Long-term durability of b/w slides from fogging second developer

I am currently fiddling with the Kodak reversal kit. TMAX results have not convinced me. FP4 gives a higher contrast and brightness that is much closer to Scala, which I try to "clone".

For TMAX it was necessary to use a selenium toner to get rid of the yellow-greenish cast and turn it into sepia/brown. It turned out that the intensity of the sepia tone disappears over a few weeks, so that the TMAX becomes greenish again and the FP4 remains only slightly sepia.

As I have seen that some of you guys in this forum have very good chemical background, I would be interested to hear your opinion about the long-term durability that one can expect from b/w slides processed with the fogging agent in the Kodak kit in comparison with a second light exposure and "normal" second developer, e.g. from the Foma kit.

Is it to be expected that these slides remain intact for as long as normal b/w prints (~100 years) or as long as color slides (~40 years)?

From my experience with reversal cine film, the archival difference chemical fogging and light re-exposure prior the second development doesn't make a bit of difference if done properly.

PE?

Kino said:

From my experience with reversal cine film, the archival difference chemical fogging and light re-exposure prior the second development doesn't make a bit of difference if done properly.

Click to expand...

Interesting. How many years of storing b/w cine film have you seen?

Kino said:

PE?

Click to expand...

Hmm. I am not a native speaker. What are you asking?

Hello Hans,

I am making my own BW slides with Ilford films, reversing both FP4+ and Delta 100, always with good results. I mix my own chemistry according to Ilford recommendations, and use dichromate bleach instead of permanganate. What bleach does use Kodak in their kit - is bleaching mix orange (dichromate) or magenta (permanganate)? On my opinion, the emulsion of Ilford films is hardened a bit more than usual, so it retains some residual dichromate even after a clearing bath. Well, the only solution in this case for me is to wash the bleached film in a running water until it clears really well - it may take 15-20 minutes, but then it clears nicely. That's how I do it - and I always tone my slides in selenium later, with no discoloration in a week. Just extend the washing times after bleaching, wash it in the subrued light or darkness, and you should be OK. The residual dichromate in emulsion is no good, of course. I don't use any fogging agent - just a light re-exposure and second development.

Mit Gruess, Zhenya

Hans Borjes said:

I am currently fiddling with the Kodak reversal kit. TMAX results have not convinced me. FP4 gives a higher contrast and brightness that is much closer to Scala, which I try to "clone".

For TMAX it was necessary to use a selenium toner to get rid of the yellow-greenish cast and turn it into sepia/brown. It turned out that the intensity of the sepia tone disappears over a few weeks, so that the TMAX becomes greenish again and the FP4 remains only slightly sepia.

As I have seen that some of you guys in this forum have very good chemical background, I would be interested to hear your opinion about the long-term durability that one can expect from b/w slides processed with the fogging agent in the Kodak kit in comparison with a second light exposure and "normal" second developer, e.g. from the Foma kit.

Is it to be expected that these slides remain intact for as long as normal b/w prints (~100 years) or as long as color slides (~40 years)?

Click to expand...

Zhenya,

The Kodak kit contains in the bleach
* potassium permanganate
* sulfuric acid

and in the redeveloper
* hydroquinone
* polymeric glycol
* potassium sulfite
* dimethylamine borane.

I have not seen Ilford Delta 100 slides yet, how would you describe them in relation to FP4 slides?

Privjet, Hans

There should be no difference in the archival characteristics of slides regardless of which second development method is used.

There's a third way to achieve the second development -- with an alkaline solution of sodium sulfide or thiourea. (These are equivalent to the second bath of a bleach-and-redevelop sepia toner kit.) This should also be very archival (in the same way as a sepia-toned print).

Hans Borjes said:

Interesting. How many years of storing b/w cine film have you seen?

Click to expand...

30 or so years myself, but the archive I work for has been storing film copies since 16mm was introduced in the 1930's and in speaking to the old-timers around here, there seems to be a consensus that it did not matter within the deterioration parameters of the base; i.e. , the base will fail either way prior to the chemical interaction affecting the emulsion becomes a substantial factor.

If it were a factor, the failure rate of chem fogged film would show in some manner over film re-exposed via light exposure, but it has not.


Hmm. I am not a native speaker. What are you asking?[/QUOTE]

Sorry, I was asking PhotoEngineer to jump in here with his opinion; I was a bit to0 cryptic, I am afraid!