Chinese Amidol Analysis

symmar_man · Dec 21, 2007

For those that are interested, Dale Grant has posted his chemical analysis of the Chinese Amidol on the MAS site;

http://michaelandpaula.com/mp/AzoFor...ID=10524&CID=5

Looks like contamination of Fe and Ni are responsible for the red wine color and I would say the high amount of Sn and possibly other contaminants would be responsible for the black sludge.

B. Dalton

Alex Hawley · Dec 21, 2007

Very interesting. Any chance of a recall (just kidding)?

Snapshot · Dec 21, 2007

Why isn't this entirely surprising?

Ole · Dec 21, 2007

Your link is buggered - it should be Dead Link Removed

The table is buggered too, but at least it's possible to read if you know what you're looking for.

What's worse is that it doesn't make sense at all! There is absolutely no way that 98% Amidol can contain 39.18% Magnesium and 11.24% Calcium by weight.

Which means that what is presented is the percentages of those elements which have been analysed, with no way of finding out what fraction this is of the whole. For all the analysis tells us, the Chinese amidol could actually be far purer than the reference! And what kind of spectra have been compared? Light? UV? IR? Xray? Emission or absorption?

symmar_man · Dec 21, 2007

Sorry for the incorrect link and thanks Ole for posting the correct one. Way too long a day for me yesterday.

Note that Mr. Grant has posted a reply to explain how the test was performed. The Amidol was 100% removed in order to more accurately ascertain the impurities and the percentages refer only to elements other than Amidol.

As is pointed out, there is no way to know the ratio of Amidol to impurities, but I feel it is safe to say that the ratio is sufficient to cause adverse effects to be noted in use. So the amounts of impurities are obviously sufficient to affect the usability of the product.

An interesting study for sure!

B. Dalton

Ole · Dec 21, 2007

It's very interesting, but it still needs a bit more data before it's useful. I've replied (again) in the original thread over there.

removed account4 · Dec 21, 2007

i don't use amidol, but i know
people waited a long time
for this to come their way from china ...
does this mean that the impurities
make the chemical pretty much useless
for print developing?

if so, that is really sad ... that people had to wait
all this time, spend all that money and come up
with something that doesn't work ... or work the way it should

Thomas Bertilsson · Dec 21, 2007

I don't think anybody is surprised anymore when poor quality product comes out of China. I dodge it unless it's a Holga camera. It's supposed to suck.

Like John says, it is a pity if it's not usable. I saw a posting of Jim Galli in the galleries that was printed with that Amidol, and it appeared as if he had to jump through both one and two hoops to get to what he needed, but it was usable to him.

- Thomas

photo8x10 · Dec 21, 2007

I've been using this Chinese Amidol and so for, I don't have problem with it....

Merry Christmas & Happy New Year

Stefano
Italy

JLP · Dec 21, 2007

Thomas, you have obviously not been following the thread about a lot of happy new Chamonix camera owners on the LF forum. There's a lot of fine gear coming out of China, some far superior to what is made in the US.

That put aside, i use the Chinese Amidol and yes, it needs a little extra time in preparation but is working just as it is supposed to do. Lot's of contrast control with a water bath.

Merry Christmas everyone.

jan

JBrunner · Dec 21, 2007

JLP said:
Thomas, you have obviously not been following the thread about a lot of happy new Chamonix camera owners on the LF forum. There's a lot of fine gear coming out of China, some far superior to what is made in the US.

That put aside, i use the Chinese Amidol and yes, it needs a little extra time in preparation but is working just as it is supposed to do. Lot's of contrast control with a water bath.

Merry Christmas everyone.

jan

Chamonix camera's are good. "Far superior" to a US, or quality camera from some other country? Nah, perhaps "as good as a _____" or "really good for the money" but "far superior" would be a stretch. Thats about as accurate as saying all Chinese products are substandard. My Fotoman is a really good product for the money, but it is definitely not a Horseman or a Linhof.

Photo Engineer · Dec 21, 2007

Iron in a developer, particularly for a chloride emulsion can cause black spots that sometimes are large and sometimes can only be seen with a loupe.

Tin in a developer will cause fog. It is used as the E6 fogging agent in the reversal bath.

I hope no one has problems with this material.

PE

Tom Hoskinson · Dec 21, 2007

Thomas Bertilsson said:
I don't think anybody is surprised anymore when poor quality product comes out of China. I dodge it unless it's a Holga camera. It's supposed to suck.

Like John says, it is a pity if it's not usable. I saw a posting of Jim Galli in the galleries that was printed with that Amidol, and it appeared as if he had to jump through both one and two hoops to get to what he needed, but it was usable to him.

- Thomas

The Chinese Amidol works fine for me - the price was certainly right! I don't mind filtering the working developer solution.

And BTW, I love my 4X5 Shen Hao.

bwphoto · Dec 21, 2007

Nobody mentioned the 'good old stuff' from Artcraft Chemicals that comes from the UK per owner Mike Jacobson. I have been using Artcrafts' Amidol for about a year with no mixing issues and superior prints. You are right about cost but the old adage 'you get what you pay for' comes to mind. Just a thought and another option to the available Chinese variety.

Thomas Bertilsson · Dec 21, 2007

All right, all right. Some products coming out of China are good, same as everywhere else. I was more referring to the troubles I have seen personally and what's been reported in the press.

It's all the 'cutting corners' that keeps surprising and baffling me. Forgive me for being biased. I've just had a lot of bad experience with Chinese products.

- Thomas

noseoil · Dec 22, 2007

Thomas, if there is a lot of bad press, problems with lead in toys, problems with the date rape drug on children's beads (what the hell's up with that one?) and many environmental concerns, perhaps it isn't you. If your direct experience is negative, then you have a valid concern and China has a large problem. Unfortunately, until there are real consequences for this national behavior, don't look for any substantive changes. tim

David A. Goldfarb · Dec 22, 2007

Can we stick to the issue of amidol and leave Chinese domestic policy and problems with other Chinese products for the SoapBox?

Alex Hawley · Dec 22, 2007

FWIW, I have occasionally had pink staining on prints using Artcraft Amidol, and on a variety of papers, not just one specific brand or type. When it happens, its always on the first, second, and sometimes third print to be developed after mixing the solution. Not being a chemist, I cannot explain why this happens, nor will I try to. Once one or two prints have been developed, everything settles down and works fine.

Doesn't happen every time, just occasionally.

Photo Engineer · Dec 22, 2007

Alex;

You may be using up or absorbing some contaminant. IDK, but I have had that before in some situataions where a photo active ingredient is present at a very low concentration and is used up.

PE

noseoil · Dec 22, 2007

With the amidol situation as it is, it sounds like there might be a couple of things to do in general. Since it is mixed once per session, these precautions might be in order and I guess I'll be doing them each time I use some. Anyone care to add to this list of remedies?

First : strain the developer once it is mixed, coffee filter, paper towel, napkin or whatever seems to be fairly fine, easy and cheap to use
Second: take an unexposed sheet of sacrificial paper (cheap again, not first quality) and dunk it in the developer for a couple of minutes, then toss
Third: make prints

Alex Hawley · Dec 22, 2007

Photo Engineer said:
You may be using up or absorbing some contaminant. IDK, but I have had that before in some situations where a photo active ingredient is present at a very low concentration and is used up.

That's a good, plausible explanation Ron. Some sort of compound is formed during mixing then reacts with the paper emulsion. I've come to believe that its a quirk of amidol that has to be lived with.

David A. Goldfarb · Dec 22, 2007

How often is the first print of a session a final version? If it's a test print anyway, a little staining usually isn't important.

Alex Hawley · Dec 22, 2007

Right David. That applies to all developers IMO. Make sure the chemistry is all settled out, run two or three prints to make sure, or two or three blank pieces of paper.

My point is that I've seen the pink stain sporadically with what's probably the best amidol that can be obtained. I wonder what it was like in years past when amidol was produced by more sources and in much larger quantities?

Here's the kicker question: Did Weston have this problem? (no debate initiation intended ).

Photo Engineer · Dec 22, 2007

David A. Goldfarb said:
How often is the first print of a session a final version? If it's a test print anyway, a little staining usually isn't important.

Sometimes this small difference can make the evaluation difficult for the change needed for the next print. The curve shape can even change. I've seen that myself and I've ended up chasing an ever changing situation that led me down a garden path with a dead end. I've used up developers that had 'deltas' between every single print, and that is one reason why Liquidol was designed, to eliminate this very problem.

I don't want to continue, as that would get me accused of 'advertizing', so this is merely an explanation of my answer and I'll leave it at that.

PE

nworth · Dec 22, 2007

Ole said:
Your link is buggered - it should be Dead Link Removed
...
What's worse is that it doesn't make sense at all! There is absolutely no way that 98% Amidol can contain 39.18% Magnesium and 11.24% Calcium by weight.
...

The table is misleading because amidol is mostly C, H, and N, which are not included. The levels still seem high. I would be interested in an MS analysis to identify organics and their levels.

Chinese Amidol Analysis

symmar_man

Alex Hawley

Snapshot

Ole

Moderator

symmar_man

Ole

Moderator

removed account4

Thomas Bertilsson

photo8x10

JLP

JBrunner

Moderator

Photo Engineer

Tom Hoskinson

bwphoto

Thomas Bertilsson

noseoil

David A. Goldfarb

Moderator

Alex Hawley

Photo Engineer

noseoil

Alex Hawley

David A. Goldfarb

Moderator

Alex Hawley

Photo Engineer

nworth

Chinese Amidol Analysis

Moderator

Moderator

Moderator

Moderator

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency