Help me identify and rectify this staining of FB paper

[Dusty Negative]

Has Ilford got it wrong?(OK a rhetorical question on my part) It says for Art 300 a Stop for 10 secs, Fix for 1 min( it actually strenuously advises against longer than this) and then the Optimum permanence sequence of 5(running water) -10(Ilford washaid with intermittent agitation) -5(running water)

I completely understand your point, and have no good answer for you. It’s of course quite possible the staining is due to an as yet undiscovered reason, and the few successes I’ve had with Super Stopping are actually (happy) anomalies.

I would have to think that, ultimately, even manufacturer’s recommendations are compromises based on a particular workflow and set of conditions. In my case, the recommended development, stop, and fix times were leaving terrible stains. User error? Probably!

 

[pentaxuser]

User error? Yes it might be a possible user error but if so we don't see to have nailed it down to a specific cause and my post was aimed at the general tenor of the responses rather than you as the individual with the problem.

It just struck me that in the list of possible solutions some were a long way from the manufacturer's fairly detailed process. This surely has to be some cause for concern.

Fresh stop seems to have corrected it, I think, so it might be time to start gradually using the Ilford method to see if anything changes for the worst

pentaxuser

 

[NB23]

I have my extensive experience with this paper. After printing more than 500 sheets in a month, and having spent 3 hours a day for more than 30 Years in my Darkroom, I can tell you my tests are conclusive and thorough.

ilford’s recomendations are exact. This paper is halfway between rc and fb. Quicker washes and fix are absolutely fine. Think about it: the paper reacts fast and is extra sensitive to chemicals, which means that is washes faster as well. The exchange is quick.

Yes, this paper will always leave a yellow residual hypo stain vs other papers, but let’s not forget that even Kodak warned against the issue, basically they said that different kinds of paper left different kinds of stains as being acceptably washed. For some of their old papers, a faint yellow stain was perfectly normal while for other papers there should be no detectable stain for the paper to be accepted as hypo free. I had this text somewhere and it was a revelation.

The stop bath: it becomes saturated by developer. For any paper, a half-saturated stop bath will be acceptable enough. But not for ilford300. Think about it: the “stop bath” is not a “stop bath” anymore. It has merely become a “very light” developer bath. As so, there is always a danger of the residual developer going into competition against the now weakened fixer and create a the stains you see.

At last, a quick fix bath is fine. Remember, this paper reacts fast to any liquid/chemical, including watercolors.

Remember:
-the stop bath has to be strong and fresh, which in turn protects the fixer and enables a proper fix.
- a quicker was is fine. Remember, this paper reacts fast.
-it’s all on the surface, no sponge.

 

[pentaxuser]

NB23, what does this translate into in terms of how many, say, 8x10 prints can be adequately stopped before either a dump some and replenish method or dump all and start again?

Thanks

pentaxuser

 

[NB23]

NB23, what does this translate into in terms of how many, say, 8x10 prints can be adequately stopped before either a dump some and replenish method or dump all and start again?
Thanks

pentaxuser

For art300, new stop every session

 

[MattKing]

The Art 300 may carry over more developer into the stop than other papers do, and that may result in more developer ending up in the fixer.
I've never seen this recommended, but perhaps the Ilford 300 would benefit from two stop baths..
And speaking more generally, I'm not sure you can expect to rely on Ilford time recommendations with non-Ilford chemicals. As an example, the Sprint stop bath may be less acidic than the Ilford stop bath.
And in general, I don't recommend keeping citric acid based stop baths after a session - stuff likes to grow in them. That includes Ilfostop and I assume, the Sprint stop bath.
The acetic acid based Kodak indicator stop bath may smell more strongly, but as it tends to inhibit bacterial growth, it can be kept until the next session.

 

[pentaxuser]

For art300, new stop every session

So that's one session and dump and thus a stop bath can cope with all the prints you could do in one session which might be say 4-5 hours i.e. the stop bath's use is time related more than it is number of prints related?

Thanks

pentaxuser

 

[removed account4]

sorry for the detour
is art300 what became of their "portfolio" papers ?

 

[MattKing]

sorry for the detour
is art300 what became of their "portfolio" papers ?

No - Portfolio is double weight RC, and I believe has been re-introduced in some sizes.
Art 300 is emulsion coated on a heavy watercolour paper, without a Baryta sub-coat.

 

[Dusty Negative]

She is a very attractive young woman, and you have captured her quite well.

Good Luck

Very kind. Thank you.

 

[bambiwallace]

Our school has been using Sprint chemistry exclusively for almost 40 years and have had no issues with it. You can actually call them and trouble shoot; they're a great company. I much prefer their wetting agent to photo-flo.

Last week one of my students had the exact problem with the art 300 paper. She ended up dumping the stop and fix, washed out the trays thoroughly and started over with fresh chemistry. Problem solved. fix 1:9

Something else about the art 300 paper we have noticed is it doesn't last all that long. I wish paper manufactures would date when the paper was made. Our lab was shut down for six months last year. The student's paper (art 300) was a new, unopened box and fine in March, and had fogged by September. We have noticed that the paper seem to fog in stages. First, the base has a slight pink cast and within the same semester it is gray fog. It was properly stored and using anti-fog didn't really help enough.

I completely understand your point, and have no good answer for you. It’s of course quite possible the staining is due to an as yet undiscovered reason, and the few successes I’ve had with Super Stopping are actually (happy) anomalies.

I would have to think that, ultimately, even manufacturer’s recommendations are compromises based on a particular workflow and set of conditions. In my case, the recommended development, stop, and fix times were leaving terrible stains. User error? Probably!

 

[NB23]

Our school has been using Sprint chemistry exclusively for almost 40 years and have had no issues with it. You can actually call them and trouble shoot; they're a great company. I much prefer their wetting agent to photo-flo.

Last week one of my students had the exact problem with the art 300 paper. She ended up dumping the stop and fix, washed out the trays thoroughly and started over with fresh chemistry. Problem solved. fix 1:9

Something else about the art 300 paper we have noticed is it doesn't last all that long. I wish paper manufactures would date when the paper was made. Our lab was shut down for six months last year. The student's paper (art 300) was a new, unopened box and fine in March, and had fogged by September. We have noticed that the paper seem to fog in stages. First, the base has a slight pink cast and within the same semester it is gray fog. It was properly stored and using anti-fog didn't really help enough.

I’m not sure it does’t age well. I’ve had a box sitting for 5 years and it was ok.

What I believe you might have experienced was the paper reacting to unfresh chemistry and you translated it to unfresh paper.

i’ve had the same thing happen: the start of the box was marvelous, and as I was going through it, it got foggier and funnier by the sheet. I suspected all sorts of scenarios of how the paper could have aged within the box, maybe sitting on a warm surface thus making the last sheets even foggier. But no, the problem all along was an aging stop bath and aging fixer.

 

[Dusty Negative]

Something else about the art 300 paper we have noticed is it doesn't last all that long. I wish paper manufactures would date when the paper was made. Our lab was shut down for six months last year. The student's paper (art 300) was a new, unopened box and fine in March, and had fogged by September. We have noticed that the paper seem to fog in stages. First, the base has a slight pink cast and within the same semester it is gray fog. It was properly stored and using anti-fog didn't really help enough.

I'm finally coming to the end of a box I opened sometime in the early stages of the pandemic...so....maybe one year or even more. I haven't had *that* particular issue. I keep the paper in my basement darkroom, so even during the summer it doesn't get above ~74 deg Fahrenheit.

 

[Don_ih]

Regarding Art300 paper, I just recently used some of mine properly and took note of what happened. I was previously using two baths TF3 fixer with water as a stop bath - that does not even come close to working with Art300.
So, I just switched to regular fixer (again 2 bath) and acid stop. In freshly made acid stop, the art300 paper actively bubbles for almost 2 minutes. Streams of bubbles from the edges and bubbles from the field of the paper, as well. So, I imagine in addition to the staining seen on the edges, there is likely staining in the field of the photo in some instances, when the developer is not fully stopped. I think it would be ideal to rinse the paper before fixing. However, I did that with a sheet and didn't do it with a sheet and didn't see any difference.

 

[Dusty Negative]

Regarding Art300 paper, I just recently used some of mine properly and took note of what happened. I was previously using two baths TF3 fixer with water as a stop bath - that does not even come close to working with Art300.
So, I just switched to regular fixer (again 2 bath) and acid stop. In freshly made acid stop, the art300 paper actively bubbles for almost 2 minutes. Streams of bubbles from the edges and bubbles from the field of the paper, as well. So, I imagine in addition to the staining seen on the edges, there is likely staining in the field of the photo in some instances, when the developer is not fully stopped. I think it would be ideal to rinse the paper before fixing. However, I did that with a sheet and didn't do it with a sheet and didn't see any difference.

Thanks for that follow-up, Don. For what it’s worth, I’m now a good 1/2 year or more into this topic of Art 300, and I can continue to second NB23’s assessment. I’ll write out my routine (inspired by him) for future readers of this post:

*IF* you are having staining issues with this paper, and *IF* you wish for an “excellent” result using Photographer’s Formulary Residual Hypo Test Solution, then consider the following routine:

1. Use fresh chemistry when you’re ready to make a “keeper.”
2. Stop for at least 60 seconds. (I do 120).
3. Fix in film-strength fixer (1:4) for 60 seconds.
4. Wash in briskly running water for 5 mins.
5. Use hypo clear for 10-15 minutes.
6. Wash in warm (20 C) water for 60 minutes.

I am aware that this does not fully gibe with the Ilford data sheet. No, I cannot explain this.

I am aware this could be predicated on my water supply (Ph, or minerals, or whatever), or an erroneous/misplaced emphasis on the “excellent” result for the hypo test.

But, after many, many ruined prints (with visible staining), or prints that failed the hypo test, this is what is consistently working for me. Hopefully that is helpful to someone.