Fixer dilution for prints

[Pieter12]

I have been following the data sheet for the fixer I use and diluting it 1+7 for prints. I haven't had any problems show in the prints I have made, but none are over 5 years old. I recently saw a recommendation to use fixer at 1+4 for prints using a slot processor (which is what I use). I wonder why the recommendation of a stronger mix and does it really make a difference? I do not use the 2-fix method as I have been told by a master printer it doesn't really make a difference.

 

[Donald Qualls]

What fixer are you using?

 

[Pieter12]

ECO PRO neutral fixer.

 

[Doremus Scudder]

Pieter,

There are basically two strategies for using modern rapid fixers. Ilford promotes the use of a stronger dilution of fixer, shorter fixing times, and, subsequently, shorter wash times.

The more "traditional" approach is to use the fixer in the weaker "print-strength" dilution, fix for longer and wash longer.

Note that if you use RC papers, the issue is largely moot - just use a stronger dilution, fix lots of prints (follow the manufacturers' capacity recommendations) and be done with it.

The real questions arise when using fiber-base paper.

When fiber-base paper is fixed, fixer, along with all the fixing by-products created during fixation, soak into the paper base. These can be hard to wash out. The two strategies above are two different ways to deal with this, along with the use of two-bath fixation and the use of a wash-aid (Kodak Hypo Clearing Agent, Ilford Wash Aid or similar).

The Ilford Archival Sequence is described here: https://www.ilfordphoto.com/ilford-optimum-permanance-wash-sequence-fb-papers/
Basically, you fix for a shorter time (1 min.) run fewer prints through your fixer (10 8x10s per liter with one-bath fixation) and get to wash for a shorter time. The advantages are that the process is fast and saves water.

The more traditional approach is to use the weaker dilution of fix (1+9 for Ilford products 1+7 for Kodak Rapid Fixer), use two fixing baths, fix for longer and wash for longer. The advantages here are that it is more economical and you don't have to worry about overshooting the 60-second limit on fixing time.

Personally, I prefer the latter method. I fix for 1.5 - 2 minutes in the "print-strength" fixer, rinse for five minutes, use a wash aid and then wash for 60 minutes.

Hope this helps,

Doremus

 

[Pieter12]

For FB paper, I currently fix for 3 min. with 1+7 fixer, wash aid for 10 min, and wash in an archival washer for 45 min. I pretty much do the same except for the wash aid and washing for RC, but I only use those as reference work prints and scanning to catalog and post. I think I may switch to 1+4 for the fixer in the future.

 

[Doremus Scudder]

Rinse before your wash-aid step if you want to get the most out of it.

If you want to ensure adequate (archival) fixation, use two-bath fixation for fiber-base prints or keep the capacity down.

The above applied to fiber-base prints; RC is like film as far as fixing is concerned.

Best,

Doremus

 

[R.Gould]

Ilford suggest fixing FB prints in film strength fixer, (1/4 for their own fixer) then a HCA bath followed by a normal wash, they say that the 1 minute in film strength fixer makes the fixer easier to wash out as the paper won't have absorbed as much as 2 minutes in standard strength (1/9 in their own brands)
Richard

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

I prefer to use Ilford's method of fixing and washing. A strong rapid fix, for a short time, followed by rinse, HCA, then fill/soak/dump wash method in a tray. Very efficient. At the school where I teach photography, we use a more dilute Ilford rapid fix, with RC papers.

 

[Mr Bill]

I do not use the 2-fix method as I have been told by a master printer it doesn't really make a difference.

The main difference, seen by smaller-scale users, is that you can substantially reduce the amount of fixer used. If you process enough material that silver recovery is significant, OR if your effluent is stringently regulated, then multi-stage fixing systems are pretty much needed.

What two-stage fixing does is to concentrate the silver in the first bath, leaving a significantly lower concentration in the second bath. So when you move your paper from the fixer into the wash, less silver "escapes" into the wash water. Now, you could also keep fixer from "escaping" to the wash in a single-bath system by using the fixer much more lightly (meaning more fixer is used), but... the silver concentration will be too low for efficient recovery.

Bottom line - the benefit of two (or more) fixer stages are primarily economic.

Sorry, no answer to your actual question. But whatever Doremus says, in my experience you can pretty much count on it to be correct.

 

[NB23]

I have been following the data sheet for the fixer I use and diluting it 1+7 for prints. I haven't had any problems show in the prints I have made, but none are over 5 years old. I recently saw a recommendation to use fixer at 1+4 for prints using a slot processor (which is what I use). I wonder why the recommendation of a stronger mix and does it really make a difference? I do not use the 2-fix method as I have been told by a master printer it doesn't really make a difference.

I’m always curious, what is a “master printer”? Is it they giving themselves that name? Or do they show a nice print to someone and that other person decides to call them a “master printer”?
What does it take to be a “master printer”? Pay an association a yearly fee? Buy a diploma?
I’ve printed 20,000 prints so far, from april 2020 until today, and I’m about 50k prints so far, ever. For what level do I qualify?

I’m genuinely curious.

For fixing, the 2-bath method has always been a standard.

 

[NB23]

The 1+7 is typically a kodak definition.

The ilford litterature that comes in every ilford paper box is thorough and clear.

 

[Pieter12]

I’m always curious, what is a “master printer”? Is it they giving themselves that name? Or do they show a nice print to someone and that other person decides to call them a “master printer”?
What does it take to be a “master printer”? Pay an association a yearly fee? Buy a diploma?
I’ve printed 20,000 prints so far, from april 2020 until today, and I’m about 50k prints so far, ever. For what level do I qualify?

I’m genuinely curious.

For fixing, the 2-bath method has always been a standard.

There is no real designation or certificate (well, maybe in parts of Europe where certification is more common), but for me a master printer is one who makes exhibition-quality prints (often for a living, working in a custom lab), with years of experience and skill. The number of prints made is not really relevant if they are mediocre. Such a printer will be expert at techniques beyond just doing and burning, such as masking, bleaching, toning, flashing.

 

[focus_on_infinity]

I noticed that TF-5 says to use 1:4 dilution for both film and prints. It freaked me out a bit, but then I realized that it probably doesn't really make any difference since it's a process that is basically done to completeion, anyway.

If I'm using the same dilution, is there any reason to separate my film fixer from my print fixer?

 

[MattKing]

If I'm using the same dilution, is there any reason to separate my film fixer from my print fixer?

Keep them separate.
You don't want the residue from fixing film on paper, and you don't want the residue from paper on film.
In particular, you don't want any fibres from fibre based prints on your film.

 

[koraks]

I'm using the same dilution, is there any reason to separate my film fixer from my print fixer?

Fixer used on film contains trace amounts of iodide which slows down fixer. Hence, using fixer that has already been used for film for paper is not a great idea. It will work, but fixing action may be slower. I've personally never had issues with paper fiber in fixer, but it's wise to play safe if you value your negatives.