Hardening or non-hardening fixer for 40-year old Plus-X and Tri-X?

[PhilBurton]

I'm the guy with the 60+ rolls of Plus-X and Tri-X that are still in my freezer from the 1970s, and I've learned (or remembered) a whole lot from reading this forum.

My latest question: I keep reading that "modern" film doesn't need hardening fixer. Is my 40+ year old film "modern?" Back when, I used Kodak fixer and didn't give it a thought, and probably didn't even know about non-hardening fixers. If I buy some Tri-X now to practice my processing techniques, does that film need non-hardening fixer?

Also, I have read that Ilford (?) non-hardening fixer doesn't contain "hypo." So is regular Hypo Clearing Agent effective with such fixers? Is it even needed?

Phil Burton

 

[Pentode]

As long as you’re careful while the emulsion is wet you should be okay with non-hardening fixer. It only has an effect until the emulsion dries anyway.

That said, old-fashioned Kodak hardening fixer is cheap as dirt and it won’t hurt anything if you use it, so why not? You’ve got a lot of old film to use it up on.

I use Heico Perma Wash, which performs the same function as Kodak Hypo Clearing Agent, with both traditional, hardening sodium thiosulfate and rapid, non-hardening ammonium thiosulfate fixers. As I understand it, it helps to make the thiosulfate more soluble, reducing washing times.

 

[PhilBurton]

As long as you’re careful while the emulsion is wet you should be okay with non-hardening fixer. It only has an effect until the emulsion dries anyway.

That said, old-fashioned Kodak hardening fixer is cheap as dirt and it won’t hurt anything if you use it, so why not? You’ve got a lot of old film to use it up on.

I use Heico Perma Wash, which performs the same function as Kodak Hypo Clearing Agent, with both traditional, hardening sodium thiosulfate and rapid, non-hardening ammonium thiosulfate fixers. As I understand it, it helps to make the thiosulfate more soluble, reducing washing times.

@Pentode Thanks for this suggestion. Maybe it's my outdated loyalty to Kodak, a/k/a Great Yellow Father, but I was going to use both Kodak fixer and Kodak HCA. For my "big developing project" I have to buy all new chemistry anyway, and I guess it's going to be Heico and maybe Ilford Rapid Fixer. I like the idea of liquid concentrate in plastic bottles. More convenient than mixing up a gallon of powder.

 

[MattKing]

Buy Kodak Rapid Fixer. The hardener comes with it in a separate bottle B. That allows you to add it or not, as the need arises.
I don't add it to the fixer. I use it separately when I sepia tone prints, which renders them vulnerable to physical damage.

Also, I have read that Ilford (?) non-hardening fixer doesn't contain "hypo." So is regular Hypo Clearing Agent effective with such fixers? Is it even needed?

"Hypo" refers to sodium hyposulphate, which is an out of date and old fashioned name for sodium thiosulphate. Sodium thiosulphate is normal, non-rapid fixer. Ammonium thiosulphate is rapid fixer.
When Hypo Clearing agent was created, the most commonly used fixer was the sodium based version. I would argue that today rapid fixers are much more common.
Whichever version you use, a wash-aid can benefit you. For historical reasons, Kodak still calls their wash-aid Hypo Clearing Agent, when Fixer Clearing Agent might be more accurate.

 

[reddesert]

I'm the guy with the 60+ rolls of Plus-X and Tri-X that are still in my freezer from the 1970s, and I've learned (or remembered) a whole lot from reading this forum.

My latest question: I keep reading that "modern" film doesn't need hardening fixer. Is my 40+ year old film "modern?" Back when, I used Kodak fixer and didn't give it a thought, and probably didn't even know about non-hardening fixers. If I buy some Tri-X now to practice my processing techniques, does that film need non-hardening fixer?

Also, I have read that Ilford (?) non-hardening fixer doesn't contain "hypo." So is regular Hypo Clearing Agent effective with such fixers? Is it even needed?

You can fix today's Tri-X (or any other major film) in a hardening fixer just fine. The Plus-X from the 1970s is almost surely a "modern" emulsion by these standards as well.

Ammonium thiosulfate = rapid. Sodium thiosulfate = non-rapid.
Either of these can be used in a hardening or non-hardening fixer.

"Hypo" as Matt explained is an old and misleading name for sodium thiosulfate. You can and should use Kodak HCA, Perma Wash, or other wash aids after either type of fixer. A reason to avoid hardening fixer is that it makes the fixer take longer to wash out, but truthfully, this likely matters more for fiber base prints and not so much for film, which does not take as long to wash.

 

[Alan9940]

Personally, I use two film stocks regularly--Foma 100 and EFKE 25--that seem to fare better using a hardening fixer. To keep things simple, I use hardening fixer for all films. FWIW, I have 40 year old LF negatives that saw hardening fixer and all are in good shape today. If you wash properly, I don't think use of a hardening fixer is an issue.

 

[Pentode]

Maybe it's my outdated loyalty to Kodak, a/k/a Great Yellow Father

There is definitely something comforting in that color....

like the idea of liquid concentrate in plastic bottles. More convenient than mixing up a gallon of powder.

Another benefit is shelf life. I stopped using Kodak Fixer (F5) not only because it was a pain to mix a gallon at a time, but also because I wasn't using it fast enough to get through an entire gallon before some of it went bad. With liquid rapid fixers you can mix a Liter at a time, that liter tends to last longer than the F5 fixer in solution and the concentrate lasts a really, really long time. A win-win. Then add the facts that fixing is faster and wash times are shorter and, well, you get the idea. I initially switched to Kodak Rapid because I used the hardener for Foma films (as Foma recommends) but I've since switched to Ilford because it's much less expensive and works as well as anything else I've used. I only useKodak w/ hardener now for Foma and Ilford for all my other films. Honestly, I suspect that all ammonium thiosulfate-based, liquid, rapid fixers are more or less the same so you could base your decision on local availability or price without sacrificing any performance.

As for Heico... I use it because it's cheap. It seems to work fine and it's inexpensive. I've never done any archival testing of any kind and I've never used Kodak HCA so I can't make any comparison. My 25-year-old negatives are still holding up okay. That's about as scientific as I can get.