Another fixer question

[Melvin J Bramley]

I have acquired a unopened 4ltr container of Ilford PAPER developer fixer not Rapidfix!
Does anyone have any idea why they would produce a fixer just for paper?
I will try it and use hypo check to verify its condition plus the twice clearing time, for film, which is usually about 1 minute.
My question is curiosity driven not technical.
FWIW
In the same acquisition of older chemicals and paper I had 500 ml of , at least 4 year old , Ilford Ilfosol 3 which worked wonderfully.
I am finding Ilford liquid concentrates performing well way after their best by dates.

 

[MattKing]

Ilford PAPER developer not Rapidfix!

I'm really confused. Developer, Fixer?
Can you share an image of the label?

 

[eli griggs]

One fixer is more related than the other and it is a matter of marketing.

You write that you've received a paper developer, not the fixer you ordered, so it sounds that you are confused as to what you have and how to use it.

Good Luck
Eli

 

[Melvin J Bramley]

Correction it is Ilford paper fixer not Ilford rapid fix.
I'll fix this before long!

 

[MattKing]

"Fixed" that for you.
I'm guessing that that was designed for the Ilford print processors - and must be really, really old!

 

[eli griggs]

Great, we know know it's a fixer, not developer we're speaking to so no confusion there.

As to why Ilford makes such a product, I'm sure someone has the scoop on that.

 

[MattKing]

I expect the label would refer to Ilford Imaging, rather than Harman Technology, which would mean that that is at least 20 years old - not likely to be usable.

 

[koraks]

not likely to be usable.

Ah...not too quick. It might be. I've seen *very* old jugs of Ilford fixer pop up (same age as this) that turned to be perfectly fine, still.

I will try it and use hypo check to verify its condition plus the twice clearing time, for film, which is usually about 1 minute.

OK, but what's more important is to verify if there's any sedimentation or cloudiness. Before opening it, shake the jug vehemently for a few minutes - really hard! Then pour out some of the concentrate into a plain glass beaker. The liquid should be absolutely perfectly clear. If there's any cloudiness or flakes drifting in the solution, it has started to 'sulfur out'. If it's perfectly clear, do a clip test to see if it clears rapidly. If so, use without reserve.

 

[eli griggs]

Ah...not too quick. It might be. I've seen *very* old jugs of Ilford fixer pop up (same age as this) that turned to be perfectly fine, still.



OK, but what's more important is to verify if there's any sedimentation or cloudiness. Before opening it, shake the jug vehemently for a few minutes - really hard! Then pour out some of the concentrate into a plain glass beaker. The liquid should be absolutely perfectly clear. If there's any cloudiness or flakes drifting in the solution, it has started to 'sulfur out'. If it's perfectly clear, do a clip test to see if it clears rapidly. If so, use without reserve.

I seem to recall opening a very old jug of chemistry that I found in a commercial photographer's dark room, that no mater how much you shook, and then later, tried to breakup with a long handled screw driver, remained as hard as marble.

Double check that you're actually getting all that prehistoric chemical sludge are not solution, if pouring the entire bottle, you probably won't notice 'till near empty a mass like I'm writing about.

Have fun!

 

[Doremus Scudder]

If there is anything at all like precipitate, particles floating around in the concentrate, or deposits on the inside of the jug, then the fixer is dead. You could use it for 100+ rolls of film and underfix and ruin them all; or you could spend $40 on a jug of new fixer and save all that money you would have wasted on film

Best,

Doremus

 

[MattKing]

I would only consider using it for RC contact proof sheets.

 

[Melvin J Bramley]

"Fixed" that for you.
I'm guessing that that was designed for the Ilford print processors - and must be really, really old!

I think you are correct.
It came with some other old darkroom supplies I purchased from an older newspaper photographer from central BC.
The rest of the purchase was much newer including some Ilfosol which still worked as it should.

 

[Melvin J Bramley]

I think the fixer is the same as Ilford RT2000, for machine processing use.
I opened the jug and the chemistry is as clear as a bell.
I then mixed it at the suggested, for RT2000, 1:4 and dropped in a piece of unexposed film.
It cleared within 30 seconds.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Ah...not too quick. It might be. I've seen *very* old jugs of Ilford fixer pop up (same age as this) that turned to be perfectly fine, still.



OK, but what's more important is to verify if there's any sedimentation or cloudiness. Before opening it, shake the jug vehemently for a few minutes - really hard! Then pour out some of the concentrate into a plain glass beaker. The liquid should be absolutely perfectly clear. If there's any cloudiness or flakes drifting in the solution, it has started to 'sulfur out'. If it's perfectly clear, do a clip test to see if it clears rapidly. If so, use without reserve.

even if it has flakes in it,it can be filtered through a regular coffee filter and still be usable.

 

[DeletedAcct1]

I have acquired a unopened 4ltr container of Ilford PAPER developer fixer not Rapidfix!
Does anyone have any idea why they would produce a fixer just for paper?
I will try it and use hypo check to verify its condition plus the twice clearing time, for film, which is usually about 1 minute.
My question is curiosity driven not technical.
FWIW
In the same acquisition of older chemicals and paper I had 500 ml of , at least 4 year old , Ilford Ilfosol 3 which worked wonderfully.
I am finding Ilford liquid concentrates performing well way after their best by dates.

Fixer is fixer, no matter what.

 

[koraks]

even if it has flakes in it,it can be filtered through a regular coffee filter and still be usable.

Indeed; once entirely clear, a clip test can be made to determine whether the fixer works to satisfaction. Since fixing goes to completion, fixing time can be adjusted to suit.

 

[eli griggs]

Do not screw around with iffy, outdated premade fixers, it's too risky

IMO, using plain hypo made from swimming sodium thiosulfate is a much better practice than questionable strength fixers; you've to much invested in your negatives and enlargements to fool around with their permanent stability.

 

[Doremus Scudder]

Fixer is fixer, no matter what.

Well, there's ammonium-thiosulfate-based rapid fixers in acid, neutral and alkaline versions, both hardening and non-hardening. And, there are "conventional" sodium-thiosulfate-based slower fixers, usually acidic and with hardener, but non-hardening versions are available too (Kodak F-24, etc.,). There are some intermediate rapid fixers too, that use sodium thiosulfate and ammonium chloride to end up with a rapid fixer without starting with the ammonium thiosulfate. And...

Do not screw around with iffy, outdated premade fixers, it's too risky

IMO, using plain hypo made from swimming sodium thiosulfate is a much better practice than questionable strength fixers; you've to much invested in your negatives and enlargements to fool around with their permanent stability.

... there are "plain hypo fixers," i.e., sodium thiosulfate alone, without the sulfite preservative or any acidic components. These oxidize quickly and should be used one-session. AA was fond of a plain hypo fixer as a second fix before toning prints. I've never found it necessary. That's just a few common formulations; there are lots of more esoteric things out there too.

Do keep in mind that sodium-thiosulfate-based fixers do not do a great job with materials that have lots of silver iodide in them, like T-Max and Delta films. You really want a rapid fixer for those.

Best,

Doremus

 

[eli griggs]

Well, there's ammonium-thiosulfate-based rapid fixers in acid, neutral and alkaline versions, both hardening and non-hardening. And, there are "conventional" sodium-thiosulfate-based slower fixers, usually acidic and with hardener, but non-hardening versions are available too (Kodak F-24, etc.,). There are some intermediate rapid fixers too, that use sodium thiosulfate and ammonium chloride to end up with a rapid fixer without starting with the ammonium thiosulfate. And...

... there are "plain hypo fixers," i.e., sodium thiosulfate alone, without the sulfite preservative or any acidic components. These oxidize quickly and should be used one-session. AA was fond of a plain hypo fixer as a second fix before toning prints. I've never found it necessary. That's just a few common formulations; there are lots of more esoteric things out there too.

Do keep in mind that sodium-thiosulfate-based fixers do not do a great job with materials that have lots of silver iodide in them, like T-Max and Delta films. You really want a rapid fixer for those.

Best,

Doremus

Good points and I should have mentioned the one day and toss nature of plain hypo.

Thanks for catching that and your other comments.

Eli

 

[Melvin J Bramley]

Does the tried and true fixer testing method of twice the clearing time , when the film clears within a minute or hypo check guarantee a good fix?

 

[MattKing]

For the T-Max and Delta films, three times the clearing time is a better test.
But it is still necessary to track how many rolls have been fixed - fixer both exhausts and becomes saturated with silver.

 

[Doremus Scudder]

Does the tried and true fixer testing method of twice the clearing time , when the film clears within a minute or hypo check guarantee a good fix?

Personally, I don't think the Hypo-check test is anywhere sensitive enough for critical work, especially printing on FB paper. For film, it's closer, but the clearing time test is better, especially if done well (first a drop of fixer on the film, wait 30 seconds, them immerse the entire strip and check when the clear spot formed by the drop is no longer detectable in bright back-light).

So, about adequate fixing and the clearing-time test. Film needs to be fixed a minimum of 2x the clearing time to be fully fixed. That's assuming that the fixer is not exhausted (another thing to use the clearing-time test for).

The clearing time increases as the fixer is used; when it approaches 2x that in fresh fix, the fixer should be discarded. This fact means that, as you use your fixer, you need to do a clearing-time test to determine minimum fixing time for each batch - or - you need to build-in a safety factor.

Since film is not damaged by moderate over-fixing, I simply fix for 4x the clearing time in fresh fixer, which is long enough to adequately fix the film in nearly exhausted fixer. Then I just need to do a clearing-time test toward the end of the fixer's life to know when to toss it (usually well before it reaches 2x the clearing time in fresh fix for me). Sure, the film in fresh fix gets a little more time than needed (doesn't hurt), but the time saved during the life of the fixer not doing clearing-time tests for each batch is worth it.

best,

Doremus

 

[eli griggs]

A good POV on fixing.