A few drops Photoflo

[RattyMouse]

Then I even wonder more that you do not mix your own wetting agent.

I dont need to reinvent the wheel.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I should have, but was worried that getting those lone 35mm strips of film back into a small Patterson tank without a reel might damage them.

I do not use PhotoFlo in my tanks or drums, instead I use a TupperWare like plastic bowl for all the PhotoFlo soaking for negatives.

 

[Eric Rose]

Well being a dyed in the wool "finger in the air" photographer for over 50 years putting only 2 drops in 1000ml works just fine for me. Plus I have water so hard you have to beat it with a hammer to get it in a glass to drink it. And yes, you chew it first before swallowing it.

I have never had water streaks on my negs.

 

[RattyMouse]

Well being a dyed in the wool "finger in the air" photographer for over 50 years putting only 2 drops in 1000ml works just fine for me. Plus I have water so hard you have to beat it with a hammer to get it in a glass to drink it. And yes, you chew it first before swallowing it.

I have never had water streaks on my negs.

10 drops of Photoflo in 500 mls did not result in one visible bead of water spreading. I have 8 grain water.

 

[faberryman]

Well being a dyed in the wool "finger in the air" photographer for over 50 years putting only 2 drops in 1000ml works just fine for me. Plus I have water so hard you have to beat it with a hammer to get it in a glass to drink it. And yes, you chew it first before swallowing it. I have never had water streaks on my negs.

Unless you are using a turkey baster for measuring, two drop of Photoflo (0.1ml) in 1000ml of water (1:10,000) is water, but it certainly won't hurt anything.

 

[RattyMouse]

Unless you are using a turkey baster for measuring, two drop of Photoflo (0.1ml) in 1000ml of water (1:10,000) is water, but it certainly won't hurt anything.

Seriously, how can anyone believe 1:10,000 does anything at all?

LOL @ turkey baster!!!

 

[removed account4]

RM im not using photoflo200 im using stuff that i have been trying to use up since like 1980 maybe that's the difference ?
i used 1 quart up from 25years ago this is like 4 or 6oz from like the ford or carter administration so maybe because it is a different
"formulation" it works . and it it works and its not supposed to, im not fixing anything unless its broke
i do have a container of the 200 i bought IDK 5 years ago, not sure why, and i will keep your recomendation under advisement
seeing by the time i use up the small bottle i am currently using, the internet might not exist.

for the stuff i have and have been using for 40+ years ... a couple of drops leaves my film water and water spot free.

 

[Doremus Scudder]

Photo Flo comes in (came in?) different strengths; 200, 600 and 2100. How much you add for a given amount of water depends which one you have. Other products may be different as well.

And, yes, less than the "recommended" dilution can work just fine in some circumstances. People that have tested their workflow and have good luck using a weaker dilution of Photo Flo are not haphazard or remiss; what works, works.

Best,

Doremus

 

[Bill Burk]

Seriously, how can anyone believe 1:10,000 does anything at all?

LOL @ turkey baster!!!

What do you think, as a surfactant engineer, of what I use... 1:2000 vs 1:200

Would I be just as well off using water rinse only? I do see sheeting and there are a few bubbles on the surface of the tray. Seems to be doing something.

 

[benjiboy]

I've read many times posts where people say they just use a few drops of Photoflo when they are doing their final rinse. Today I decided to try something similar to that. I developed two rolls of Acros in 600 mls of fluid and for my final rinse, instead of doing the typical 1:200 dilution of Photoflo, I added 7-8 drops which is more than a few.

When I hung my film I saw clear signs that the wetting agent was doing nothing. Water all across the film was beading up. The surface tension of the water was not lowered anywhere near enough for the liquid to thin out and drain off the film. I am preparing for a pretty miserable amount of drying marks.

It's my own fault for trying this. It goes against everything I know as a surfactant scientist of the past 23 years. The concentration of surfactant in the water is nowhere near the critical micelle concentration which is where maximum lowering of the surface tension occurs.

There's a reason why Kodak recommends 1:200.

I use just two drops in the dev. tank with the final rinse, any more I find can cause problems.

 

[RattyMouse]

What do you think, as a surfactant engineer, of what I use... 1:2000 vs 1:200

Would I be just as well off using water rinse only? I do see sheeting and there are a few bubbles on the surface of the tray. Seems to be doing something.

If you see sheeting, you are doing OK. I saw none whatsoever and was using far more than 1:2000.

 

[faberryman]

I use just two drops in the dev. tank with the final rinse, any more I find can cause problems.

Do you measure your drops with an eyedropper?

 

[Bill Burk]

If you see sheeting, you are doing OK. I saw none whatsoever and was using far more than 1:2000.

I verified today.

I doubled my usual concentration and at 1:1000 ratio the mix does NOT have enough Photo-Flo in it to create real sheeting. On the emulsion side there is sheeting. But on the base side water breaks into droplets.

I doubled again. At 1:500 sheeting is adequate on both sides.

I can imagine 1:500 is appropriate for my reverse osmosis filtered water... and that 1:200 would be useful for tap water or to provide plenty of room for safety.

 

[benjiboy]

Do you measure your drops with an eyedropper?

Yes, no more because if you use too much it can cause more problems than it solves..

 

[Doremus Scudder]

Well, it looks like we've empirically arrived at a conclusion that water quality affects the sheeting action of surfactants; and that Kodak's recommended dilution for Photo Flo is likely an average value with a safety factor built in. Careful testing to arrive at the minimum amount of Photo Flo needed to adequately break the surface tension of the water being used in any particular situation is probably closer to optimum than blindly using Kodak's recommendation. Many get by with much less Photo Flo than recommended, some need more. However, since it's not too difficult to observe whether the Photo Flo solution is doing its job, it shouldn't be too hard find one's individual dilution ration.

Best,

Doremus

 

[Bill Burk]

Well, it looks like we've empirically arrived at a conclusion that water quality affects the sheeting action of surfactants; and that Kodak's recommended dilution for Photo Flo is likely an average value with a safety factor built in.

And you’ll never believe what happened next...


RattyMouse convinced Bill Burk to change the way he mixes Photo-Flo, despite his long-held belief in discussions on multiple threads that he was right to “use a few drops”. Now Bill Burk is using a full syringe, 1cc Photo-Flo per 500cc water. Good thing he’s got three bottles of the stuff.

 

[faberryman]

And you’ll never believe what happened next...


RattyMouse convinced Bill Burk to change the way he mixes Photo-Flo, despite his long-held belief in discussions on multiple threads that he was right to “use a few drops”. Now Bill Burk is using a full syringe, 1cc Photo-Flo per 500cc water. Good thing he’s got three bottles of the stuff.

Who are you going to leave the other two bottle too?

 

[Bill Burk]

Who are you going to leave the other two bottle too?

About that. Though truthful, I was being deceptive about the details of how much I have. The 16 ounce bottle I decant from has about 4 ounces left... the third bottle has about an ounce left and a little bit of crud swimming around. And my working bottle has about 3 ounces left. I was going to consolidate them until I saw the bit of contamination and figured it was safer keeping them separated.

 

[removed account4]

bill i'd be careful combing them !
it cause troubles with your dilution
methodology and you will have to use
15500:1 instead of 20000:1

 

[Bill Burk]

Haa they’re all Photo-Flo 200. One I bought when I was still in Jr. High

 

[Patrick Robert James]

Or just use a couple drops of LFN. Maybe that is where the couple drops comes from. People confusing the two.

I've never liked PhotoFlo but I haven't used it in two decades. Always left streaks on my negs. That was a long time ago and there wasn't any interwebs to find out what the problem was, so I switched to LFN. Been using it ever since, although these days I just wipe the negs off with a paper towel.

 

[traveler_101]

I verified today.

I doubled my usual concentration and at 1:1000 ratio the mix does NOT have enough Photo-Flo in it to create real sheeting. On the emulsion side there is sheeting. But on the base side water breaks into droplets.

I doubled again. At 1:500 sheeting is adequate on both sides. I can imagine 1:500 is appropriate for my reverse osmosis filtered water... and that 1:200 would be useful for tap water or to provide plenty of room for safety.

1:200 - that's close to the 3ml I use for roughly 600ml of (good quality) tap water. I use one of those syringe like devices used for measuring and delivering doses of medicine to small children. I found that simply attempting to drip photo Flo into the water meant that I put too much in.