Archival Wash Times

[cbphoto]

This seems like an easy question, but...

I have a Zone VI 16x20 washer I'm using for the first time tonight. I have 4 16x20 prints in there which were processed and superficially washed and dried, then soaked again, selenium toned, and superficially washed again. I put them in about two hours ago, and did a full drain and refill about 30 minutes in. Long enough? Keep in mind the drain and refill took a while, but I failed to record exactly how long.

 

[Blighty]

It is an easy question, and you'll get a myriad different responses. I think the most important step is to use some sort of washaid. This will cut down on wash times considerably. I use a 2% sod. sulph. solution and soak the prints for about 10 mins before transferring them to the wash (Silverprint 16x20 6 slot). I've settled on 6 ten minute soaks in warmish water (around 30C) followed by a short running water wash.

 

[Mahler_one]

Why not follow the Ilford protocol for archival printing?

 

[jmcd]

A wash-aid is a great idea, but so is testing your wash method for residual hypo with HT-2. I use so much less water than I used to to process my prints, and I feel confident in the method because of the HT-2.

With your method described above, the only part that makes me hesitant is allowing residual hypo to dry in superficially washed prints.

 

[fschifano]

You made a big mistake from the start for two reasons when you only superficially washed, then dried the prints. First, it's going to be tough, if not impossible, to get all the fixer out of the paper once any residue is dry. Any residual fixer in the print may have already begun to break down, releasing sulfur. Second, while selenium toner does contain quite a bit of ammonium thiosulfate (same stuff that makes rapid fixer work), it is not acidic. Introducing acid into the toner will cause silver to precipitate out and may lessen the capacity of the toning bath.

A good sulfite based wash aid is always good practice with FB prints, as this will help remove fixer residue more efficiently.

 

[cbphoto]

I should add permawash to the initial bath. it can be weeks between the time of printing ad time of toning/washing. That first wash usually involves 5-6 changes of water and long soak times, so it's not THAT bad. Does it help at all that I use TF-4 fixer?

 

[fschifano]

Yes, it helps that you're using an alkaline fixer. No it's not that bad. When you said a superficial wash, I took it to mean a quickie 5 minute wash and leave the rest till later. There's no harm drying completely washed prints and then toning at a later date. When I do that, I pre-soak the prints in clean water before toning.

Perma Wash and Hypo Clearing Agent, they're all no much more than sodium sulfite. Get yourself a big tub of the stuff and use a couple of tablespoons for each litre of water. Use it once, then discard. Much cheaper and just as effective.

 

[CBG]

Whatever you do, develop a minimum standard for each part of the process: how you agitate, wash aid use, wash time including how many complete changes of water... It rarely hurts to do better than a standard. I keep a cheat sheet taped to the darkroom wall for when I'm brain dead and can't remember what time for what. Every part of the process gets a standard. Not to make it more complex, but so I can do it well with less effort.

I wash so many minutes for film or so many minutes for paper along with insuring I get 10 complete changes of water, always after use of a wash aid.

 

[CBG]

My basic plan for fiber based printing paper:
Use fresh developer.
Use indicator stop bath.
Use two bath fixing.
Make sure the second bath is fresh. Use a hypo check test to be sure.
Generous rinse after fix. Exceed Kodak time recommendations.
Use a wash aid mixed according to directions. Exceed Kodak recommendations for time.
Be sure your wash is long enough and has at least 10 complete changes of water.
Don't dry paper that has not been washed as well as you will ever want it.

 

[Mahler_one]

Yes, it helps that you're using an alkaline fixer. No it's not that bad. When you said a superficial wash, I took it to mean a quickie 5 minute wash and leave the rest till later. There's no harm drying completely washed prints and then toning at a later date. When I do that, I pre-soak the prints in clean water before toning.

Perma Wash and Hypo Clearing Agent, they're all no much more than sodium sulfite. Get yourself a big tub of the stuff and use a couple of tablespoons for each litre of water. Use it once, then discard. Much cheaper and just as effective.

Thanks for the really great tip about the sodium sulfite... so, no need to be any more exact then a few tablespoons per liter?

Ed

 

[fschifano]

Thanks for the really great tip about the sodium sulfite... so, no need to be any more exact then a few tablespoons per liter?

Ed

No need to be extremely precise with this stuff. Two tablespoons / liter is more than enough to do the job.

 

[Mahler_one]

Thanks...in the Darkroom Cookbook the amount suggested was 200 Grams per liter of H20. I was surprised at the much lower amount that you suggested was effective. I have already ordered some sodium sulfite from Art Craft, and will make my own from now on.

Just curious, since the amounts are so disparate. How long do you soak the FB prints in the sodium sulfite solution using the concentration you suggested?

 

[cbphoto]

Thanks, Frank. I'm definitely going to pick some up.

 

[Anon Ymous]

Mahler one, the Darkroom Cookbook formula is for a stock solution which indeed has 200g sulfite in 1l of water and some metabisulfite. It's not a working solution formula and has to be diluted 1+9. So, in the end, you have 20g of sulfite in 1l of working solution, like Frank says. The metabisulfite is used to improve it's keeping properties and it's not needed if you use the solution for one session only.

 

[Mahler_one]

Thanks so very much for drawing my attention to the correct way to use the home brewed HCA. Somehow I had missed the dilution and "time and technique chart" provided in the book. Once again, I thank you for pointing out the additional information. Can you think of any reason that the HCA solution in the proper dilution could not be used as one of the sequences one uses while developing sheet film on the JOBO?

Ed

 

[fschifano]

There's really no need for HCA with films. The main purpose of HCA is to aid in the removal of fixer and fixing byproducts from fiber based papers. Because of their very nature, these products act like a sponge and soak up solutions into the support. This cannot happen with film or with resin coated papers because they, by their nature, are waterproof. Only the gelatin coating absorbs photo chemistry, and this coating is very thin and doesn't hold onto it as tightly as paper fibers. You can use it if you want, but there is no real advantage to doing so. A sulfite wash aid can be useful with Kodak's TMax films because it is very effective in helping to remove the magenta sensitizing dyes, but then good fixing and washing will accomplish the same thing.

 

[Mahler_one]

Thanks Frank. I have not been using HCA routinely with any of my developing protocols for LF film in the Jobo, but I admit to wondering if I was doing something "wrong". I appreciate the clarifications, and I will take your suggestion regarding the FB paper.

As an aside.....one can readily see the value of APUG virtually everyday. Members are willing to take the time to share information, and clarify issues that cause confusion and misinterpretation. I know of no other site at which analog photographers can obtain guidance so quickly, and dispensed with such patience.

Ed

 

[CBG]

There's really no need for HCA with films ...

You're absolutely right. It's gilding the lily. It's such an easy step, and with no proven consequential downside, I just do it. Were I seeking a minimal but sufficient process, I'd just wash, as you appropriately suggest.

On more thought, I do recall some interesting and suggestive research on the archival benefits of a tiny tiny residual fraction of hypo on - I think - microfilm. It is possible I might be removing too much of that last, possibly and unintuitively, helpful (according to some recent research) minute trace of thiosulfate.

I'd be pleased to know if anyone knows of research on the films we use. Short of really involved chemical analysis of my processed film, and further research to verify the hypothesis that a micro trace of hypo is beneficial to the life span of conventional film, I sleep well knowing it unlikely my film is poorly washed.

 

[dancqu]

Save on Water and Chemistry

Were I seeking a minimal but sufficient process,
I'd just wash, as you appropriately suggest.

I do recall some interesting and suggestive research on
the archival benefits of a tiny tiny residual fraction of hypo
on - I think - microfilm.

It is possible I might be removing too much of that last,
possibly and unintuitively, helpful .... minute trace of
thiosulfate.

The 3 wash method recommended by Ilford is likely
more than sufficient. I include an additional margin of
cleanliness by using room temperature water and by
allowing some still time twixt water changes and
agitations. The additional margin I gain is not at
the expense of an additional step or additional
chemistry.

IPI research found that microfilm soaked in a solution
of sodium sulfide at a dilution of 1:9999 exhibited
a much greater LE. Also, the sulfide content of
selenium toner was found to be responsible
for greatly extended LE. Dan

 

[jglass]

Can anyone tell me if sodium sulfite is toxic in the environment? Is it nasty stuff or more commonly found in cleaning products, for example?

 

[apochromatic]

Has anyone mentioned wash water temperature yet? Low wash temp can extend the time required exponentially so a check with the Ilford Photo site for recommendations would be helpful I'm sure.