Mr Bill
Member
- Joined
- Aug 22, 2006
- Messages
- 1,436
- Format
- Multi Format
Where to start... (or continue?)...
A brief diversion into Brian's link to "regenerate fixer," etc., using zinc dust to remove silver. That was once used, I don't know how commonly, in the US to precipitate silver, etc. The big issue, in my view, is the zinc added to your effluent stream (it's probably preferable to put iron in there). But it also takes time to let it settle out, then substantially dry. (Yeah, I've spent time in rubber boots and my MSA mask, shoveling out the zinc sludge from large settling tanks, mid-1970s.) In the US today, if they knew you were dumping zinc they would probably regulate it in your sewering permit.
in any case one will not be able to, per the linked patent, successfully regenerate conventional C-41 fixer in this, or similar, manner. The main issue is buildup of iodide ion which drastically slows down the rate of fixation in conventional C-41 fixer (yeah, I've been there also, desilvering and regenerating C-41 fixer, several hundred gallons, as a trial). It's possible to reuse limited amounts, but all things considered it's probably preferable to, uh, do different things (too many angles to cover here, etc.).
Back to the case at hand, and Koraks' brief analysis of available silver... I did a brief "back of the envelope" reality check on "available silver." I concur that his numbers for photo PAPER are probably pretty close; they sorta agree with what we (where I used to work) used to recover, in very rough numbers. But... PAPER is not the issue here. However, he is guessing at the silver content of FILM as a factor of that in PAPER. I think his guess for FILM is too low, at least for the films of 20 years ago. Today's films may possibly be significantly lower due perhaps to use of things like so-called antenna dyes and 2-electron sensitization, etc. If I had to make a guess on silver content of current films, I'd guess somewhere between koraks' guess and double that number. (In the past, when I was involved in photolab work, we would actually measure the recoverable silver in our materials, then compare our actual physically recovered silver against this.) But in this case I'm just guessing. Anyway, it looks to me like a lot of silver is being "left on the table," so to speak.
But none of this is really relevant to the OP's original question.
A brief diversion into Brian's link to "regenerate fixer," etc., using zinc dust to remove silver. That was once used, I don't know how commonly, in the US to precipitate silver, etc. The big issue, in my view, is the zinc added to your effluent stream (it's probably preferable to put iron in there). But it also takes time to let it settle out, then substantially dry. (Yeah, I've spent time in rubber boots and my MSA mask, shoveling out the zinc sludge from large settling tanks, mid-1970s.) In the US today, if they knew you were dumping zinc they would probably regulate it in your sewering permit.
in any case one will not be able to, per the linked patent, successfully regenerate conventional C-41 fixer in this, or similar, manner. The main issue is buildup of iodide ion which drastically slows down the rate of fixation in conventional C-41 fixer (yeah, I've been there also, desilvering and regenerating C-41 fixer, several hundred gallons, as a trial). It's possible to reuse limited amounts, but all things considered it's probably preferable to, uh, do different things (too many angles to cover here, etc.).
Back to the case at hand, and Koraks' brief analysis of available silver... I did a brief "back of the envelope" reality check on "available silver." I concur that his numbers for photo PAPER are probably pretty close; they sorta agree with what we (where I used to work) used to recover, in very rough numbers. But... PAPER is not the issue here. However, he is guessing at the silver content of FILM as a factor of that in PAPER. I think his guess for FILM is too low, at least for the films of 20 years ago. Today's films may possibly be significantly lower due perhaps to use of things like so-called antenna dyes and 2-electron sensitization, etc. If I had to make a guess on silver content of current films, I'd guess somewhere between koraks' guess and double that number. (In the past, when I was involved in photolab work, we would actually measure the recoverable silver in our materials, then compare our actual physically recovered silver against this.) But in this case I'm just guessing. Anyway, it looks to me like a lot of silver is being "left on the table," so to speak.
But none of this is really relevant to the OP's original question.