• Welcome to Photrio!
    Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.
    Click here to sign up

Is everyone using Photoflow wrong, or is it just me and my professor?

abruzzi

Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2018
Messages
3,204
Location
New Mexico, USA
Format
Large Format
10 drops for 500ml water? I hardly use 2 drops. It takes very little.

Perhaps, but it is approximately 5 times more dilute than what the instruction on the bottle reccomend.

I'll also mention that I've never had issues using the dev reel in the PhotoFlo bath, but I always soak them in hot water after developing, and I keep my tap water hotter than most (135F)
 

JensH

Member
Joined
May 30, 2017
Messages
534
Location
Schaumburg, Germany
Format
Multi Format
I'll also mention that I've never had issues using the dev reel in the PhotoFlo bath, but I always soak them in hot water after developing, and I keep my tap water hotter than most (135F)

Same here, just a quick flush with warm tab water...
 

DREW WILEY

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Jul 14, 2011
Messages
14,754
Format
8x10 Format
I had problems when way back when I did use the "recommended" amount on the bottle instructions. Perhaps they had extended usage in mind, or a different kind of water quality.
Dunno. Just like development times and all kinds of other things, such instructions are just a starting point which likely need personal fine-tuning.
 

mshchem

Subscriber
Allowing Ads
Joined
Nov 26, 2007
Messages
15,645
Location
Iowa City, Iowa USA
Format
Medium Format


I got involved in this somewhat tangentially. Surface tension is a big deal in printing industry. We were having problems with liquid foam not sticking to certain metals. (The opposite of what you want with water and film)

The foam wasn't "wetting the surface"

Anyhow I use "Matt's IPA Photoflo" juice for last couple of years. Single use into purified water, on the reels, just hang the film to dry. Works perfectly
 

MattKing

Moderator
Moderator
Allowing Ads
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
54,678
Location
Delta, BC Canada
Format
Medium Format
Matt, by any chance have you used the film apron as well?

I started out doing the see-saw maneuver in the dark - yech.
I then went to using the Kodacraft tanks and aprons with 120 film and, for a short while, 35mm film.
They worked well, and were very helpful when it came to dealing with the fact that I lack dexterity and range of motion in my right hand.
Unfortunately, I have never located any of the aprons sized for the wider 116/616 film. They were made, and they would be usable with short lengths of 70mm film, but they aren't easy to find.
I have a Yankee ratcheting plastic reel tank that is adjustable for 616, but it isn't great when you try to load extremely curled, vintage 616 film on to them. The aprons are absolutely ideal for that - especially for 1.5 handed me.
 
OP
OP

gealto2

Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2025
Messages
22
Location
Peoria, IL, USA
Format
Multi Format
And I would never, ever use Palmolive or any other dishwasher detergent, because even the scent free stuff has ingredients that would be bad for gelatin.
I doubt you have evidence for this statement. I believe this is one of those old wives tales started by a marketing agent at Kodak. MY ENTIRE POINT was to not soak your film in any drying aid, but rather to run it through once fairly briskly so it stays on the surface of the film where it can do what it needs to.

I've never seen mold growing on the surface of dish detergent, and assume it contains a fungicide. I've heard that most people don't like fungus growing on their dishes. I should also mention I always use a very dilute plain fixer one shot with no acid stop, so my film is always relatively swollen compared to others so is more prone to absorbing things. There is an already hardened protective gelatin layer on the surface of most camera films.
 

MattKing

Moderator
Moderator
Allowing Ads
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
54,678
Location
Delta, BC Canada
Format
Medium Format
I doubt you have evidence for this statement.

I am prepared to rely on the advice shared right here to this effect by the late (and much missed) Ron Mowrey, who posted on APUG/Photrio as @Photo Engineer, and who was a chemical engineer who retired from Eastman Kodak after a distinguished career which included, amongst other things, being one of the named parties on the K14 Kodachrome patent.
Household cleaners are designed to do many things, including dispersing greases. They often make use of enzymes to assist with their assigned tasks. They also are designed to be "gentle" on hands.
PhotoFlo was designed to be nothing more than a surfactant that was not deleterious for film.
Here is a search listing Ron's more than 29,000 posts on this site: https://www.photrio.com/forum/search/403/
 

Certain Exposures

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Aug 31, 2023
Messages
257
Location
USA
Format
Analog
The link is broken, Matt. I'll check out his posts.
 

MattKing

Moderator
Moderator
Allowing Ads
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
54,678
Location
Delta, BC Canada
Format
Medium Format

Raghu Kuvempunagar

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Jul 28, 2016
Messages
2,986
Location
India
Format
Multi Format

I have an apron for 35 mm film in good condition but I haven't used it yet. Good to know that film aprons work fine, thanks Matt, now I am tempted to try.
 
OP
OP

gealto2

Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2025
Messages
22
Location
Peoria, IL, USA
Format
Multi Format

Matt, I didn't think you had any data to prove that, just opinions. Those opinions clearly represent a commercial interest, and are directed to high volume commercial users. I am a low volume home darkroom person, who has the opposite use case. If I was a high volume commercial user, I would use PhotoFlo or more likely some similar product. I've only seen it packaged in 16oz size, which is more than ten times what I could ever use in my lifetime. I've seen the concentrate go bad in the bottle at least a half dozen times, so I throw out 15.5oz of moldy sludge. I'm concerned by the environmental impact of all those full containers. Today, we likely need an environmental impact study to dispose of this since used photochemicals are probably considered hazardous waste. Oh, wait...dish detergent isn't hazardous waste. Although it wasn't designed for mold culturing, it also was not designed for low volume home use.

I did some searching here yesterday and found several times where an authority told people who were clearly in my category not to use dish detergent. One particular person was just starting out and trying to simplify their initial experimenting with cafenol home film developing on the cheap and they were shot down for thinking about using dish detergent. This is sad. Authorities here have also educated beginners to not even think about using Tween 20, a well known commercial surfactant that IS available in small quantities as a film drying aid. They already bought some for alt. processes. But no, they gotta spend more money according to the experts here.

I believe understanding things is important. For low volume users, dish detergent is a viable re-purposed home product that is a good film drying aid when used properly. It contains a surfactant, a mild detergent similar to those in shampoo like sodium lauryl sulfate and the like, glycerine a well known polyol often used in photochemestry, water and other beneficial ingredients. Don' soak your film in it.
 
Last edited:

Don_ih

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Jan 24, 2021
Messages
8,380
Location
Ontario
Format
35mm RF
I doubt a high-volume commercial concern would consider using Palmolive instead of Photoflo. But regardless of that, there's no need to prove dish soap is harmful to film - Photoflo is proven to be harmless. Kodak didn't market products to dislodge the use of household detergent - they marketed products as the correct ones to use for film. They've done the relevant testing.

If you use dish soap and find no ill effects, great. But advising someone else to use it when that person may not use the same soap as you, may not use it in the same way, is not a good idea. If someone asks what they should use, tell them the proven product. It's a matter of behaving responsibly.

Note that I don't think dish soap would do much of anything bad to film. But my opinion doesn't matter if I'm not paying to replace the film people mess up following my advice.
 

djdister

Subscriber
Joined
Oct 6, 2012
Messages
224
Location
Maryland USA
Format
Multi Format

If you are going to suggest something, be specific...


 

MattKing

Moderator
Moderator
Allowing Ads
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
54,678
Location
Delta, BC Canada
Format
Medium Format
Authorities here have also educated beginners to not even think about using Tween 20, a well known commercial surfactant that IS available in small quantities as a film drying aid.

{EDIT - oops - momentary conflation between Thymol and Tween - now deleted}
It wouldn't surprise me if Tween 20 would be fine - if used correctly. The challenge with re-purposing something like that is accessing reliable instructions for small quantity use.
There is no such challenge with PhotoFlo.
Given how long a bottle of PhotoFlo lasts for small volume users, I guarantee that potential profit from the small volume user market did not factor into recommendations against using products with unidentified constituents for the same purpose. Having a reliable solution for a common problem to complement the other, higher profit Kodak branded products would have factored in.
Don't use commercial cleaning products with film, unless you know everything that is included in them - not just the the items on the SDS (formerly MSDS).
It is the uncertainty that creates the problem.
 
Last edited:

MattKing

Moderator
Moderator
Allowing Ads
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
54,678
Location
Delta, BC Canada
Format
Medium Format
FWIW, the internet tells me that the Palmolive dish washing detergent contains at least the following:

Common Ingredients
  • Water/Eau: The base of the soap.
  • Sodium Laureth Sulfate (SLES): A surfactant (cleaning agent) that creates suds and lifts grease.
  • Lauramidopropyl Betaine: A milder surfactant, often derived from coconut, that boosts foam and cleans.
  • Lactic Acid: Helps adjust pH and can have mild cleaning properties.
  • Poloxamer 124: A foam stabilizer and cleaning booster.
 

BrianShaw

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Nov 30, 2005
Messages
16,943
Location
La-la-land
Format
Multi Format
Matt, I didn't think you had any data to prove that, just opinions. Those opinions clearly represent a commercial interest, and are directed to high volume commercial users. I

I'm not going to disagree with anything you write, but just for education sake... when Ron (PE) posted in this forum he was not representing Kodak but was a Kodak retiree. His interactions here were very informative because of his unique background and tended to be very focused on the specific needs/concerns of the forum members who, like you, tend to be low-volume users.

BTW, welcome to Photrio.
 

chuckroast

Subscriber
Joined
Jun 2, 2023
Messages
2,962
Location
All Over The Place
Format
Multi Format


It's not a significant environmental hazard nor is it particularly dangerous to handle as long as you avoid getting it into your eyes or drinking the stuff:


In something like 50 years of use, I have never seen it mold. And I buy it in sufficient quantities that my reserves sit on the shelf for years. The PG shouldn't mold, the alcohol shouldn't mold, I don't know about the Triton-X 100 claimed to be in it. I suppose a bottle opened in a very humid environment thereby introducing water into the container might potential promote mold over time, but I have never seen thls.

I work too hard getting my negatives right to subject them to household cleaners and the fragrances parked therein. If I could not get a quality surfactant, I'd just use a distilled water final rinse with roughly 20-25 ml/l Isopropyl Alcohol added.
 

GregY

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Apr 12, 2005
Messages
3,875
Location
Alberta
Format
Large Format
The end of an era. Babies are adults, 3 houses, 3 darkroom builds.....countless sheets & rolls of film...neither Zone VI nor Calumet are still in business.
 
Last edited:
OP
OP

gealto2

Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2025
Messages
22
Location
Peoria, IL, USA
Format
Multi Format
If you are going to suggest something, be specific...
DJ, I already was very specific. The brand doesn't matter, get the one that has the fewest additives. This will be a clear version, not with color tints, and be the one that has the most claims on environmental friendliness. I happen to use Palmolive "Pure and Clear" that claims to have "no unnecessary ingredients". I thought it was fragrance free, but notice it has Lanvender and Eucalyptus. The ingredients are not listed. I store it carefully in the laundry room on the shelf over the bathroom sink right next my darkroom area in the corner. I tried to upload a 0.985 mb jpeg, but this board doesn't take it, saying its too big. Resized it twice. I give up on that.
 
  • gealto2
  • Deleted
  • Reason: second copy by mistake
OP
OP

gealto2

Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2025
Messages
22
Location
Peoria, IL, USA
Format
Multi Format

Those pesky AI's are almost always wrong, but that's likely close. Thanks for helping me out there. I would much rather use Palmolive on the surface of my film where it smoothly glides the water off than soak it in that highly diluted Photoflo which I believe we all agree grows mold. As the gelatin on the film dries, that Photoflo will become more concentrated and rise to the surface. I would think it would stick to the gelatin on the way up. When all the volatiles evaporate aren't we left with the TritonX goop on the emulsion? I believe it would remain in liquid form on the surface but also within the gelatin. There would be a small amount.

Triton™ X-100 Detergent, Molecular Biology Grade, Non-ionic detergent and emulsifier. Has an optimal pH range of 6.0-8.0.

This is what Google AI gives for comparing Triton X to Tween 20:

Triton X-100 and Tween-20 are both non-ionic detergents, but
Triton X-100 is generally stronger for membrane permeabilization and can interfere with UV readings due to its aromatic ring, while Tween-20 is milder, often used for washing steps (like in Western blots and ELISAs), and less disruptive to protein structure, improving antibody binding. Think of Triton as better for breaking open cells/membranes, and Tween as better for washing while keeping proteins intact and accessible for antibodies.

I believe we are washing film, not trying to open gelatin molecular bonds. I prefer keeping my proteins intact, so I'm thinking about switching from Palmolive to Tween 20, which I already have. I have read things about Tween 20 having a short shelf life, but not finding that today. It has to also leave some tiny amount of residue. Next time, I will try a drop of Tween 20 in a liter of water. I don't want to dilute it from stock to some lower dilution. I thought my Palmolive was pretty mild, but I like the sound of tween 20. What I have is actually the generic polysorbate-20.

Do all those Alt photographer know that TritonX absorbs UV? I just learned that today. This could cause little spots on precious negatives.


Triton X-100
 
OP
OP

gealto2

Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2025
Messages
22
Location
Peoria, IL, USA
Format
Multi Format
Thank you very much.

I know Ron (PE) was not with Kodak when he posted here. I've read through many of his postings, mostly where he argued with Pat Gainer. Theory versus common sense. Both are important and interesting. I'm planning to use polysorbate-20 one drop per liter because I have a 4 oz. bottle I got for alt processes that I find not very helpful for that.
 

Craig

Subscriber
Joined
Apr 8, 2004
Messages
2,469
Location
Calgary
Format
Multi Format
I have a 118ml (4oz) bottle of Photo Flo that has a price sticker form a camera store that closed 30 years ago and there is no mold in the bottle.

I've never seen mold in Photo Flo, so I'll keep on using it, instead of experimentation with various dish soaps that have unknown chemicals in that I have no idea what the effect on film in long term storage might be.