As for this, I probably should have been more specific. The fixer I usually use for film contains 220-250 grams of Sodium Thiosulfate and 25-30 grams of Sodium Sulfite per 1 liter of solution. I mix it on my own. I hope this makes more sense.What do you mean by "Hypo".
A very long time ago, what is now known as sodium thiosulfate was often referred to as sodium hyposulfate - thus the nickname "hypo".
In more recent years, I've seen "hypo" used confusingly when the writer meant Kodak's washaid, Hypo Clearing Agent, which itself is mostly Sodium Sulfite.
You don't need a washaid for RC paper. You really benefit from it with fibre paper, and it is useful with film.
I actually found a recipe on here and it works well for the film.I expect that that fixer will be fine, but as I don't mix my own, I'll let others comment on the recipe, if necessary.
If I recall correctly, it means using two baths with the same solution and while first bath exhausts, the second one is preserve for a much longer time. Is that right, or am I lost in translation again?A plain sodium thiosulfate based fixer would be a good candidate for two bath fixing.
You use both baths to fix each print.If I recall correctly, it means using two baths with the same solution and while first bath exhausts, the second one is preserve for a much longer time. Is that right, or am I lost in translation again?
FB is substantially more expensive than RC and for me it would be irrational to straight up start with that paper. It seems to me that there's a lot of trial and error in traditional printing, all of which takes resources. Surely it's better to accumulate at least some sort of practical knowledge before spending more money.There are probably others here who can give you guidance on the fix times and capacities, although you may find that a lot of people who mix their own fixer use more fibre paper than RC.
I would post that thread (about the fixer) in the general Black and White film and chemistry sub-forum.
I still can't wrap my head around split-grade printing, maybe it's something "for later", but I will regardless invest in filters.Another alternative, however, is split-grade printing. The idea here is to use two filters, and vary the exposure through each to achieve intermediate contrast grades. Many people use this printing method. For this, you only need the #00 and the #5 filter or, alternately a sharp-cut blue and green filter.
And thank you, I didn't know that much! Ilford is pretty much the only option over here, so I'll just go with its Multigrade filter set.If you use filters below the lens, or between the negative and the lens, they need to be of optical quality (like the Ilford MG filters or Kodak Wratten gel filters). If between the light source and the negative, optical quality is not needed.
If you live in the county of Georgia and not in the state of Georgia in the U.S you can see if you buy Salvich paper, I think they are still in business, Russian or Ukraine? Last time I was able to buy, Salvich had a nice line of graded paper, grade 2, 3, and 4, matt and glossy, fiber based and maybe RC. I liked their fiber based papers. With graded papers no need for filters, but you might to keep all three grades on hand to match a negative to the contrast grade you think best matches for given print.
any rapid non-hardening fixer will work for both, films and paper but, it is wise to keep separate baths for film and paper to keep the baths clean. any filter set will probably work but, I would get the set from the paper manufacturer whose paper I use.Hello,
I just can't stop creating more and more problems for my own self, so this time I intend to start printing the traditional way, which employs enlarger and all the corresponding gear. However, as someone who has never done this before, I'm still fumbling in the dark. I found answers to most questions online, while some remained unanswered, so I hope for your assistance. Here goes:
1. I usually use a fixer which contains Hypo + Sodium Sulfite for fixing my negatives. Will this solution work for RC paper as well, or do I have to invest in an actual fixer with some fancy name on it?
2. Printing on variable contrast paper. Let's say, I'm using Multigrade IV (or V if you wish) paper without filters. Will contrast grade in that case be 2? Did I get it right?
3. Multigrade filters - do I need them at all? If yes, then there are several options on the market, some are ancient with yellow-only filters, probably for earlier generation of paper. Others are newer, with purple and red-ish. There's even an "educational set" by Ilford which looks more red than any other filter set. Surely not all will be suitable for me, so which one to get, if any at all?
Thank you in advance.
Thank you,any rapid non-hardening fixer will work for both, films and paper but, it is wise to keep separate baths for film and paper to keep the baths clean. any filter set will probably work but, I would get the set from the paper manufacturer whose paper I use.
Also "Hypo" may be used for a Fixer, whereas a fixer contains more than just sodium thiosulfate.What do you mean by "Hypo".
A very long time ago, what is now known as sodium thiosulfate was often referred to as sodium hyposulfate - thus the nickname "hypo".
In more recent years, I've seen "hypo" used confusingly when the writer meant Kodak's washaid, Hypo Clearing Agent, which itself is mostly Sodium Sulfite.
Ilford filters our a good choice.Thank you,
Sodium Thio fixers don't seem to be hardening, but on the other hand, they're not exactly rapid either. I will surely have separate baths for everything (I wash my film in developing tank anyway). And yes, I will definitely go for Ilford option with filters, because it's the only one available for a reasonable price, locally.
I think you may have misunderstood me.FB is substantially more expensive than RC and for me it would be irrational to straight up start with that paper. It seems to me that there's a lot of trial and error in traditional printing, all of which takes resources. Surely it's better to accumulate at least some sort of practical knowledge before spending more money.
My apologies, I definitely misundersood the meaning of your previous post. There seems to be too many variables when it comes to the paper, so everyone does their own calculations based on their practice.I think you may have misunderstood me.
My observation about those who mix their own fixer using fibre paper was intended to warn you that you need to be careful about recommendations from those who use similar fixer, because if their fixing time and capacity numbers are based on fibre paper, they will be incorrect for RC paper.
I'll try to. I have a fair amount of second thoughts, but there's no way back.Have fun with your new adventure!
John
I don't want to disappoint you, but Ilfospeed filters may work very differently from Ilford multigrade filters.Hello and thank you. I actually got NOS off of Ebay UK. It reads Ilfospeed, so must be fairly old, but looks adequate (unfaded).
Hello and thank you. I actually got NOS off of Ebay UK. It reads Ilfospeed, so must be fairly old, but looks adequate (unfaded).
A new current set of MG filters is not that expensive, you should have spent more wisely. Buying outdated anything is false economy, it will nearly always cost more in the long run.
I don't want to disappoint you, but Ilfospeed filters may work very differently from Ilford multigrade filters.
They are probably different colours than what the papers are designed for.
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?