Alternatives to 2 fixing bath

[Myxine]

Hello all,

I have been printing for a little less than a year only and i do it nearly exclusively in a bathroom-transformed-darkroom which is very tiny. I'm already happy that i can print up to 8x10 but when I do so, I have room for only 3 trays (and they are already in precarious situation).
Reading a few books and this very forum for information, I learned it was standard practice to have 2 fixing bath.

Would someone be kind enough to explain me the benefits of a "old fixer" bath - rinse - "newer fixer" bath workflow?

I have been replacing my fixer (for now Ilford RapidFixer - I also bought a TF4 Photographers Formulary, I believe) fairly often and I was wondering if the fact that I have "fresh-ish fixer" as a rule would be enough to get paper that is properly fixed? - I try to print often but my fixer is usually replaced after less than 15-20 8x10 sheets.

Last, on Ilford's data sheet, it is recommended to fix during 1 minute for Fiber based paper. They're is no mention of a 2 bath 1 min + 1 min or even 2 + 2, as far as I have seen. Any advice on fixing time and common practice on that part?

Thanks a lot for your help

Arnaud

 

[cliveh]

Only one fix bath is required.

 

[wildbill]

use one fixer bath then. or just get a tray stacker and use much less space
(there was a url link here which no longer exists) your fixer to see if it's still good:

two bath (there was a url link here which no longer exists)

 

[Xmas]

I keep trays in bath eg
dev, stop, fixa, fixb, clear
in 1-2 cm of temper water
I enlarge in dry area and carry paper in dry tank to bathroom with safelight.
wet paper in handwash basin 20C
and go through each tray until fixb when I rinse in temper water then in clear bath and then back in temper water for holding for long wash when finished
but that is for a keeper
most get pulled from fix a and examined under white light for exp, contrast, burning,...
I scan any printable for filing, to allow location for re print, print on inkjet, laminate and scan again for density analysis and mark up on laminate,
When wetprinting I mark up laminate again and again…
cause my negs are %+=* and keepers are shots of unicorns
Im happy if the clear tray is over at 45 degrees cause it stops the others moving
you don't have to copy
I don't push fix hard, batha gets replaced after 50% or session or slows
I use inspection gloves and PQ dev

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Only one fix bath is required.

that's true but, the efficiency of two-bath fixing is hard to beat.the first bath does most of the work but leaves a certain amoubt of silver complexes in the bath, which cannot be removed by extending the fixing time. that just gives them a betterchance to be absorbed by the paper fibers from where they are almost impossible to wash out. the purpose of the 2nd freshbath is to remove these complexes.alternatively,one could replace the first bath moreoften with fresh fixer but,that would require more fresh fixer than the two-bath methodand would still not remove all silver complexes for certain.stacking trays or using vertical slot processorsis another wayto reduce the darkroom foot print requirement.skipping the second fixer bath is not advisable.

toto
i

 

[Rich Ullsmith]

RC paper sure, one bath. Fiber, particularly if you plan on toning or bleaching, there is no substitute for 2 bath.

Benefits: fiber paper is a sponge. Dissolved silver will diffuse either into the sponge or out of the sponge, depending on which contains the least dissolved silver. First bath dissolves the silver, second bath brings it into solution. As you can see, with RC paper all that matters is that your fixer is not exhausted.

Fixing occurs rapidly. I'm sure this will provoke disagreement, but with fiber paper I fix for 30s and then drop into a holding tray (you can stash this out of the way for space.) At the end of the print session, pour fixer #1 into bottle #1, and dump fixer #2 in the tray (bonus, no need to wash the tray). Now, drain your holding tray and you can fix for another 30s en masse! In an 11X14 tray of fix #2, I can process 4 8X10's simultaneously. I even do RC prints this way, 15s #1 and 15s#2 in batches, for time savings.

Test fix #1with a film leader before each session. When it gets slow, dump fix #1, concoct a new fix#2. According to Tim Rudman and his toning book, I think five of these cycles until too much silver gets carried over into #2.

All my bleaching and toning problems went away with the 2 bath fix.

 

[cliveh]

that's true but, the efficiency of two-bath fixing is hard to beat.

I understand what you say, but surely this depends on throughput and how often you change the fix. Historic print permanence from one bath fixing used in probably 99% of amateur and commercial operations would show this to be a pedantic over precaution.

 

[john_s]

1 bath or 2 fixing baths? Both sides have arguments in their favour (compromise between simplicity and thoroughness). For small throughput I have got away with 1 fix, but I suspect it's been more a function of my slow productivity combined with a deliberate policy of replacing fixer generously. Forty years later my FB prints are still good.

I now use 2 fix baths all the time. If I wanted to economise I would use as fix bath #2 the well known Simple Fixer (sodium thiosulphate plus sodium sulphite). If I didn't have room i would use a tray stacker if a suitable Nova vertical slot processor was out of the question.

 

[removed account4]

print
fix bath #1 --->to water tray
finish printing your session
clean up dev, fix and fix #1 trays
make fix bath #2
2nd fix EVERYTHING
final wash
done

 

[cliveh]

This guy states he has been printing a little less than a year and you want him to use a 2 bath fixation? Please.

 

[pentaxuser]

Nothing wrong with one bath fixing but I thought that Ralph L explained the advantages very simply and clearly. After a year's printing I see nothing too complex in 2 bath fixing for the OP.

Key to his scope for doing 2 bath is space which is at a premium in his case and I'd endorse Ralph L's point about getting a Nova processor for him and anyone who thinks he will make printing a long term hobby and has limited space

pentaxuser

 

[Myxine]

Thanks a lot for all your answers. It clarifies things a lot on a subject that was...fogging me.

- Ralph, it's actually the information I got from your book that led me to rethink the process . Thanks for this-

- Cliveh: I understand your point completely. In a few years i probably will look at my prints wondering why I went through such a hassle. It's just that i'm the kind of guy who likes to do things well and properly. And, I guess, being in the darkroom is already a lot of work, why not try to make it worth it all the way.

I'll try either to get a tray stacking device (provided it's stable enough for my 10 inches large plank), it's good advice, I'll look at that Nova processor, or i'll finish the session with a 2nd fix bath in a previously washed tray - seems to be the easiest way to go for now

 

[Alan W]

Ilford have always recommended one fix bath,right?

 

[DanG]

Hey Clive,
What's wrong with advising proper technique even to beginners? So

what if he has only been printing for less than a year?
Dang

 

[richard ide]

Ilford may recommend one bath fixing but that is for the average photographer processing at home. If done properly; the residual silver salts in a print should not be an issue. Two bath fixing ensures that a print has been processed to optimum quality standards.

 

[MattKing]

From Ilford's "Fact Sheet" for Hypam fixer:

"Two bath fixing
An extremely efficient method of fixing film or
paper is to use the two bath fixing technique.
Make up two separate fixing baths of the same
solution volume. Fix the film or paper in the first
bath for half the recommended fixing time and
then transfer them to the second bath for the
remainder of the time. Continue to work this way
until the capacity of the first bath is reached, then
discarded it and replace it with the second fixer
bath. Prepare and use a completely fresh second
bath. Repeat this process as required with the
result that the film or paper is always thoroughly
fixed by the relatively fresh fixer in the second
bath."

 

[L Gebhardt]

When my darkroom was in a tiny bathroom I used a vertical set of tanks. I could have 6 baths and do up to 11x14 paper. They cost about $30 each to have made at a plastic fabricator. I used nova clips to hold the paper. You could search for a nova slot processor.

 

[David Allen]

Hey Clive,
What's wrong with advising proper technique even to beginners? So

what if he has only been printing for less than a year?
Dang

Precisely!

Why do so many people seem to advocate that photographers must spend a number of years frustratingly doing things the wrong way before they can start doing things in the correct manner?

It is very easy to take someone who is a novice and, in the space of a weekend's tuition, get them producing well exposed negatives and prints with a full range of tones. This then gives them a base from which to move forward finding their way of photographing. During the process of developing their vision they may well want to move away from the 'standard' quality (perhaps they want more/less contrast or want photographs that are more like Moriyama / Andersen or perhaps photographs that are more like Sugimoto) and this is, of course, perfectly acceptable if it suits what they want. However, by having learned good technique at the outset, favourite images made during their learning journey will not have been ruined by poor technique.

Of course technique is not the be and end all of photography. Equally though, it is very sad to see potential great images blighted by poor technique.

Bests,

David
www.dsallen.de

 

[pdeeh]

Personally, I always crack my boiled egg open at the little end

 

[Rick A]

Personally, I always crack my boiled egg open at the little end

Blafiscuan eh!

 

[Doremus Scudder]

There is nothing inherently "better" about two bath fixing. These are all matters of print volume and efficiency. If one wants to use one-bath fixing, simply follow the manufacturer's directions and keep tabs on your process. If you do things properly, one-bath and two-bath fixing both work well. If you don't, one-bath and two-bath fixing both don't work well.

Well, yes and no.

Single-bath fixing works fine if you really limit the capacity. Ilford says 10 8x10s per liter for optimum permanence. Two-bath fixing to the same standard allows 40 prints through two one-liter baths, and you can reuse bath two as bath one for the next batch of 40 prints. That is a significant increase in economy and efficiency. Plus, it is relatively easy to over-use a single bath and end up with inadequately fixed prints that will stain when toning (not economical) and won't last as long.

Since everyone seems to refer to the Ilford tech publication about fixing, maybe it needs to be read in its entirety. Please note that Ilford has two standards for fixer capacity: "commercial" standards and "optimum permanence." Commercial standards are/were for print media and produced a print that would last long enough to be reproduced and be kept in the archives for a few years. If you want your prints to last, processing for optimum permanence or "archivally" is the only way to go. Especially if you are/intend to be an exhibiting art photographer and sell your prints, proper processing for permanence is crucial. Anything else is irresponsible.

Two-bath fixing is a simple and effective way to ensure proper fixation. Just keep count of throughput in bath one and you're good to go, no headaches, no worries. That will suffice for beginners. The next step is to do regular testing for residual silver in your prints to verify your fixing procedure. This is also not difficult once you have the proper test chemicals. A drop on the last print through the fixer for a given batch and you know.

I prefer not to take chances with proper fixation and certainly don't want anyone who buys one of my prints to have to deal with the effects of poor processing sometime in the future.

If you're and amateur, never plan on selling your prints and don't care if they last through the next generation, then by all means use single-bath fixation.

To the OP: FWIW, I routinely print and give only one fixing bath before the wash. I then collect the prints I deem "keepers" and fix them for the second time later, just before toning. As long as the time between first and second bath is relatively short (days, not months), there is not a problem provided that the first fix was not used past capacity.

Best,

Doremus


www.DoremusScudder.com

 

[David Allen]

It might be my memory playing tricks with me but wasn't it the people of Blefuscu who favoured the big end once the people of Lilliput (finally) settled on the small end?

Whilst I agree with Michael R that there is nothing inherently better about a well controlled two-bath fixing method over a well controlled single-bath fixing method, a two-bath regime is certainly more cost efficient and more likely to enable less experienced photographers to produce correctly fixed prints (by this I mean you can explain to a novice that after - for example 15 prints at size 10" x 8" - the first fixer bath will be no longer suitable for archival permanence and that it should be replaced with the contents of the second fixer bath and that they should clean the second fixer bath tray and then mix up a fresh bath of the second fixer bath. This is easier than a novice obtaining, using and interpreting correctly the various methodologies of checking the levels of silver in the fixer together with the pH level, etc).

Bests,

David
www.dsallen.de

 

[Mr Bill]

... but what I'm trying to say is that a two-bath regime is inherently no more "correct" than a single-bath regime.

I don't disagree with this, but I think it's fair to say that a two bath fixer is "inherently better" at reducing the chemical costs. Of course, if your fixer cost for a session is only about 20 cents, it's probably not worth your effort to reduce it to 5 or 10 cents.

There is another case where a two bath fixer is inherently better, and that is with respect to silver recovery, where economy within typical regulated limits are concerned.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

I understand what you say, but surely this depends on throughput and how often you change the fix. Historic print permanence from one bath fixing used in probably 99% of amateur and commercial operations would show this to be a pedantic over precaution.

It is my strong believe that anything worth doing is worth doing right.

 

[cliveh]

It is my strong believe that anything worth doing is worth doing right.

So in your book a single bath fix is wrong? It's not in mine.