Ilford Washaid spill - fogging film/paper?

[Pablo_PTM]

Hello, I’d like to ask to some fellow darkroom dweller for an opinion on the following:
Found in my basement/darkroom, after a couple of months of absence, a broken/empty bottle of ilford washaid which basically emptied completely itself on the floor… above it my collection of undeveloped film, some unused photographic paper and a couple of 100ft hp5 spools.

I found in the forum info on sodium sulfide fogging light sensitive material, but nothing on sodium sulfite or in general ilford washaid.

Do you think that I’ve ruined with fogging all my undeveloped material?

Thanks to all the kind help on this matter

 

[gone]

Everyone will have their opinion, but I would make a test print and see. There is no other way to know for sure.

 

[mshchem]

I think washaid would contain Sulfites not Sulfides. If there was a Sulfide present you would have a strong smell, like rotten eggs. I doubt you will have fogging. MHOFWIW
Best Regards, Mike

 

[koraks]

I found in the forum info on sodium sulfide fogging light sensitive material, but nothing on sodium sulfite or in general ilford washaid.

Sulfite and sulfide are different things. Indeed, sulfides will fog photographic materials. Sulfides Sulfites won't. If the paper and film remained dry, they will be unaffected. If they have become wet (not just the packaging, but the film/paper itself), there will be damage and it will be irreversible.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I would be surprised if you had any problems, but test to be sure.

 

[pentaxuser]

Everyone will have their opinion, but I would make a test print and see. There is no other way to know for sure.

Well they may have an opinion but surely there is a factual answer, isn't there?

pentaxuser

 

[Molli]

Sulfite and sulfide are different things. Indeed, sulfides will fog photographic materials. Sulfides Sulfites won't. If the paper and film remained dry, they will be unaffected. If they have become wet (not just the packaging, but the film/paper itself), there will be damage and it will be irreversible.

Just to avoid clouding the issue, you've written sulfides twice, Koraks, as both the chemical that WILL fog photographic material and the chemical which WON'T!
Are we still within the editing window to change the latter Sulfide to Sulfite?

 

[MattKing]

Are we still within the editing window to change the latter Sulfide to Sulfite?

koraks may not be within the window, but my moderator's window doesn't close!
Fixed it for you.

 

[Molli]

koraks may not be within the window, but my moderator's window doesn't close!
Fixed it for you.

Thanks Matt, I messed up a formula write up years ago and didn't catch it for correction until three pages later. Not good for anyone following along at home who didn't get the memo!

 

[koraks]

My apologies, and thanks @Molli and @MattKing for catching this one

 

[Molli]

My apologies, and thanks @Molli and @MattKing for catching this one

If it makes you feel any better, my stupid auto-correct changed Sulfide to Sulphite both times as that's the chemical I've typed up most and more often had need of... and also the spelling I use for it.

Anyway, back to the original question. I've never come across information either in reference books or data sheets nor anecdotally of wash aids causing chemical fogging. Soggy paper if spilled across it, yes, but no harmful mists.

 

[MattKing]

A priest, a rabbit and a minister walk into a bar. The bartender asked the rabbit "what will you have?" The rabbit answered "I don't know, I'm only here because of auto-correct".

I expect that is important to clean up the dried wash-aid, because it might be a skin irritant. But I think the OP can be re-assured about the light-sensitive materials.

 

[Doremus Scudder]

Wash-aids are largely sodium sulfite. So is Ilford's, with the addition of a couple of other chemicals (acetic acid and sodium laurel sulfate). Here's the MSDS.

https://www.ilfordphoto.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Washaid-CAN-EN-L18-102-10438.pdf

As far as fogging goes, it's a non-issue; nothing photographically active in the formula. And, as long as you haven't got any on your film, there should be no damage.

FWIW, I bought a slug of old trays on eBay in various sizes. All my liquid chemicals are stored sitting in trays (in cupboards or wherever) to catch spills if/when the bottles degrade and leak. I've had packaging fail on a couple of strange things: print developer concentrate, C-41 chemistry, working solutions of toner, etc. The trays kept the spills from spreading beyond the tray and clean-up was a lot easier.

Best,

Doremus

 

[Pablo_PTM]

Thanks to all!!! As always this forum is a source of kind and wise fellows.

I indeed performed a test, in particular I developed two of the closest/most unprotected film roll relative to the “disaster” (none was actually touched by the liquid luckily); if I had to be extremely pedantic I’d call the result “inconclusive” since one of the two rolls showed weak/peeling emulsion on the sides (roll coming from same 100ft bulk, same bulk loader, shot on the same camera a month apart, loaded in my usual tank); as long as I can remember I never experienced such defect (at least not this year, I checked the recently developed negative archive, I’ll look in the older ones). The other one showed no evident issues (at least to my eyes, I’ll either scan or contact print both).

But given the experienced suggestions of the fellows above I’d rather be more optimistic and say that the emulsion peeling might be connected to an unrelated event; I’ll perform some other developing a and shoot some of the film stored and keep you posted.

In the meantime thanks again to all for the knowledge shared, and of course now I’ve leaned my lesson… to keep chemistry and lightsensitive material apart! Next time I might not be so lucky…