Do you peek at your negs before fixing?

[RalphLambrecht]

I'll peek sometimes before the HCA - but never before then.
I'd prefer not to get any more fixer on my fingers or glove than I need to.

HCA on film?

 

[MattKing]

HCA on film?

Quicker wash. I can have most everything I use in my temporary set up/take down film processing system cleaned, dried and put away and the film washing finished in just a few minutes. Which frees up the space for everyday life.
It uses less water too, for those whose water supply is more restricted than ours is.
Not strictly necessary, but for those of us who have to adapt to temporary setups in multi-use spaces, it is advantageous.

 

[retina_restoration]

Forty years ago, we all used a HCA for washing film — it was considered standard practice. These days, I use TF-4 or TF-5 and wash times are five minutes without a HCA, so I no longer use a clearing agent, unless I have problems washing out the pink stain on TMX/TMY, in which case I mix a teaspoon of Sodium sulfite in water and soak for a couple minutes before final wash.

 

[MattKing]

I have a bunch of packaged HCA. It is the only darkroom chemical that I use a teaspoon at a time, because it is essentially sodium sulfite, plus a pinch of sodium metabisulfite, and unlike most photochemicals, the relative proportions of each aren't particularly critical.
When and if I run out of the packaged stuff, I'll probably either lengthen my wash time, or just use sodium sulfite.
@retina_restoration also highlights another convenience from using it - almost all of the film I use is TMax.

 

[Doremus Scudder]

Why do they need to see the image, it sounds like a party trick that will eventually go wrong? Show them a tip that will be useful to them for ever after, how to test the strength of fixer, put a drop of fix on the cut off leader and time it as the emulsion clears, then tell them to double the time it takes to clear for fixing the film, bingo, two birds with one stone.

Naturally, all that is demonstrated and explained as well. Seeing how the image has developed before fixing is, indeed, just a party trick for the curious. Still, it illustrates in a tangible way how the process works and also helps in recognizing problems later on, e.g., unfixed areas on negatives caused by contact with something. As for things going wrong: no one is suggesting that viewing negatives after the stop bath and before fixation should be standard procedure

Best,

Doremus

 

[MattKing]

As for things going wrong: no one is suggesting that viewing negatives after the stop bath and before fixation should be standard procedure

As I understand it, the original BTZS practitioners excepted .
(the light is hitting the film anyways, you may as well peek )

 

[Agulliver]

I've never peaked. I fail to see any advantage. I'll see the negatives in a few minutes and I have patience. If I've messed up the exposure or development, what done is done.

 

[koraks]

I've never peaked

Maybe the best is yet to come!

 

[mshchem]

Nope. I fix 5 minutes continuous agitation (no hardener) the HCA for 2 minutes, all this helps get TMY-2 clear and free of any purple, then wash carefully for 5 minutes. Finally DI water with some of Matt King's patented alcoholic Photoflo. Hang no touch, let dry in peace

 

[mshchem]

Maybe the best is yet to come!

 

[Agulliver]

Maybe the best is yet to come!

I am yet to peek at me peak. Or my negatives. Though there is still some little magical thrill about observing them come out of the wash, unwinding them from the reel and seeing if they look any good. After 40 years of doing this, it is still exciting.

 

[koraks]

Never lose the magic!

 

[skahde]

I use two-stage fixing and I often take a peak at the end of stage one for the sole purpose to see, if the first fixer hasn't cleared the base and needs to be replaced.

 

[Sirius Glass]

No, I can wait a few more minutes. I use a Jobo processor, so it is inconvenient to take an early look.

 

[Vaughn]

I prefer to wait, also. Not all that handy to do either when using drums for sheet film. I definitely peek at the first few exposures of roll film (120) after rinsing the fix out of the SS tank. Just to see if I have images!

I waited back when I was making silver gelatin prints, too. I use to tell students there was two types of dry-down. One is physical -- the paper and gelatin shrink as they dry, pulling developed silver a little closer together, blocking more light in a way most notable as darkening the higher values. The other way is mental...students would come out of the darkroom to judge test strips or prints and make snap judgements as soon as they hit the light, then turn right around and head in to make the print. They make their decision before their pupils have a chance close down in response to the bright light...and generally ended up giving the paper just a tad too much exposure -- that first impression is strong.

Plus wet paper generally transmits light better than dry, so viewing a wet print in a silver or white tray might look slightly lighter than if in a black tray. And one has more light bouncing around in a silver or white tray, also. Probably not very significant in the long run.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Peek at negatives prematurely, before being reasonably fixed? Isn't that synonymous with potentially ruining the neg? And not all films are the same in that respect; some are highly sensitive to even minor misdemeanors. In any event, anyone who takes that risk has no right to complain about the price of film these days. Kinda like turning your beer cans into .22 rifle target practice while they're still full.

 

[BHuij]

After nearly 20 years of developing my own B&W film, I feel like I'm just barely starting to get a handle on "reading" B&W negatives well enough to tell if they're going to print easily or not, and which contrast grade to start with for my test strips. The last thing I need is to try and re-learn that skill with residual silver still in the emulsion

I figure by the time it's developed and stopped, there's no longer any opportunity to change the development or the outcome. I don't really gain anything by peeking at this point. So no, I just run the whole process and look at how it came out when I pull it off the reel and hang it to dry.

 

[hobbes]

Why would I... if you know what you're doing then there's no need to do that. Been always happy to pull out the neg _after_ rinsing.

 

[ChrisGalway]

I thought the whole point of analogue photography was to be patient and take your time ... slow photography. Otherwise you might as well go digital!

 

[DREW WILEY]

I know a happy compromise. Dunk the digital camera in the developer and stop, then see what it looks like before drowning it in the fixer too.

 

[ChrisGalway]

I know a happy compromise. Dunk the digital camera in the developer and stop, then see what it looks like before drowning it in the fixer too.

What best agitation to ensure the digital camera is definitely ruined ... rotary or inversion?

 

[loccdor]

I thought the whole point of analogue photography was to be patient and take your time ... slow photography. Otherwise you might as well go digital!

Plenty of 35mm cameras around that can do high frames per second and/or autofocus. Sometimes you need that, for example with animal photography. There are many points to this exercise, they vary from one person to the next.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

I do. With sheet film, mainly. As soon as the film has had its 30 sec in the stop, the lights go on. I do this in several of my videos. It's not a "party trick" either. I started doing this after a round of fixing did nothing. This way, I can see that the fix is actually doing its job.

 

[John Wiegerink]

What best agitation to ensure the digital camera is definitely ruined ... rotary or inversion?

I prefer the old dip-dunk method! Never had a camera make it through that, be it film or digital. Works every time!

 

[DREW WILEY]

Most people take pictures today with cell phones anyway. What is nice about them is their compact flat shape, which is great for tossing and skipping them atop ponds.