Hypo

veke · Nov 23, 2015

Hi! Been developing films using Tmax developer and Hypam fixer, do I need HCA, Washaid or is careful washing enough?
When using Hypam with Multigrade papers (resin coated) I recall that HCA is not advised. With films, do I use or not?

Ian Grant · Nov 23, 2015

Wash aid isn't really needed with films and resin coated papers. It's more important with Fibre based papers where the intermediary silver-thiosulphate complexes formed during fixing can bond weakly with the cellulose in the paper base making them difficult to wash out.

So yes careful washing is enough.

Ian

bernard_L · Nov 23, 2015

careful washing

http://www.ilfordphoto.com/Webfiles/200629163442455.pdf
see bottom right of page 10
http://www.largeformatphotography.info/unicolor/ilfwash.pdf
"In my opinion the photographers community has developed over the years a false but very obsessive position according to which a proper washing cannot be achieved without leaving the film plenty of time under a waterfall. "
quoted from:
http://www.largeformatphotography.info/unicolor/com_rolf.html

Propagating an internet rumor is easier than performing and documenting proper tests. So, you will find all kinds of discussions, like, one should wait 5min before each water change, and why not do it, etc...
Just don't use a hardening fixer.

Terry Christian · Nov 23, 2015

Veke:
Please forgive me if I come across as too stern here, but I must ensure one thing is made clear:

Hypo is not HCA.
Hypo = fixer.
HCA = washaid = hypo clearing agent, which means that it helps to clear hypo, i.e., helps to remove hypo (fixer) from film and paper.

Confusing the two is a colossal mistake and I just want to make sure you don't do it.

RalphLambrecht · Nov 23, 2015

Ian Grant said:
Wash aid isn't really needed with films and resin coated papers. It's more important with Fibre based papers where the intermediary silver-thiosulphate complexes formed during fixing can bond weakly with the cellulose in the paper base making them difficult to wash out.

So yes careful washing is enough.

Ian

agreed but a washing aid doesn't hurt like a hypo eliminator would. I still use a wash aid for film and RC paper as I measured a reduced washing time with it.

RalphLambrecht · Nov 23, 2015

Terry Christian said:
Veke:
Please forgive me if I come across as too stern here, but I must ensure one thing is made clear:

Hypo is not HCA.
Hypo = fixer.
HCA = washaid = hypo clearing agent, which means that it helps to clear hypo, i.e., helps to remove hypo (fixer) from film and paper.

Confusing the two is a colossal mistake and I just want to make sure you don't do it.

+1

SMBooth · Nov 23, 2015

RalphLambrecht said:
agreed but a washing aid doesn't hurt like a hypo eliminator would. I still use a wash aid for film and RC paper as I measured a reduced washing time with it.

What the difference between a wash aid, and hypo eliminator? I assume they were the same thing.

Sirius Glass · Nov 23, 2015

SMBooth said:
What the difference between a wash aid, and hypo eliminator? I assume they were the same thing.

A wash aid helps eliminate water streaking the film.
Hypo eliminator or Hypo Clearing Agent [HCA] removes some of the hypo from a print before the print is washed.

The two are not the same.

Ron789 · Nov 23, 2015

I always used wash aid for my films but I recently stopped doing so. Instead I now do a final rinse in demineralized water. Much better! With wash aid I would sometimes still have stains / streaks on the film. But now my films are 100% clean.
When using RC paper you really don't need HCA; good washing is enough.

MartinP · Nov 23, 2015

So far as I know, there are no more Hypo-eliminators being produced. They are not the same as a washaid/hypo-clearing-agent for various chemical reasons that I don't remember. The HCA products were preferable in use, as a minute trace of fixer residues is somehow beneficial, and so continue in production. Again, I was taught this decades ago and am not going to spend the evening Googling for an original research paper.

This refers to Sirius Glass' post at #8 above.... In British-English usage, a wetting-agent to reduce streaking on film is not called a washaid, it is a wetting-agent. The usage of the term 'washaid' appears to be different in US-English. It is going to get very confusing.

As Ian Grant says, in #2 above, a hypo-clearing-agent is of most value when washing fibre-based papers as it will save time, save water and can result in an archivally improved print if used correctly.

SMBooth · Nov 23, 2015

Sirius Glass said:
A wash aid helps eliminate water streaking the film.
Hypo eliminator or Hypo Clearing Agent [HCA] removes some of the hypo from a print before the print is washed.

The two are not the same.

Ah, brain fade. Yes I use wash aid (photo flo)for my film. What was I thinking.

MattKing · Nov 23, 2015

To emphasize:

Photoflo and the like are not wash-aids - they are wetting agents or, for some, rinse-aids.

Hypo Clearing Agent and the like are wash-aids. They improve the efficacy of washing.

Hypo Eiminator is no longer made. Historically, it was used to eliminate entirely all traces of fixer a.k.a. sodium thiosulfate (the correct name for what was historically referred to coloquially as "hypo") from photographic materials. They don't make it any more, because they discovered that trace amounts of fixer actually extend the life of prints.

Gerald C Koch · Nov 24, 2015

At one time Kodak published a formula for a hypo eliminator HE-1. It was a mixture of aqueous ammonia and hydrogen peroxide used as dilute solutions. As Matt mentions it was latter found that prints so treated faded faster than untreated ones. Further research discovered that small amounts of thiosulfate acted like sulfide toner in preserving the silver image. This finding resulted in such products as Agfa Sistan which do not effect image tone.

veke · Nov 24, 2015

Thank you all, so careful washing is enough to wash all the remains of the fixer (hypo). Hypo clearing agent and Wash aid can be used to save water and time, but water is enough.

Xmas · Nov 24, 2015

If you have soft faucet water you may not need a surfant to avoid drying marks.

If you don't use Kodak HCA (or a clone) you need to do it religious by time and temperature, cause washing is temperature dependent.

If you in water conservation use HCA and Ilford's water conservation technique it on on their site.

Moving the water past the film is important just like agitation during development.

Fixing is time, temperature and fixer exhaution dependent and needs agitation...

Paul Howell · Nov 24, 2015

Gerald C Koch said:
At one time Kodak published a formula for a hypo eliminator HE-1. It was a mixture of aqueous ammonia and hydrogen peroxide used as dilute solutions. As Matt mentions it was latter found that prints so treated faded faster than untreated ones. Further research discovered that small amounts of thiosulfate acted like sulfide toner in preserving the silver image. This finding resulted in such products as Agfa Sistan which do not effect image tone.

The formula is 16 oz water, 4oz 3% hydrogen peroxide and 5 oz ammonia, mix right before use and discard after use. While in college in the 60s we use HE, none of the prints I made are faded, it could cause a shift in tone with some papers. At the time the my standard process for double wt paper was 2 mint wash, 2 mints Kodak Hypo Clearing agent, 20 mint wash, 6 mint HE, 10 mint wash, followed by toner and follow up wash. HE did not reduce wash time, eliminated last traces of fix from fb paper. I am not sure when Kodak stopped recommending it. After college I was a photographer in the Air Force, I don't recall ever seeing a tech order using HE.

If you use a alkaline fixer no need for wash aid at all.

M Carter · Nov 24, 2015

I'm a cheapskate - I keep a grocery store container of plain salt and a big jar of sodium sulphite powder and mix my wash aid as needed. If I'm printing and toning same day, I'll bottle it during the interim steps, my understanding is it has a couple hours tray life.

Sodium sulfite is cheap in decent quantities and is available in bigger grocery stores and outdoor shops - I guess it's a popular preservative for home canning and such. And salt is about 50 cents a pound. (Got this info from Tim Rudman's Lith Printing book). I always do a residual hypo test and my prints come clean pretty quickly, usually 20 minutes wash post salt mixture.

But I don't use it with film, just fiber paper.

miha · Nov 25, 2015

Does anybody know when exactly was recognized that hypo eliminators do more damage than good? I have a Darkroom Book by The Morgan & Morgan from 1980 with Grant Haist beeing one of the authors. The book still advise the use of a hypo eliminator.

Paul Howell · Nov 25, 2015

Good question, I don't recall reading any definitive statement or rational from either Kodak or Ilford. AS late as 70s HE was recommended by several authors, Lester Bogen, among others although I recall that in the last edition of The Print Ansell Adams recommended against it. John Carroll in the 1974 update of Wall and Jordan Photographic Facts and Formulas state "In general, the problem of washing negatives is not a difficult one, the archival permanence can with routine washing, without using a hypo eliminator. The main value of hypo eliminator is in prints, papers tend to absorb the thisofulfate complexes to the fibers of the print, rather than in the gelatin of the emulsion coating. The most commonly recommended formulas fro hypo elimination in printing contain and ammonia and hydrogen peroxide. The treatment in this bath is followed by thorough washing and is not intended as a time saver."

MattKing · Nov 25, 2015

miha said:
Does anybody know when exactly was recognized that hypo eliminators do more damage than good? I have a Darkroom Book by The Morgan & Morgan from 1980 with Grant Haist beeing one of the authors. The book still advise the use of a hypo eliminator.

Does that book clearly distinguish between hypo clearing agents and hypo eliminators? I ask, because I certainly have seen the use of the word "eliminator" when the chemical involved was actually a clearing agent.

miha · Nov 25, 2015

MattKing said:
Does that book clearly distinguish between hypo clearing agents and hypo eliminators? I ask, because I certainly have seen the use of the word "eliminator" when the chemical involved was actually a clearing agent.

It does, even gives the recipe.

HE-1
H2O 500 ml
H2O2 3% 125ml
NH3 solution (1 part 28% to 9 parts of H20) 100ml
H2O to make 1l

Gerald C Koch · Nov 27, 2015

miha said:
Does anybody know when exactly was recognized that hypo eliminators do more damage than good? I have a Darkroom Book by The Morgan & Morgan from 1980 with Grant Haist beeing one of the authors. The book still advise the use of a hypo eliminator.

To help narrow down the time. Since the development of Sistan was based on the observation that HE did not produce archival results the observation must have occurred before the entry of Sistan on the market.

BTW the Morgan & Morgan books have a long history of inaccuracies.

miha · Nov 27, 2015

Gerald C Koch said:
SNIP:Since the development of Sistan was based on the observation that HE did not produce archival results

Do you have a reffernece to this? It's my understanding that Sistan has been developed, in particular, with RC / PE papers in mind.

Hypo

veke

Ian Grant

bernard_L

Terry Christian

RalphLambrecht

RalphLambrecht

SMBooth

Sirius Glass

Ron789

MartinP

SMBooth

MattKing

Moderator

Gerald C Koch

veke

Xmas

Paul Howell

M Carter

miha

Paul Howell

MattKing

Moderator

miha

Gerald C Koch

miha

Hypo

Moderator

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency