kentmere

[Photo Engineer]

One thing I can add about Kentmere. Last time I really tested it was about 2 years ago. At that time, it was the only brand of paper that did not contain incorporated developing agents. If this is still true, it could be a very stable paper during keeping, but IDK, other factors may intervene.

PE

 

[lee]

Ron,
is this test results on line any where? if so, what is the URL, please. also, what other papers did you test? Thanks.

lee\c

 

[Photo Engineer]

Lee, the test is posted here, but it is simple. Just take a little sodium hydroxide in water (I used 4% - 5%) and drop some on the paper in the light. If it turns black or gray, it contains incorporated developing agent.

I tested Kodak (several types) and Ilford (Several types of MG) and Kentmere. Some of the Kodak did not contain the developing agent and some did. All of the Ilford MGIV did, none of the others did. The Kodak paper results are now moot.

Kodak papers that contained it turned black, Ilford turned gray. This indicates either the level or the activity, IDK which with my limited equipment.

PE

 

[Michel Hardy-Vallée]

PE, does any other alkali (e.g. soda) work for the incorporated developer test?

 

[Photo Engineer]

I have been told that strong sodium carbonate (50 - 100 g/l) will work. I have not done this.

PE

 

[uraniumnitrate]

Ron,
is this test results on line any where? if so, what is the URL, please. also, what other papers did you test? Thanks.

lee\c

No sorry, I where at the time working at the institution and all the tests where made for a major Museum! The result is not my privately owned resource and it wasn’t meant to made for publication anywhere. But that was edges ago when papers like the Oriental and others where available. I think it was around 15 or some less papers served a basics to the tests. I can tell you that much that the final products where washed to archival status Ph tested for hypo and dried with air, and with tissue (slowly) and some of those where flattened with dry mounting seal in different temperature and time duration. Agfa and Oriental was those which where absolute the best (high above) compared to other major brand. Some of the brands had major cracks on the surface very ugly ones and lots of them! I will not name it those because I don’t want people jump on my back again and I’m not sure if I remember those in the right order either! Anyway it can not refer to today’s material at all at least that’s what I believe also many of those products are not available any longer or the basic chemistry of those whom still exits may had been changed!
I might just talk to our local hospital if I can borrow or if they have the right equipment for re-emerge this test in as privateer than of course if it’s possible than I would publish the results.
I thought that PE is already very close to everything and he might do the tests.

What I forgot to say is this, before we have conducted the tests investigated all the dry material and we fund that the surface had cracks even before the dry mounting seal it’s just increased more with the effect of the heat!

Also important to mention that, than we investigated the row material which we begin with and than we find out that cracks clearly shown but it's increased more step by step and it was different on each paper. Itell you some of the surface was really a nightmare!

 

[Sal Santamaura]

...it was the only brand of paper that did not contain incorporated developing agents. If this is still true...

Current data sheets for Bromide

http://www.kentmereusa.com/pdf/Kentmere_Bromide.pdf

and Fineprint VC

http://www.kentmereusa.com/pdf/Kentmere_Fineprint.pdf

both say, under "Coated emulsion layer," "...contains a small amount of developing agent."

 

[Photo Engineer]

Sal;

Thanks for the information. I will test the latest and greatest from Kentmere ASAP.

I suggest anyone interested test it using my test posted above. It may be that there is a developing agent there, but it may not be revealed by my test. I'll look at that too.

As for Uranium's comments, they are a total non-sequitur to the exchange between Lee and myself. IDK what they refer to.

PE

 

[uraniumnitrate]

Sal;

Thanks for the information. I will test the latest and greatest from Kentmere ASAP.

I suggest anyone interested test it using my test posted above. It may be that there is a developing agent there, but it may not be revealed by my test. I'll look at that too.

As for Uranium's comments, they are a total non-sequitur to the exchange between Lee and myself. IDK what they refer to.

PE

Sorry PE I missunderstood.