Off topic, I know, but anyone have any suggestions for deliberately introducing this effect?"static electricity' could fog the film so you might want to try to eliminate it. The most common time I see the little sparks is when removing the tape from 120 film. So, I usually cut it instead.
Check your negatives closely, anything like these visible? They may be very faint
Apparently the chemiluminescence of pyrogallol is well known. It happens when pyrogallol is oxidized, according to that paper (https://doi.org/10.1016/S0039-9140(97)00272-5) the emission of light is sensitive to the pH value and the maximum of the intensity depends on the oxidizing agent. For potassium permanganate the maxima is at 0.6-0.8 and zero above 5, whereas for hydrogen peroxide the maxima is 11.
So you could try a different stop bath and hope for the best.
and btw ....phosphorescence is the effect that something emits light long after it has been exposed to light (glow in the dark paint)
fluorescence is the effect that something emits light of another colour while it is irradiated (black light paint under UV light)
chemiluminiescence is the effect that something emits light during a chemical reaction…(glow sticks)
I’ve just spotted this in The Book of Pyro (Hutchings, 1992) page 52:
“When negatives from pyro developer are placed in an acid stop bath you may notice a pale green glow on the negative surfaces. This is called chemoluminescence and is the release of visible light as the pyro is rapidly oxidised by the acid stop bath. This release of light will not harm the film.”
A bit of a nitpick. Phosphorus phosphoresces when exposed to air. Zinc sulfide luminesces after it is exposed to light.
I find it interesting how the expertise on this forum has changed over time. Some years ago, someone posed exactly the same question. It was answered, authoritatively, in one or two posts, and no one went on about how terrible pyro developers are to do this or how stop bath can't be used with pyro developers because of the danger of fogging the film due to chemoluminescence. I'm very happy that the OP found the relevant passage in Gordon Hutching's book and posted it here to dispel and misconceptions.
I've been using PMK for 30+ years and see this phenomenon occasionally, but not the majority of times. I think the longer the developer stands and oxidizes before development takes place has an impact. I've seen no effect on the developed film from this phenomenon. I think it's kind of cool and smile to myself in the dark when it happens.
Best,
Doremus
I find it interesting how the expertise on this forum has changed over time. Some years ago, someone posed exactly the same question. It was answered, authoritatively, in one or two posts, and no one went on about how terrible pyro developers are to do this or how stop bath can't be used with pyro developers because of the danger of fogging the film due to chemoluminescence.
I've been using PMK for 30+ years and see this phenomenon occasionally, but not the majority of times. I think the longer the developer stands and oxidizes before development takes place has an impact. I've seen no effect on the developed film from this phenomenon. I think it's kind of cool and smile to myself in the dark when it happens.
Actually I was thinking the opposite: how nice it is that there's somewhere I can post a fairly arcane question and get good natured and meaningful help. My question was answered the same day (post 12) – albeit with some festive cheer in between. (I did do a search but obviously missed the thread you're referring to.)
Thanks for this information. I mix my developer only once everything else is ready; then pour it into the tray, turn out the lights, and reach for my film.
Despite what Hutchings wrote, I'm not wholly convinced that this chemoluminescence doesn't affect the negative. I experienced the phenomenon during a BTZS film test: the negatives had measurably higher FB+F than a repeat test I did later the same day with a water stop bath. Of course it's entirely possible that this may have been due to another factor.
Did you find that the fog was uniform, or greater at denser parts of the negative? I'm new to 8x10, and am seeing some blooming in dense highlights when bordered by thin areas. My lens looks quite clean and am trying to track down its cause.
Do you use a pre-soak, by the way? This is a process that I use, that adds time that the developer is oxidizing.
Please correct me if I am wrong: I thought that one did not use or need stop bath with Pyro.
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?