt bulb in it. > > I have yet to try to buy any paper, what I have is several > years out of date Ilford Multigrade and Agfa Brovira. From > what I have read, I probably will only be able to buy > Ilford > paper. > > Agfa and Kodak are "out of the game" and the more obscure > papers have to be mail ordered from the U.S. or Germany > and > have little chance of surviving the trip, except when > shipped > via air express, which would be about $100 a box. > > I therefore might as well confine my questions to Ilford > Multigrade > paper. Will it work properly with a red safelight? Which > filter > (OA/OC) should I use in the Kodak? > > Any recemondations for a commonly available liquid paper > developer? > I plan to make up a tray full of developer and stop bath > and throw them > out when done. Fixer will probably be old, but still > useable, film fixer. > (should I dilute the fixer?) > > Thanks, Geoff. > > -- > Geoffrey S. Mendelson, Jerusalem, Israel gsm(a)mendelson.com > N3OWJ/4X1GM > IL Voice: (07)-7424-1667 U.S. Voice: 1-215-821-1838 > Visit my 'blog at http://geoffstechno.livejournal.com/ Outdated paper is likely to be fogged. While the use of an anti-fog agent can same some of it its best just to avoid it. The red safelights are fine for both graded and variable contrast papers but are somewhat unpleasant to work under. The recommended safelight filter is the Kodak OC. Do NOT use an OA, this is an older type of filter intended for graded paper and will fog VC paper. The Ilford equivalent filter is the No.905. These filters are intended to pass as much visible light as possible so that the darkroom is easy to work in without passing light the paper is sensitive to. However, the red safelights quite satisfactory from the fogging standpoint. Safelight filters can fade so should be tested. Both Kodak and Ilford have test procedures on their web sites, the Kodak test can be found by entering K-4 in the search engine on their web site. Because the combination of exposure to the safelight and to the enlarger results in greater sensitivity to fogging a simple exposure to the safelight will not tell you if its safe. The Kodak bee-hive safelight is a very common item as are the filters for it. You should be able to find more of them at pretty low cost. There is really very little difference among paper developers. I would use whatever is conveniently available to you. The requirements for fixing paper are more stringent than those for film. Do NOT use partially exhausted fixer. A better method is to use a two bath fixing system. The second bath remains relatively fresh and will clean up after the first bath. When the first bath becomes exhausted enough its tossed and the second bath moved up, the second bath being replaced by a fresh bath. The capacity of this system to fix paper completely is four to ten times the capacity of a single bath. This system should also be used for film. While the Iodide leached out of film tends to slow down fixing it has relatively little effect on a two bath system and relatively little effect of Ammonium Thiosulfate (Rapid) fixer. So, if you are going to use the same fixer for both film and paper rapid fixer is preferred. For paper you can use the fixer at film strength, but be careful of excessive fixing times because acid rapid fixer can bleach the image a little. There are a couple of ways to test fixing baths for exhaustion. The best is to check periodically for clearing time. This is the time it takes for the emulsion to become completely clear in the bath. It is very hard to determine this for paper but it can be seen easily for film. I suggest using a scrap of film to test the fresh bath and test periodically using a scrap of the same film. When the clearing time doubles toss the fixer. This is OK for the first bath of a two bath system but for a single bath will result in excessively exhausted fixer. Soak the film for a couple of minutes before testing because wet film fixes at a different rate than dry film. Another test is to use a solution of Potassium Iodide. This will produce a cloud of Silver Iodide in exhausted fixing bath. Kodak gives the formula and method in their darkroom handbook. Fixer test solutions are also available packaged. Total fixing time should be about double the clearing time. For the two bath system fix for half the time in each bath. A further economy is to use a sulfite wash aid such as Kodak Hypo Clearing Agent. This does several things but among them is the ability to make some otherwise bound up silver complexes soluble so it has the effect of partially compensating for inadequate fixing. It is also a definite economy where water is at a premium. Standard Acetic acid stop bath is fine. If you use rapid fixer avoid the use of Citric acid stop bath, such as Ilfords, because the combination of Citric acid with the Ammonium Thiosulfate fixer makes a pretty good bleach. The cheapest way to make up stop bath is to buy Glacial Acetic (concentrated acetic) acid and dilute it to 28% working solution. This is then used to make up the usual 1.5% stop bath. A liter of Glacial will make many gallons of stop bath. Don't try to save the stop bath, just toss it. Despite the current trend to eliminate stop baths they serve a useful purpose in preventing dichroic fog in the fixing bath. A water rinse will work but should be thorough, at least 30 seconds to one minute in water kept pretty fresh. Eliminating the stop bath really has no advantage despite some pretty strong fans of the method. Ilford makes good paper and, at the moment, seems to be about the only paper manufacturer with good quality control. IMO, most of the small manufacturers are using very old technology and there are many reports of inconsistent results. Fuji also makes good paper but does not sell it outside of Japan. -- --- Richard Knoppow Los Angeles, CA, USA dickburk(a)ix.netcom.com
From: Geoffrey S. Mendelson on 21 Aug 2007 02:39 Richard Knoppow wrote: Thanks for the wonderful answer. It will be a great help. > Outdated paper is likely to be fogged. While the use > of an anti-fog agent can same some of it its best just to > avoid it. I agree, but it's what I have. :-) I'll have to see if I can get any paper locally. Darkroom stuff does not sell well here. Up until some time in the late 1980's photgraphic equipment (and personal computers) were taxed at about 250% (two and a half times the price in taxes), when I moved here in 1996, it had been reduced to 140%. So very few things were sold here. Schools had darkrooms and some imegrants from rich countries, but most, like me had to sell what we had as we could not afford to buy it again for the tax people. In the last few years, it has been dropped to simply VAT (15.5%), which makes it more affordable. However since 9/11 the chance of shipping anything by air without it being X-Rayed is pretty slim. Surface shipping is safer, but the temperatures vary from well bellow freezing in the winter to over 120F in the summer. In the last few months, the USPS has revised their prices upward, and a friend sent me a small vaccuum sealing device she bought at a yard sale for $4. It was about the size of 100 sheet photo paper box, 4x11 inches. The shipping was $35, without tracking, guarentee of delivery or insurance. Freestyle, for example ships only FedEX and therefore a package of 8x10 paper would cost $100 to ship. > The red safelights are fine for both graded and > variable contrast papers but are somewhat unpleasant to work > under. The recommended safelight filter is the Kodak OC. Do > NOT use an OA, this is an older type of filter intended for > graded paper and will fog VC paper. The Ilford equivalent > filter is the No.905. Ok, thanks. I'll stick to the OC. Now to find a 15 watt bulb. I looked through Home Center and the smallest bulb they had was 25 watts. Smaller bulbs have been replaced with miniflourescent bulbs. I'll have to find a lighting store. > These filters are intended to pass as much visible > light as possible so that the darkroom is easy to work in > without passing light the paper is sensitive to. However, > the red safelights quite satisfactory from the fogging > standpoint. That's good to know. I have two safelights that are red. They are very dim, and use 7.5 watt night light bulbs, which are easily found, and I bought a large supply. :-) I also have two Phillips safe light bulbs, which are like regular red light bulbs, but coated with a safelight filter. One I bought, which cost as much as the small safelights and the other was a gift. I know this is rambling, but I expect that in 10 years, the situation in the U.S. will be the same. :-( > Safelight filters can fade so should be tested. Both > Kodak and Ilford have test procedures on their web sites, > the Kodak test can be found by entering K-4 in the search > engine on their web site. Because the combination of > exposure to the safelight and to the enlarger results in > greater sensitivity to fogging a simple exposure to the > safelight will not tell you if its safe. This is really a gem. I was bought up on the quarter on the paper safelight test. I'll look for it right away. > The Kodak bee-hive safelight is a very common item as > are the filters for it. You should be able to find more of > them at pretty low cost. It's the only one I've seen here. It was given to me unmodified as it came from the U.S. complete with a 120 volt bulb in it. I would love to find more, but don't have much hope. > There is really very little difference among paper > developers. I would use whatever is conveniently available > to you. Thanks, I appreiciate that information. I was a big dektol user and have long since forgotten what liquid I used. :-) > The requirements for fixing paper are more stringent > than those for film. Do NOT use partially exhausted fixer. > A better method is to use a two bath fixing system. > The second bath remains relatively fresh and will clean up > after the first bath. When the first bath becomes exhausted > enough its tossed and the second bath moved up, the second > bath being replaced by a fresh bath. The capacity of this > system to fix paper completely is four to ten times the > capacity of a single bath. This system should also be used > for film. Ok, thanks. > While the Iodide leached out of film tends to slow > down fixing it has relatively little effect on a two bath > system and relatively little effect of Ammonium Thiosulfate > (Rapid) fixer. So, if you are going to use the same fixer > for both film and paper rapid fixer is preferred. Ok, that's what I use. > For paper you can use the fixer at film strength, but > be careful of excessive fixing times because acid rapid > fixer can bleach the image a little. I did not plan to, that's why I said I would dilute it. I can make fresh and keep it seperate. > There are a couple of ways to test fixing baths for > exhaustion. The best is to check periodically for clearing > time. This is the time it takes for the emulsion to become > completely clear in the bath. It is very hard to determine > this for paper but it can be seen easily for film. I suggest > using a scrap of film to test the fresh bath and test > periodically using a scrap of the same film. When the > clearing time doubles toss the fixer. This is OK for the > first bath of a two bath system but for a single bath will > result in excessively exhausted fixer. Soak the film for a > couple of minutes before testing because wet film fixes at a > different rate than dry film. Ok, thanks, > Another test is to use a solution of Potassium Iodide. > This will produce a cloud of Silver Iodide in exhausted > fixing bath. Kodak gives the formula and method in their > darkroom handbook. Fixer test solutions are also available > packaged. I have some, but I know it is at least 15 years old. Does it go bad? > Total fixing time should be about double the clearing > time. For the two bath system fix for half the time in each > bath. > A further economy is to use a sulfite wash aid such as > Kodak Hypo Clearing Agent. This does several things but > among them is the ability to make some otherwise bound up > silver complexes soluble so it has the effect of partially > compensating for inadequate fixing. It is also a definite > economy where water is at a premium. I'm in the desert. :-) Like L.A., you might not believe it if you see it, but water is at a premium here. I am using some sort of wash aid, but Kodak chemicals were hard to find here and are probably gone. > Standard Acetic acid stop bath is fine. If you use > rapid fixer avoid the use of Citric acid stop bath, such as > Ilfords, because the combination of Citric acid with the > Ammonium Thiosulfate fixer makes a pretty good bleach. oops. That's what I have. > The cheapest way to make up stop bath is to buy Glacial > Acetic (concentrated acetic) acid and dilute it to 28% > working solution. This is then used to make up the usual > 1.5% stop bath. A liter of Glacial will make many gallons of > stop bath. Don't try to save the stop bath, just toss it. I used to do that in the U.S. I have never seen it here. > Ilford makes good paper and, at the moment, seems to be > about the only paper manufacturer with good quality control. > IMO, most of the small manufacturers are using very old > technology and there are many reports of inconsistent > results. Fuji also makes good paper but does not sell it > outside of Japan. Thanks for everything, I'll report back. I hope I can find paper, I've already bought out local supplies of bulk 35mm film, plastic reloadable casettes, HC-110 and Rodinal. When asked if more (developer) was on the way, a local store said yes. which I wonder because the Rodinal was the old Agfa version. Another store in Tel Aviv danced around the issue, but gave the impression I got the last of their chemicals. The HC-110 I bought from them had gone bad with age (something I thought almost impossible for a factory sealed bottle). Geoff. -- Geoffrey S. Mendelson, Jerusalem, Israel gsm(a)mendelson.com N3OWJ/4X1GM IL Voice: (07)-7424-1667 U.S. Voice: 1-215-821-1838 Visit my 'blog at http://geoffstechno.livejournal.com/
From: Claudio Bonavolta on 21 Aug 2007 08:33 On 21 août, 08:39, g...(a)mendelson.com (Geoffrey S. Mendelson) wrote: <snip> > Freestyle, for example ships only FedEX and therefore a package of 8x10 > paper would cost $100 to ship. At B&H, UPS shipment is cheaper than USPS and service is much better (tracking #, fast delivery, etc ...). Multigrade, fiber papers are here: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/3results/controller/home?O=search&A=search&Q=&ci=3905&sb=bs%2Cupper%28ds%29&sq=asc I ordered once a bunch of electron tubes from New-York through USPS. I received them with "some" delay as they went through South Africa before arriving in Europe. I suppose someone mixed Swaziland and Switzerland, phonetically close but just on two different continents ... > I also have two Phillips safe light bulbs, which are like regular > red light bulbs, but coated with a safelight filter. One I bought, > which cost as much as the small safelights and the other was a gift. They work fine, I use some of them together with their amber counterparts. But, as usual, test your safelight to be sure it is safe ... > I'm in the desert. :-) Like L.A., you might not believe it if you > see it, but water is at a premium here. I am using some sort of > wash aid, but Kodak chemicals were hard to find here and are probably > gone. As washaid, I just use a plain 2% sodium sulfite solution I through at the end of the session. This is a very cheap chemical. Or you may go the formula Richard gave some times ago which is more or less similar to Kodak's one. > Thanks for everything, I'll report back. I hope I can find paper, > I've already bought out local supplies of bulk 35mm film, plastic > reloadable casettes, HC-110 and Rodinal. > > When asked if more (developer) was on the way, a local store said yes. > which I wonder because the Rodinal was the old Agfa version. Another > store in Tel Aviv danced around the issue, but gave the impression I got > the last of their chemicals. The HC-110 I bought from them had gone bad with > age (something I thought almost impossible for a factory sealed bottle). Buy also your chemicals from one of the US large distributors but, because of air shipments regulations, you're usually limited to dry chemicals (Dektol, Xtol, etc ...). In your situation, I would try to find a local supplier of raw chemicals and mix my own, it may be easier. > > Geoff. > > -- > Geoffrey S. Mendelson, Jerusalem, Israel g...(a)mendelson.com N3OWJ/4X1GM > IL Voice: (07)-7424-1667 U.S. Voice: 1-215-821-1838 > Visit my 'blog athttp://geoffstechno.livejournal.com/ Good luck, Claudio Bonavolta http://www.bonavolta.ch
From: Rod Smith on 21 Aug 2007 11:29
In article <slrnfcl22n.r42.gsm(a)cable.mendelson.com>, gsm(a)mendelson.com (Geoffrey S. Mendelson) writes: > > Richard Knoppow wrote: > > Freestyle, for example ships only FedEX and therefore a package of 8x10 > paper would cost $100 to ship. When did you check their prices? I recall that Freestyle added some overseas shipping options a few months ago, with the goal of making themselves more affordable for non-US customers. If you did your checks a while back, it could be you should check again. A few other options include B&H (in the US, http://www.bhphotovideo.com), Fotoimpex (in Germany, http://www.fotoimpex.de), and Megaperls (in Japan, http://www.unicircuits.com/shop/index.php). I haven't checked overseas shipping prices (or even product prices) at most of these places; I just happen to know about them and I believe they all do ship internationally, so they're worth checking out. >> The red safelights are fine for both graded and >> variable contrast papers but are somewhat unpleasant to work >> under. The recommended safelight filter is the Kodak OC. > > Ok, thanks. I'll stick to the OC. Now to find a 15 watt bulb. I looked > through Home Center and the smallest bulb they had was 25 watts. Smaller > bulbs have been replaced with miniflourescent bulbs. I'll have to find > a lighting store. You might see if you can find a red LED bulb. I use one of these as one of my two safelights: http://www.superbrightleds.com/specs/E27-W24.htm I've heard some people use the amber ones, too, but I'm not sure they'd be safe with VC paper. > That's good to know. I have two safelights that are red. They are very > dim, and use 7.5 watt night light bulbs, which are easily found, and I > bought a large supply. :-) > > I also have two Phillips safe light bulbs, which are like regular > red light bulbs, but coated with a safelight filter. One I bought, > which cost as much as the small safelights and the other was a gift. My second safelight is a coated low-wattage incandescent bulb, similar to what you describe. I bought it from B&H or Freestyle (I don't recall which). Coated red bulbs sold for non-photographic uses might or might not be safe; the coating might be incomplete or it might pass light outside of the safe range. If you've got no other choice you might as well try one, but I certainly wouldn't assume it's safe without testing. Oh, I've heard of people using red Christmas tree lights as safelights. I'd imagine those are rarer in Israel than in the US, though. ;-) >> There is really very little difference among paper >> developers. I would use whatever is conveniently available >> to you. > > Thanks, I appreiciate that information. I was a big dektol > user and have long since forgotten what liquid I used. :-) .... > When asked if more (developer) was on the way, a local store said yes. > which I wonder because the Rodinal was the old Agfa version. FWIW, I've heard that Rodinal makes a decent paper developer, but I've never tried it myself. (It must be used at greater concentration than with film -- around 1+10 dilution, IIRC.) There's also a mix-it-yourself version of Rodinal called paRodinal; see http://silent1.home.netcom.com/Photography/Dilutions%20and%20Times.html (it's one of several formulas there). The advantage of paRodinal is that it's easy to make from acetaminophen (Tylenol) tablets, sodium sulfite, and sodium hydroxide (lye). When mixed, the acetaminophen is chemically converted into p-aminophenol, the developing agent in Rodinal. Given what you've said, you might find it easier to track down these ingredients than to track down a packaged commercial developer. For that matter, you could try to get more traditional photographic raw ingredients, such as phenidone, metol, etc. You could then mix a wide variety of developers. I believe that JD Photochem (http://www.jdphotochem.com) in Canada ships internationally. Even if shipping charges are ridiculous, chances are you'll be able to find some ingredients locally, so the total cost on a per-liter basis of developer should be reasonable. If you don't know Thing One about mixing your own chemicals, check out a few resources: - Steve Anchell's _The Darkroom Cookbook, 2nd Edition_, ISBN 0240804236 - Steve Anchell and Bill Troop's _The Film Developing Cookbook_, ISBN 0240802772 - http://www.jackspcs.com - http://www.digitaltruth.com/data.html - http://www.photosensitive.ca/wp/easy-film-developers/ -- Rod Smith, rodsmith(a)rodsbooks.com http://www.rodsbooks.com Author of books on Linux, FreeBSD, and networking |