thank you, ralph. much appreciated!over the years, I collected a bit of photochemistry information and some standard recipes(formulae). Recently, I compiled it into a pdf and thought, I'd share it here. Hope it helps;It's meant for the non-chemists amongst you but I'm happy to consider comments from the pros.
tween 20 is much easier to find than TritonX in homeports of the world; such toner recipe is included.but thanks for the reply.Nice work. Here's my feedback:
- It's a bit unusual to call isopropyl alcohol "isopropylic alcohol".
- Also, it does seem to imply that Triton X-100 is identical to Tween 20, but these are different chemicals. In my experience tween 20 doesn't work as well for avoiding drying marks on film, though it is better than nothing.
- Might be nice to include a recipe for (non-stinky!) thiourea based sepia toner.
Yes, exactly. I have my own thoughts and opinions on units; having lived and worked in both metric and English-unitcountries, I don't mind either snd think they both have their purpose. I prefer(just out of habit)metric units for metal and lab work buttes English units for paper,wood and plumbing. Metric seems to be easier for me for all engineering calculations and to convert units. I don't see what the big problem is with working in either unit. All, I get chilly at 0C or32F just the same.Great! And thank you for this! No freaking oz and gallons.
Page 509 is empty for my notes, I guess.
Yes, I've tested it except for an accelerated age test but so far, it looks like it does exactly what was intended; a mild direct sulphide toning, slightly warming the image tones and adding 'archival' image protection with a very simple formula and widely accessible materials; not entirely odor free but nothing like the typical sulphide toners either.Thanks Ralph,
Has SFT-9 actually been tested? The variations I've tried so far certainly do tone like a sulfide toner, but the maximum toning was a mid-tan color... I didn't feel like it was ready to use on real prints yet. I tried sodium carbonate but not sodium hydroxide.
Should it be sodium sulfide instead, until the other has been tested more?
Yes, I've tested it except for an accelerated age test but so far, it looks like it does exactly what was intended; a mild direct sulphide toning, slightly warming the image tones and adding 'archival' image protection with a very simple formula and widely accessible materials; not entirely odor free but nothing like the typical sulphide toners either.
No,that has not been tested yet. Mainly because, I'm only a fan of direct sulphide toning; never liked indirect toning much.Very good, thanks! And I should revise what I wrote... I tested it as a developer ( with an eye toward using it to re-develop in reversal ), not with an eye toward what it does to already reduced silver. I can imagine it works nicely on a developed and fixed print. Cheers!
thanks for the nice words; you are more than welcome.Thank you very much for this. While I have no desire to mix my on chemistry, it's good to understand during the developing and fixing processes. Thank you for this easy to understand explanation of what is going on in my processing tank.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?