Resource icon

Experiments with Metol and ascorbic acid.

Recent Classifieds

Forum statistics

Threads
197,570
Messages
2,761,208
Members
99,405
Latest member
Dave in Colombia
Recent bookmarks
1
OP
OP
gainer

gainer

Subscriber
Joined
Sep 20, 2002
Messages
3,699
Don't even bother with the bicarb. 0.8 grams phenidone, 9 grams ascorbic acid, 25 grams borax and water to make a liter will do the job for either film or paper. If you keep your phenidone in a glycol solution, you can mix a batch in just a few minutes. You will probably want to dilute the stock for use. I'll come back when I can give more information.
 
OP
OP
gainer

gainer

Subscriber
Joined
Sep 20, 2002
Messages
3,699
FP4+, 6 minutes, 70 F; 7 miuntes, 68 F. Normal contrast, no problem with box speed + or - 1/2 stop.
 

psvensson

Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2004
Messages
623
Location
Queens, NY
Format
Medium Format
While you are about it, add 8.8 grams of ascorbic acid and 6.6 ml of TEA to the liter of working solution without sulfite and check the activity.

Meanwhle, I cut the Metol to 0.01 moles /liter (3.44 grams), used 8.8 grams/l of ascorbic acid and 16.6 grams of sodium metaborate, and the activity is almost what it was with 0.05 moles of Metol.

Sorry, I didn't do exactly this, but I did do two things that proved to my satisfaction that my MC-TEA only needs more alkali to activate it, and that sulfite doesn't have any particular role in getting the metol-ascorbic acid synergy going.

Instead of adding two teaspoons of sulfite to a liter of working solution I added two tsp sodium metaborate. The resulting developer was extremely active, developing Delta 400 to a contrast index of 1.9 in the same time it takes the sulfite mixture to get to 1.2. However, shadow detail was very poor, so I'll stick with the sulfite formula for now (especially since I have 5 lbs of the stuff).

I also tried using double the amount of sulfite (but no metaborate), which gave me about the same development time as the original amount.
 
OP
OP
gainer

gainer

Subscriber
Joined
Sep 20, 2002
Messages
3,699
If you should want to use acetaminophen (Tylenol) in place of p-aminophenol, the 5.45 grams of p-aminophenol will be supplied by 7.5 grams of acetaminophen or 15 of the 500 mg tablets. If you use the tablets, crush them to a powder. Add 1/2 teaspoon of ascorbic acid and 1/4 tsp of sodium bicarbonate to 40 ml water, let the effervescence subside and then add the acetaminophen and 4 grams of NaOH or 5.6 grams of KOH. Stir well and let it stand a while. Bring the water up to about 700 ml and add 2 teaspoons of ascorbic acid and 2 tablespoons of borax. Add water to make a liter.

You will probably have to dilute this developer at least 1+4 to make it managable. The best way to dilute these developers is to add more of the ascorbic acid-borax mixture. You can make 4 liters of it with 35 grams of ascorbic acid and 100 grams of borax. This way you need not worry about whether you will have enough of the developing agent in the working solution when you try such outrageous things as stand development for an hour with 1:50 dilution of the working solution. There will be as much of the ascorbate in the diluted solution as in the full strength, and that will ensure that the p-aminophenol or phenidone is continually regenerated. This is a chance to see if the usual statements about starved development and characteristic curves, Mackie lines, etc. are pertinent here.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Joined
Sep 24, 2003
Messages
1,041
Location
Holland, MI
Format
Pinhole
Found another source of borax. Had only been able to find 20 Mule Team, and at last one source of that.

Pool supply stores have been referenced for hypo/fixer but hard to confirm actual product contents per some readers.
Here's one borax source:
http://www.proteampoolcare.com/msds/SUPREME.pdf
NOT "Supreme Plus" - that has additional components, boric acid and fragrance. Still costs more than 20 Mule Team - strange that this is the case.

While I'm here, the same company has a sodium thiosulfate 'ChlorOut' product.
Haviland Chlor Out - I found MSDS(to confirm contents) the other day with alot of searching, but not tonight. Their web page will let you bring up Chlor Out for shopping basket but no MSDS - can't verify it's a current product. Lots of discounted 2# bottles on eBay, however.
 
OP
OP
gainer

gainer

Subscriber
Joined
Sep 20, 2002
Messages
3,699
20 Mule Team is probably their supplier of the raw product.
 
Joined
Sep 24, 2003
Messages
1,041
Location
Holland, MI
Format
Pinhole
Somehow I thought this company 'made' chemicals, but obviously not mineral-based ones, and I'm not aware of borax fields here near the Great Lakes...so you're probably right (of course, as usual, etc)..
 
Joined
Sep 24, 2003
Messages
1,041
Location
Holland, MI
Format
Pinhole
I confirmed Chlor Out IS a current product, but considered 'specialty', per CSR, mainly for people who make mistake of over-chlorinating.

I wasn't impressed with the price, but picking up locally beats shipping a heavy tub from out of state and probably makes the local price more realistic.

MSDS for Haviland Chlor Out
Dead Link Removed

Got a deal. 25# $39 local pickup. $63 + shipping online (huh?) Hope I don't get burned by impurities as warned by PE.

Now I have no excuses not to start homebrewing.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

BradS

Member
Joined
Sep 28, 2004
Messages
8,110
Location
Soulsbyville, California
Format
35mm
So...uh, do you recommend pre-washing the film with this stuff?

I mixed up a liter of this stuff (2.5g Metol, 9g Ascorbic Acid, 25g Borax) about a week ago and tried it last night. The fresh developer goes in nice and clear and, with TXP at least, comes out a very, very interesting blue-purple color!

I did 8 minutes and got a very delicate neg. If I had a 5x7 enlarger, it will be easy to print. I'm not sure how it'll contact.
 
Joined
Sep 24, 2003
Messages
1,041
Location
Holland, MI
Format
Pinhole
Brad, I'll guess your question is for Patrick about pre-wash.

Isn't presoak usually done in water?

I just added the additional info on pool chemicals for those interested. The last one I listed is for simple fixer.

Murray
 

BradS

Member
Joined
Sep 28, 2004
Messages
8,110
Location
Soulsbyville, California
Format
35mm
Murry,

Yes, I'm asking Patrick if he suggests/recommends pre-washing the film with plain water prior to development in the Metol-C developer proposed here.

My appologies for the confusion.

Brad.
 
OP
OP
gainer

gainer

Subscriber
Joined
Sep 20, 2002
Messages
3,699
It has been a long time since I prewashed any film before any developer. There was a time when I routinely prewashed TMX with a wetting agent because otherwise I had problems with air bells. I don't think TMX does that anymore.
 
OP
OP
gainer

gainer

Subscriber
Joined
Sep 20, 2002
Messages
3,699
I had a complicated scheme for prewetting ready to post but couldn't see the value of it. If you do prewet, I would suggest using a small amount of nonionic wetting agent in the prewash. Something like propylene glycol, maybe. It may be that keeping Phenidone or p-aminophenol base in glycol to mix with the ascorbic acid-borax solution will preclude the necessity of prewashing.
 
OP
OP
gainer

gainer

Subscriber
Joined
Sep 20, 2002
Messages
3,699
If you are concerned about the dye that doesn't wash out in the developer, it should come out in the fixer. Most developers have enough sulfite to bleach it out.
 
Joined
Sep 24, 2003
Messages
1,041
Location
Holland, MI
Format
Pinhole
Um, PG (no, no, not Propylene Glycol, the other guy, Gainer), I'm following your sulfite-free recipe. (acetaminophen, Na-ascorbate, Lye, Borax, water. Hmm, I see a Lorax acronym hiding in there).

If there's dye left over, what then, does it mean anything (like a staining developer), say a magenta dye that would affect contrast with VC paper?

Thanks

M
 
OP
OP
gainer

gainer

Subscriber
Joined
Sep 20, 2002
Messages
3,699
If there's any dye left after fixing, fix some more. Some films have a faintly blue base IIRC, but I haven't encountered any lately.
There's no dye in these formulas like catechol, hydroquinone or pyrogallol. The brown that p-aminophenol turns, as in Rodinal, is not to my knowledge fixed in film emulsion or attached to the image. It often happens with low sulfite developers that the developer solution turns the color of the film's antihalation dye.
 

BradS

Member
Joined
Sep 28, 2004
Messages
8,110
Location
Soulsbyville, California
Format
35mm
Patrick, Assume the film is 320TXP, here are a few questions...
1) If I don't prewash (not just pre-wet) the film, the metol-c dev turns deep, dark blue-purple. Can I re-use it?

2) why is D-23 (for example) almost clear after developing even multiple sheets of film (TXP) while the metol-C developer contemplated here is not? Where does the color go with D-23?
 
OP
OP
gainer

gainer

Subscriber
Joined
Sep 20, 2002
Messages
3,699
D-23 contains a lot of sodium sulfite which bleaches the dye by design. Its parts are still there in the solution, but arranged by the bleaching so they are colorless. If it worries you, you can add a pinch of sulfite or you can prewash. IIRC, the purple goes away after a while. In any case, I have not found it to be chemically active toward the developer.
 

BradS

Member
Joined
Sep 28, 2004
Messages
8,110
Location
Soulsbyville, California
Format
35mm
OK. Thank you Patrick. I'm going to mix up another batch and not give the funky color a second thought.

So, for the record, I'm using...

2.5g Metol
9g Ascorbic Acid (vit. C crydtals from heath food store)
25g Borax
distilled water to make 1L
 
OP
OP
gainer

gainer

Subscriber
Joined
Sep 20, 2002
Messages
3,699
About borax.

If any of you are wondering about the possible harm from use of borax of less than Photo grade, whatever that is, I will show you how to reduce impurities in 160 grams of 20 Mule Team or other Technical Grade borax by a factor of at least sixteen at the expense of less than 40 grams of the cheap stuff.

I have recommended making a stock solution of borax and ascorbic acid to which various developing agents can be added to make a complete developer. The stock solution requires about 25 grams of borax per liter.

Weigh out about 200 grams of borax into a bucket big enough to hold 4 liters. Add two liters of ice water. It need not be distilled water at this point, but it will make your conscience feel better if it is water that you would not mind using for D-76. Stir well, let it settle a while and stir it again. This time let it settle while you go watch a TV show or something. What has happened is that only about 40 grams of the borax have dissolved, but all the soluble impurities from the original 200 grams have dissolved. Now decant as much as you can of the clear liquid. You should be able to recover at least 1.9 liters which will contain all but about 5% of the original impurity. That 5% remains in the water that is held by the sediment. You may even be able to squeeze more out by filtering, but do it after decanting. Filtering borax slurry would try the patience of a saint, and I know of no incantation that will speed it up. We shall just have to rely mostly on decantation.

Now the remaining sediment will contain only about 5% of the original soluble impurities in about 80% of the original borax. True, it contains a somewhat higher ratio of insoluble impurities, but need not worry over that. We are not trying to recover powdered borax, but are seeking a solution of borax of certain concentration. Insoluble impurities, by definition, will not dissolve, although the settling time for some may be very long. We will just leave the insoluble stuff behind. So, add 3 liters of water to the sludge in the bucket and stir well. If you do this with water at 17 degrees C (63.6 F) you will saturate the solution at 4 grams/100 grams, using about 120 of the remaining 160 grams.

Again, decant the clear liquid. This time you will get all 3 liters back plus a little because the sludge already was wet from the first solution. The solution is fixed at 4.00% by weight as long as the temperature stays above 63.6 F or 17 C. If it goes below, it will either supercool or precipitate some borax. Measuring the borax will now be done by weighing the solution. Note that neither the water nor the borax had to be measured accurately, but the weight percent is accurately determined by the temperature at which the saturated solution was made, and cannot change once the source (sludge) is no longer present, and as long as the measuring temperature stays above that temperature. 0.1 grams of the solution contains 0.004 grams of borax decahydrate. Thus, measuring the solution to the nearest 1/10 gram is as precise as measuring the powder to the nearest 0.004 grams.

Much of this discussion is of no concern if the solution is only to be used to make the developer's borax-ascorbate stock. Just add another liter of water to the 3 liters of saturated solution you have just made and add 36 grams of ascorbic acid, and you're ready to go.

In a numerical example, suppose 1330 ppm maximum total soluble impurities are guaranteed. Then:

Impurities carried in by 200 grams = 200 * 0.00133 = .266 grams maximum.

2 liters water were added, 1.9 liters liquid decanted. The ratio of impurities dissolved in the output water to those dissolved in the input is 1.9/2 = 0.95. The impurity remaining in the sediment is thus 0.05 * 0.266 = 0.0133 grams. The impurities in the sediment have been reduced by a factor of 20, but only 160 grams remain in the sediment. Thus the total soluble impurities are about 83 ppm, 1/16 of the original.
 
OP
OP
gainer

gainer

Subscriber
Joined
Sep 20, 2002
Messages
3,699
I found that 20 Mule Team technical grade borax comes in granular or powder form. The specs for the granular say insoluble impurities are <400 ppm. The specs for the powder grade, which is what you get at the supermarket for about 50 cents a pound, show no insoluble particles. The soluble impurities are guaranteed <700 ppm chloride, <600 ppm sulphate and less than 30 ppm iron.
 

Kirk Keyes

Member
Joined
Jun 17, 2004
Messages
3,234
Location
Portland, OR
Format
4x5 Format
Patrick - if technical grade meets your design specifications, then why waste all your time doing this??
 
OP
OP
gainer

gainer

Subscriber
Joined
Sep 20, 2002
Messages
3,699
Patrick - if technical grade meets your design specifications, then why waste all your time doing this??

Because you told me technical grade is not good enough for photo work. Further, you said it was not possible for technical grade to have 0 insoluble particles, even though 20 Mule Team Borax from the grocery store is claimed not to be abrasive. Third, because you could not, or ar least did not point to a place where one could find the specs required of Photo Grade borax. At the time I wrote this, I did not know that the specs for technical granular and powder were not the same. Fourth, it takes little time to prepare a gallon or more of borax solution of known weight percentage and of a higher grade than technical, whether it started as granular or powder. Fifth, because there might be some among us who do not know that a solution saturated at a given temperature has a known concentration and can be measured out on a balance more accurately than by weighing the powder directly, even though the temperature is higher that that at which the solution was made.
 

Kirk Keyes

Member
Joined
Jun 17, 2004
Messages
3,234
Location
Portland, OR
Format
4x5 Format
First - I said I would try to use a better grade than technical and that I recommend others do as well.

Second - It all depends on your required limit for insoluble particles. If they are sufficiently small enough and there are very few of them, then who cares? You can easily filter a solution through a 0.45 um glass fiber filter and what gets through would be of no consequence, as they would remain suspended in the solution.

Third - I'm still working on that one.

Fourth - OK - it's still extra work to make the gallon.

Fifth - Your're saying that if I weigh a gram of liguid it is more precise than weighing a gram of solid? Please explain. The precision of my balance or scale is still the same. And if I go your method, then I have to trust that I have truely made a saturated solution. If I weigh the dry chemical, then I KNOW that I have exactly what I wieghed. At least to the accuracy of my balance or scale.

You're having a lot of fun, but really, your system is a lot of work and based on assumptions and requires extra skill (to know that you have actually saturated the solution).
 
OP
OP
gainer

gainer

Subscriber
Joined
Sep 20, 2002
Messages
3,699
First - I said I would try to use a better grade than technical and that I recommend others do as well.

Second - It all depends on your required limit for insoluble particles. If they are sufficiently small enough and there are very few of them, then who cares? You can easily filter a solution through a 0.45 um glass fiber filter and what gets through would be of no consequence, as they would remain suspended in the solution.

Third - I'm still working on that one.

Fourth - OK - it's still extra work to make the gallon.

Fifth - Your're saying that if I weigh a gram of liguid it is more precise than weighing a gram of solid? Please explain. The precision of my balance or scale is still the same. And if I go your method, then I have to trust that I have truely made a saturated solution. If I weigh the dry chemical, then I KNOW that I have exactly what I wieghed. At least to the accuracy of my balance or scale.

You're having a lot of fun, but really, your system is a lot of work and based on assumptions and requires extra skill (to know that you have actually saturated the solution).

Let me point out that the highest grades I have seen specified by Rio Tinto and others guarantee the sodium tetraborate decahydrate equivalent to be between 99.9 and 105 or even 110 %. That is due to uncertainty in the state of hydration. You do not know how accurately you are measuring when you measure by weight of dry powder or granules if you are looking for an accurate measurement of sodium tetraborate unless you know the exact state of hydration of all of your batch.

I don't see your argument that I do not know if I have a saturated solution. If I decant a clear liquid and cool it, I will soon know if it was saturated. If it sits long enough with excess borax at the bottom, and I stir ir periodically, I don't see how it cannot be saturated. If I weigh an accurate 4% solution to the nearest 0.1 gram I am certainly more accurate than measuring a solid whose concentration, so to speak, is not known any better than +/- 5%. The best way I can see to make sure of the state of hydration is to make a saturated solution. It must be commonly used as a method, for the weight percentage of borax decahydrate in a saturated solution is specfied vs. temperature to the hundredth of a percent in the Borax Decahydrate Product Profile by U. S. Borax.
 
Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links.
To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here.

PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Ilford ADOX Freestyle Photographic Stearman Press Weldon Color Lab Blue Moon Camera & Machine
Top Bottom