ilford rapid fix

[CMoore]

This is just regards RC Paper...not FB and not Film.
Just for economy sake.....is there any real reason not to use The Ilford spec of 1:9 .?
What ratio do you guys use with this product, and RC Paper.?
Thank You

 

[CMoore]

Yeah.....that is what i gather.
So it makes you wonder, and is why i ask, what ratio people use.
Or rather, why would you go 1:4.....is One Minute faster going to be a consideration for anybody.?

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

It's only a consideration when I use FB papers...which is all the time. The less time in the fixer, the better.

 

[Carriage]

It also depends on how quickly you get through it. Once open it only lasts about 6 months (I think), so if you print relatively infrequently and in smallish trays you end up using a bottle every 6 months either way, so you may as well spend less time sitting there agitating.

 

[M Carter]

For "economy's sake"? Dump the Ilford and kodak paper developers and get Liquidol. Stuff lasts for ages.

 

[MattKing]

For "economy's sake"? Dump the Ilford and kodak paper developers and get Liquidol. Stuff lasts for ages.

I didn't realize there was a Liquidol version of fixer.

All things being equal, I prefer using the fixer at 1 + 9 dilution with RC paper.
You don't really know whether your throughput will be high or low during the next several months until the end of that period.
I generally go on to the next print while the last one is in the fixer, so the shorter fixing time in the 1 + 4 dilution isn't much of an advantage for me.

 

[Rudeofus]

I didn't realize there was a Liquidol version of fixer.

I think he thought of TF-5. Both Liquidol and TF-5 are to a large extent Ron Mowrey's brain children.

 

[Doremus Scudder]

I prefer the 1+9 dilution of Ilford Rapid Fixer for prints. Handling larger prints and trying to keep the fixing time in two baths plus drain time to under 60 seconds is just too hectic. For RC prints, which don't have the washing problems of fiber-base papers, there's no reason not to use a longer fixing time and a weaker dilution. Since the capacity for both the 1+4 and 1+9 dilutions are the same, it is actually more economical to use the weaker dilution. If you are processing for optimum permanence, do use two fixing baths.

Best,

Doremus

 

[CMoore]

Right.....Thank You.
I WILL venture into FB Papers at some point. But for now it is strictly RC.
Sounds like 1:9 is what i will go with for now.
Thanks For All The Info Everybody

 

[Dali]

I always use 1+9 dilution for paper. Worked for me so far.

 

[Huub]

I much prefer the 1+4, as it safes tours to the chemical waste deposit...

 

[M Carter]

I prefer the 1+9 dilution of Ilford Rapid Fixer for prints. Handling larger prints and trying to keep the fixing time in two baths plus drain time to under 60 seconds is just too hectic. For RC prints, which don't have the washing problems of fiber-base papers, there's no reason not to use a longer fixing time and a weaker dilution. Since the capacity for both the 1+4 and 1+9 dilutions are the same, it is actually more economical to use the weaker dilution. If you are processing for optimum permanence, do use two fixing baths.

I'm surprised more people don't test for fixing and washing. I use a drop of selenium to verify proper fixing, and for 11x14 and up, I try to minimize time in the fix - fix for :60, quick rinse, test - if I get a yellow spot, back in and I can usually judge the time by the darkness of the spot - maybe another :15, quick rinse, test again til clean.

I test for washing with RHT, similar process... wash til I feel I'm close, test, wash some more if needed. I feel this has saved me a lot of water over the years.

I think he thought of TF-5. Both Liquidol and TF-5 are to a large extent Ron Mowrey's brain children.

I think at some point developers got mentioned above? Then again, I think I had a head injury so severe that I don't remember getting it. My wife would agree. (But damn, Liquidol is the stuff.)