Fiber Base Print in 5 Minutes? Kodak Model 11 Processor

[mshchem]

I have a mountain of old equipment. My question. Can my Model 11 Kodak Rapid color processor, designed for fiber base color prints, make an acceptable FB B&W print??

Short answer sure! Running at 100 F, following steps.
1. Presoak exposed print in water for 30 to 60 seconds in a regular tray
2. Start processor with plain water, place print onto drum
3. Dump water, add Bromophen 1&3 develop for 1 minute including 5 sec drain at end
4. Kodak Stop bath for 15 seconds
5. Kodak Rapid Fix with Hardener 1&3 (film strength) 45 seconds
6. Wash print on processor for 3 minutes with running water @100F. Dump water 12 -14 times. Keep rinsing over the back and net.

Time on machine 5 minutes. Hypo Test HT-2 solution shows a slight stain, Easily in the "Good" category of the Kodak Darkroom Dataguide.
Not really sure why I would want to do this. But it's always been on my mind so I tried it.

Seems AOK, I may try a Hypo Clear step, but at 100 F I don't know if it would help.
Crazy??
Best Mike

 

[jvo]

crazy? sure! and that's what makes photography fun, and expands the boundaries of what we do! enjoy

 

[Bob Carnie]

I have a mountain of old equipment. My question. Can my Model 11 Kodak Rapid color processor, designed for fiber base color prints, make an acceptable FB B&W print??

Short answer sure! Running at 100 F, following steps.
1. Presoak exposed print in water for 30 to 60 seconds in a regular tray
2. Start processor with plain water, place print onto drum
3. Dump water, add Bromophen 1&3 develop for 1 minute including 5 sec drain at end
4. Kodak Stop bath for 15 seconds
5. Kodak Rapid Fix with Hardener 1&3 (film strength) 45 seconds
6. Wash print on processor for 3 minutes with running water @100F. Dump water 12 -14 times. Keep rinsing over the back and net.

Time on machine 5 minutes. Hypo Test HT-2 solution shows a slight stain, Easily in the "Good" category of the Kodak Darkroom Dataguide.
Not really sure why I would want to do this. But it's always been on my mind so I tried it.

Seems AOK, I may try a Hypo Clear step, but at 100 F I don't know if it would help.
Crazy??
Best Mike

why the need for 100degree water?

 

[Rick A]

FB prints in 5 minutes or less with 68f temps, no need for a processor. I can see where it may save counter space, all steps in one spot rather than a series of trays, but the high temp is unnecessary.

 

[Bob Carnie]

I have used this machine for colour work and I can say its first rate, I see no reason for it not working at 68 degrees for fibre base, it really is such an easy machine to use, keep clean and move from print to print. The OP should keep this beauty
as it really is extremely simple to work with.

 

[mshchem]

When I develop black and white prints I always develop for at least 2 minutes , with some of the slower chloro-bromide papers 3 minutes, followed by stop and if I'm ambitious 2 fixer baths , followed by Se toner in hypo clear followed by plain hypo clear quick rinse then into an archival washer for at least a half hour .

I was just playing , at the higher temp the print is fully developed in a minute , leaving longer has no real effect . I am just playing . I do wonder if there is a way that by pre soaking the paper and just exposing the emulsion side to fix if you could in theory develop a rapid archival process .
I tried it according to kodak residual hypo test it's good enough for normal prints . This is just a lark.

I have some fresh 16 x 20 Fuji color paper on order . With my rescued Ilford dryer I'm pretty sure I can go dry to dry in 5 minutes . I have a 20 x 24 Jobo drum but tubes take forever . You have to heat the drum and all the chemicals . With these processors no need to warm the chemistry off the machine , there's over 4 gallons of water at 95 degrees . As fast as you can get them on and off you can make a color print no muss no fuss . I have a 10 foot Arkay stainless sink (free), and an 8 foot Kreonite fiberglass sink ($30) so I have plenty of room.
I am a history fan as much as a photographer . And the prints look great
I just hope Fuji doesn't stop selling color paper in sheets as the big beautiful rolls of the Kodak stuff is probably out of reach for me
Never boring , beats sitting in front of a computer trying to calibrate a scanner
Best Regards Mike

 

[mshchem]

Remember the old P-122 process Kodak used before CP-5 came along took over 50 minutes to process a color print at 75 F. By increasing temperature to 100F it took less than 8. With thus machine I can make a Black and white or color RC print in about 4 minutes or less at 95 F..

I'm just experimenting .
Best Mike

 

[mshchem]

FB prints in 5 minutes or less with 68f temps, no need for a processor. I can see where it may save counter space, all steps in one spot rather than a series of trays, but the high temp is unnecessary.

That 5 minutes includes the wash . That's the big deal
Best Regards Mike

 

[Gerald C Koch]

That 5 minutes includes the wash . That's the big deal
Best Regards Mike

I would test for residual silver and thiosulfate before adopting this method. Remember that the processor and method were designed for color prints. What may be tolerable levels for color prints may not be for B&W ones. Better to be safe than sorry.

 

[Ian Grant]

That 5 minutes includes the wash . That's the big deal
Best Regards Mike

Yes but colour paper passes through bleach to remove the silver and leave the Chromogenic dyes, any slight trace of silverpthiosulphate complexes left in the paper won't affect image quality as long as the level is low.

Hover residual silver-thiosulphate complexes will have a detrimental affect on with B&W papers particularly Fibre based where complexes bind with weal bonds with the cellulose fibres in the base.

5 minutes including the wash won't be remotely archival. I used to use an Ilfoprint machine with the first Ilfospeed (RC) paper which was fully developer incorporated but I needed to use a second fix bath and wash.

There's no shortcuts to processing and washing Fibre based papers. If you process B&W papers at 100ºF / 38ºC you would need to add additional restrainer to the developer to prevent base fogging.

Ian

 

[mshchem]

I understand the importance of washing fiber base paper . People need to look at the design of these processors . The fixer doesn't come into contact with the back of the paper at all . In fact none of the chemicals really penetrate into the fiber base.
The print is adequately fixed and is adequately washed to the standards Kodak recommended in the fiber paper days . I checked the emulsion side of the paper in the white areas with Kodak hypo test reagent HT-2. There is a stain , indicating low levels of residual fixer , in 1970s this was condidered more than adequate for documentary photos. No this is NOT ARCHIVAL in any sense. I have at last count 3 big beautiful archival washers.
I'm not advocating processing prints this way. I was just playing and quite surprised how well it worked.
My normal process is at 68f Bromophen 3 minutes in a tray , 2 fixer baths , Se toner , archival wash etc.
Best Regards Mike

 

[mshchem]

Yes but colour paper passes through bleach to remove the silver and leave the Chromogenic dyes, any slight trace of silverpthiosulphate complexes left in the paper won't affect image quality as long as the level is low.

Hover residual silver-thiosulphate complexes will have a detrimental affect on with B&W papers particularly Fibre based where complexes bind with weal bonds with the cellulose fibres in the base.

5 minutes including the wash won't be remotely archival. I used to use an Ilfoprint machine with the first Ilfospeed (RC) paper which was fully developer incorporated but I needed to use a second fix bath and wash.

There's no shortcuts to processing and washing Fibre based papers. If you process B&W papers at 100ºF / 38ºC you would need to add additional restrainer to the developer to prevent base fogging.

Ian

No base fogging MGCIV GLOSSY . I'M NOT CLAIMING ARCHIVAL .

 

[Rick A]

No base fogging MGCIV GLOSSY . I'M NOT CLAIMING ARCHIVAL .

If you are not washing to archival, why even bother washing, or even printing for that matter.An extra 5 minutes in HCA followed with 5 minuted wash in slow running water, all at at 68f, will get you to archival. I have to ask, why are you in such a rush?

 

[MattKing]

The OP is most likely attaining something like the commercial level of permanence that standard photofinishing labs attained in days of yore.

Something like all those photos in decades old shoeboxes that seem to have survived so well.

 

[mshchem]

The OP is most likely attaining something like the commercial level of permanence that standard photofinishing labs attained in days of yore.

Something like all those photos in decades old shoeboxes that seem to have survived so well.

Exactly correct my friend . Makes me wonder how Kodak and other large photofinishers did it back in the 40's and 50's . Kodak would have had a continuous roll? Maybe .
Anyway it was a fun experience .
Now tomorrow hopefully , I have got the model 11's big brother the 16k up and running . My 16 x 20 Fuji color paper arrived yesterday . I'm going to put it to work doing (roughly ) what it was designed to do make a color print in under 5 minutes
Best Regards Mike

 

[mshchem]

If you are not washing to archival, why even bother washing, or even printing for that matter.An extra 5 minutes in HCA followed with 5 minuted wash in slow running water, all at at 68f, will get you to archival. I have to ask, why are you in such a rush?

I'm not in a rush I'm playing . Hypo clearing agent is in my arsenal , I use it for every fiber base print I make . In fact my normal process is at ambient 68 to 70 F . Bromophen 2 minutes (I think it's very important not to rush development ), stop , Kodak rapid fix with out hardener , then directly into Kodak rapid selenium toner , 1:3 mixed with Kodak hypo clearing agent (this is a good test for adequate fixing as it will stain badly and immediately if there is any silver halides present) then I use Kodak hypo clearing agent again this time no toner , wash in rapidly running water then park in a large tray of water . When I have enough prints I will run through a archival washer . Usually I fill it and after a couple minutes pull the plug drain it completely and refill .
I love fiddling around with all the baths the more the better . Lately (last 20 years ) have just been using Se toner it makes so much of a difference much deeper blacks puts more texture in the highlights . To me an untoned print is just blah . I have done a lot of combination toning in the past . I was looking at my print book of some toner experiments I did in 1983 . Makes me wonder what Kodak Blue Toner (Gold) would look like with modern papers . anyway I seem to have strayed from my original point . No argument with your point just having fun.
Best Regards Mike

 

[mshchem]

One other thing , if I recall correctly hypo clearing agent was primarily used with sodium thiosulfate fixers which are impossible to wash out of paper in cold tap water I e below 60F . With ammonium thiosulfate rapid fixers not sure it's needed but for me old habits . ..etc.
Best Mike

 

[Ian Grant]

One other thing , if I recall correctly hypo clearing agent was primarily used with sodium thiosulfate fixers which are impossible to wash out of paper in cold tap water I e below 60F . With ammonium thiosulfate rapid fixers not sure it's needed but for me old habits . ..etc.
Best Mike

It's important with Ammonium Thiosulphate fixers, probably more so. In the past older commercial B&W D&P machines used thinner paper bases than we have today and used Sodium Thiosulphate fixers which washed out easier, the use of ammonium rather than Sodium affects the silver-thiosulphate complexes that bind weakly to the cellulose in the paper base.

Ian

 

[miha]

Ian, can you perhaps explain further?

 

[Ian Grant]

Ian, can you perhaps explain further?

I'm in the darkroom now so checked, I couldn't remember where I'd read it

LFA Mason of Ilford lists the disadvantages of Ammonium Thiosulphate fixers, they less stable and decompose faster than Sodium Thosulphate fixers,are more prone to attack silver in the image with over fixing, and more prone to staining due to the intermediary complexes which form weak bonds with the cellulose in the paper base. GIP Levenson of Kodak worked on this as well, and was the Editor working with Mason..

The use of HCA and also two bath fixing is the best way to prevent issues and both become standard practice with FB papers and Rapid fixers.

Ian

 

[miha]

Interesting, thanks.

 

[mshchem]

Ansel used Kodak F6 sodium thiosulfate,two bath, maybe I will give this a whirl. This stuff doesn't drive you out of the room from the smell. Now that we are all telling the truth I still use hypo clearing agent on film and RC paper too.
Old Habits die hard.
Best, Mike

 

[mshchem]

I'm in the darkroom now so checked, I couldn't remember where I'd read it

LFA Mason of Ilford lists the disadvantages of Ammonium Thiosulphate fixers, they less stable and decompose faster than Sodium Thosulphate fixers,are more prone to attack silver in the image with over fixing, and more prone to staining due to the intermediary complexes which form weak bonds with the cellulose in the paper base. GIP Levenson of Kodak worked on this as well, and was the Editor working with Mason..

The use of HCA and also two bath fixing is the best way to prevent issues and both become standard practice with FB papers and Rapid fixers.

Ian

I've been looking for a reason to start mixing up the F6 fixer, I have everything I need. Ansel in 1968 reprint of The Print recommends two bath Fixer with regular hardening fixers F5 (stinks) F6 (not so stinking) then parking prints in water, before he tones he would bathe the prints in plain hypo (sodium thiosulfate) then tone in Selenium 1:10 diluted with Kodak HCA. CEK Mees and others recommended Hardening fixer for belt dryers to prevent sticking. I use dryers if for no other reason than you can't judge a print until it's dry. And rapid fix with no hardener they Stick to the belt dryed with emulsion side towards the belt.
Anyway, Very good discussion thanks!
Best Regards, Mike