Kodak T-8 and Formulary Polysulfide Toner questions

My interest is in using this toner for print permanence, not for color change.

I've read about Kodak T-8 toner in The Darkroom Cookbook 4ed and the instructions for the Photographers' Formulary Polysulfide Toner (with the same formula). These lead me to some questions, the answers to which have so far eluded my google-fu.

1. TDC4 says that following use of the full-strength toner the print should be treated in a Sodium bisulfite solution and then re-hardened. There PF instructions say nothing about this. Do modern hardened papers (I use Ilford Classic and MGWT) still require these post-toning steps? This is kind of an academic question as I don't plan to use the toner at full strength (see 2).

2. TDC4 mentions toning for permanence with minimal color change by using a very dilute solution (1:100). That single sentence doesn't mention the bisulfite and re-hardening steps. Assuming those two steps are needed when using full strength toner (see 1), are they also needed when using highly dilute toner as well? BTW, there's no mention of the 1:100 dilution in the PF instructions.

3. The PF instructions say "the working solution is stable for extended periods of time", where by working solution they mean full-strength toner. I assume the 1:100 solution should be discarded after use, but if that's how I'm using T-8 I can image a liter lasting quite a long while. Any ideas what "extended periods of time" means? Months? Years? Geologic time?

4. My darkroom is not well ventilated. Does this toner produce dangerous or noxious fumes? I can tone in other parts of the house, or even outdoors, if need be. I know T-8 must be kept away from acids to avoid evolving Hydrogen sulfide.

5. I like the slight color change away from olive that I obtain with 1:20 KRST. If I want to use both KRST and dilute T-8, which should come first? My guess would be to first get the color change with KRST and follow up with dilute T-8, but that's only a guess.

Thanks in advance to the collective for your thoughts.

Steve Goldstein said:

My interest is in using this toner for print permanence, not for color change.

I've read about Kodak T-8 toner in The Darkroom Cookbook 4ed and the instructions for the Photographers' Formulary Polysulfide Toner (with the same formula). These lead me to some questions, the answers to which have so far eluded my google-fu.

1. TDC4 says that following use of the full-strength toner the print should be treated in a Sodium bisulfite solution and then re-hardened. There PF instructions say nothing about this. Do modern hardened papers (I use Ilford Classic and MGWT) still require these post-toning steps? This is kind of an academic question as I don't plan to use the toner at full strength (see 2).

2. TDC4 mentions toning for permanence with minimal color change by using a very dilute solution (1:100). That single sentence doesn't mention the bisulfite and re-hardening steps. Assuming those two steps are needed when using full strength toner (see 1), are they also needed when using highly dilute toner as well? BTW, there's no mention of the 1:100 dilution in the PF instructions.

3. The PF instructions say "the working solution is stable for extended periods of time", where by working solution they mean full-strength toner. I assume the 1:100 solution should be discarded after use, but if that's how I'm using T-8 I can image a liter lasting quite a long while. Any ideas what "extended periods of time" means? Months? Years? Geologic time?

4. My darkroom is not well ventilated. Does this toner produce dangerous or noxious fumes? I can tone in other parts of the house, or even outdoors, if need be. I know T-8 must be kept away from acids to avoid evolving Hydrogen sulfide.

5. I like the slight color change away from olive that I obtain with 1:20 KRST. If I want to use both KRST and dilute T-8, which should come first? My guess would be to first get the color change with KRST and follow up with dilute T-8, but that's only a guess.

Thanks in advance to the collective for your thoughts.

Click to expand...

I am beginning to use polysulfide toner. I'm having good results with Ilford Classic, but I have many of the same questions you are expressing. Attached is some of my research for you (and all) to read. Please tell me what you think., especially concerning post-toner treatment (hardener...).

I'm sorry, you're not going to like this...

Steve Goldstein said:

toning for permanence with minimal color change

Click to expand...

I personally think that concept is a red herring. Toning for permanence basically entails linking the silver together with something else intentionally in order to prevent the same thing happening over time unintentionally. Hence, real 'permanence' is only achieved if all the silver is bound, and that means toning to completion. In a sulfide toner (or just about any toner, really), this means a distinct color change.

To demonstrate the above, take one untoned print, and one print that's so-called 'toned for permanence' (either selenium or sulfur/sepia) without a very clear color change (i.e. only very lightly toned). Chuck both into a ferricyanide bleach bath. You'll see the untoned print bleach back entirely, and the other will only have slight density left in the deepest shadows. The latter is the gain in permanence; over time, any environmental influences that might degrade the silver image will leave only those remaining tones in tact and affect all the others. You'll see first hand that the whole endeavor provides only a marginal gain that has no real-world advantage whatsoever to the permanence of the print.

But look at it from another angle: elementary silver as you'd find in a typical silver gelatin print is fairly stable as it is, provided the print is (1) thoroughly fixed and (2) thoroughly washed. What kind of 'permanence' do you want to achieve on top of this? Against most environmental factors, the paper base itself is actually substantially less protected as a matter of principle than the silver image itself in a well-processed but untoned print - think of humidity or fungal or insect infestations. Yes, your silver image may tone in sulfur-rich environments - but a polysulfide toner would do the exact same thing to begin with...

So in short, if you ask me, the whole concept of this approach is fundamentally flawed and perhaps one of the most re-iterated urban myths of darkroom photography.

Steve Goldstein said:

I like the slight color change away from olive that I obtain with 1:20 KRST.

Click to expand...

Now that's a useful application of a very light toning. I very much agree with this and that's the only reason why I tone any prints that might end up on display in one way or another. Usually with selenium, sepia or a combination thereof. Especially with warm-tone papers this really brings out the full potential of the image, IMO.

Steve Goldstein said:

Does this toner produce dangerous or noxious fumes?

Click to expand...

Yes to both, but more noxious than dangerous. Polysulfide toners tend to produce a distinct rotten egg smell that is dangerous in high concentrations, but you'll probably have fled the room and had a major row with your housemate(s) long before a level like that is achieved. For sulfur toning, a thiourea 'no-odor' toner is IMO a better choice, also because of its flexibility in image tone (ranging from yellow tones to chocolate browns).

I think it is true that a certain level of toning (to completion?) is necessary for image protection, which will definitely mean a color change.
I still would like to learn more about post polysulfide toning, especially regarding the need for hardener with modern papers (mentioned by OP).
Also, I would be interested to know if anything has changed concerning the effectiveness of toners, specifically polysulfide, since the research done by the Image Permanence Institute at RIT. They came up with "Silverlock" toner which seems to be a concentrated Kodak Toner T-8 to be diluted for use. I think the main concern there was to improve the oxidation resistance of silver images. I don't think they were thinking about bugs or anything like that.

The fumes may be more noxious than dangerous, agree, but they WILL fog sensitized emulsions, so if you have unexposed paper in your darkroom don't tone there. Years ago I overlooked this and destroyed some very expensive paper. Well expensive as paper goes (Ilford MGWT Fiber.) Thankfully I didn't have a lot of it at the time.