Aluminum chemical trays?

[BetterSense]

I'm still trying to set up a dirt-cheap darkroom on a nonexistant budget. I'm trying to come up with the cheapest possible trays for developing prints in. There are those aluminum baking pans that are only a few cents each, but I don't know if the chemistry will cause problems with them.

 

[Alex Hawley]

There are those aluminum baking pans that are only a few cents each, but I don't know if the chemistry will cause problems with them.

Aluminum is bad news; its fairly reactive with some of the chemicals - don't do it. Good photography trays are not expensive. Its best to stay with a for-the-purpose product with these items.

 

[MattKing]

Try plastic cat litter trays at Walmart or Target - about $5.00 for a tray large enough to do an 11x14 (at least in Washington State, near the border).

Matt

P.S. you can see them in the flesh in this post from the darkroom portraits thread:

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

 

[nyoung]

How big are you printing? If you are 8x10 or smaller there is always a lot of plasticware large enough for the job at garage sales in my area. Also, don't forget the classics - glass and enameled steel. There are often Pyrex and enameled steel - white with the red rim around the top - cake pans and such for a buck each or less at the garage sales. You don't get more chemically neutral than glass.

 

[Monophoto]

I found a number of photographic trays at garage sales and flea markets.

It's also possible to use the plastic containers that supermarkets use to package lettuce and spinach.

 

[BetterSense]

I wonder about paint trays. I'll have to have a look next time I'm out.

You don't get more chemically neutral than glass.

usually true, but just FYI hydroflouric acid cannot be kept in glass. It eats its way out somehow. At work we have to keep it in special lexan-like containers.

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

Look for second hand trays on eBay. I've bought quite a few stainless steel and enamel trays for a fraction of their original cost. Used plastic trays are dirt cheap.

Enamel trays are kind of delicate, but the surface is very chemical resistant as long as the enamel isn't cracked and hasn't been scrubbed with abrasives, so I like them for albumen coating and toning, which requires a bit more care about avoiding contamination, as does any kind of emulsion making.

Stainless is essentially indestructible, at least the way we use it, so there's no downside to buying used stainless trays for normal processing, and new ones are very costly.

 

[brofkand]

I set up a full darkroom for under $50. I paid $20 for an enlarger, 6 trays, and two 1L air-evac bottles from Craigslist in Myrtle Beach (I'm from Charlotte, NC, but was traveling to Myrtle so checked out their CL).

I bought two steel tanks, an easel, an old Time-O-Lite timer, two 35mm reels, two 120 reels, a large assortment of film clips and print clips for $25 shipped from a user on another forum.

I bought an array of plasticware from the dollar store for developing film and prints. Three 1/2G jugs, a cat box tray, and a measuring cup from my dollar store.

Oops, that's $50 now and I didn't include the thermometer or the glass measuring cup I bought for finer measurement. Those also came from the dollar store.

So, I figure I spent about $55 when it's all said and done for everything after tax and such.

 

[Anscojohn]

I am using stainless and enamel trays purchased by my Dad in the late 1940s. That comes out to being a pretty economical outlay, methinks.

 

[eli griggs]

Until I could scrounge or work-in regular trays into my darkroom budget, I used large Ziploc containers for prints no larger than about 8 inches square. I also liked that I could put the tops on for storage and even though I now have plenty of 'normal' trays now, I still use these for 5x7 and smaller stuff; the depth is a big plus over a standard 5x7 or 8x10 tray, IMO.

I also went to WalMart and bought several large, white dishwashing pans for water stop-wash, after-fixer 1st wash, 2ed wash, etc. They are still useful as well and weren't very expensive.

Eli

 

[Photo Engineer]

Do not use Aluminum trays.

PE

 

[amuderick]

Aluminum is bad news. Very reactive with photo chemicals. I use a combination of disposable kitty litter trays and glass pyrex baking pans from a garage sale ($1 each). There are many options.

 

[donbga]

I'm still trying to set up a dirt-cheap darkroom on a nonexistant budget. I'm trying to come up with the cheapest possible trays for developing prints in. There are those aluminum baking pans that are only a few cents each, but I don't know if the chemistry will cause problems with them.

You should have better sense! Aluminum won't cut it for any wet processing including water storage.

Don Bryant

 

[Frank Szabo]

Aluminum is far too reactive to have a use (wet) in photography, and in some cases, even around food.

In some instances, the gases made during AL's chemical decomposition are rather toxic as well, some types of AL more so than others.

The most common type to make pans out of is a 6XXX series which has Magnesium as the major alloying element. 2XXX series is copper and 7XXX is tin, the latter being comparatively expensive as compared to 6XXX and the type most high-strength AL structure parts are fabbed from.

The most chemically inert AL is a 1XXX series (commercially pure), but it's so soft and pliable it's difficult even to look at without it bending over double on itself and very hard to find because of that. Much of the commercial AL produced has an exterior coating referred to as ALCLAD - a very thin coating of pure AL on the outer surfaces of sheet for both corrosion protection and a shiny appearance.

Plastic, stainless steel, or enameled steel are your best bets for both long life and non-reactivity to photo chemistry.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Any grade of stainless steel that is non-magnetic is suitable. Lower grades that are magnetic will be corroded by photographic processing solutions.

PE

 

[Frank Szabo]

Any grade of stainless steel that is non-magnetic is suitable. Lower grades that are magnetic will be corroded by photographic processing solutions.

PE

I wouldn't go so far as to call some of the 400s (martensitic stainless) "lower" grades when comparing them with austenitic types (300 series). The lower grades in this family would include 303 and 304 (non-mag). 203 is even lesser than that but still has a few uses. Any 2XX or 3XX series stainless steel is non-hardenable except by work-hardening - heat only softens the stuff.

The types you speak of are non-corrosive for the most part due to their nickle/chrome content and ratios of same (moly is also a component in 316).

FYI, any stainless steel can be made to oxidize and rust by scrubbing with regular steel wool instead of a stainless steel wool product.

410 is a good grade that will stand up to H2S service (when properly hardened) and almost anything else but it's much more expensive than type 316 which is the industry standard for non-rusting material used in restaurants, photolabs and medical facilities.

440C is a good grade for knives if hardened correctly. Most won't take the time for the many steps necessary and end up with the standard stainless knife that won't hold an edge. 406L/408L (lead added to the material as a high pressure lubricant to ease machining) series stainless steel is typically used for rifle barrels.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Then I'll remove the word lower and just say that any magnetic stainless steel object will corrode more rapidly in contact with photographic solutions than non-magneitc stainless steel objects. That I have seen proven time and again. Grades 308 and 316 are recommended by Kodak for equipment and barring that, they recommend hard rubber.

Any copper containing or aluminum containing product should be avoided. They will corrode or have photographic effects or both.

PE

 

[Frank Szabo]

Then I'll remove the word lower and just say that any magnetic stainless steel object will corrode more rapidly in contact with photographic solutions than non-magneitc stainless steel objects. That I have seen proven time and again. Grades 308 and 316 are recommended by Kodak for equipment and barring that, they recommend hard rubber.

Any copper containing or aluminum containing product should be avoided. They will corrode or have photographic effects or both.

PE

Right you are.