Mercury Intensifier

Louis Nargi · Apr 1, 2011

I'v done some reading on Mercury Intensifier manufactured By The Smith-Victor Co. This intensifier is no made because its very toxic. Its a interesting film intensifier in that it goes to the shadow areas of the negative.Can this intensifier still be gotten or made?

nworth · Apr 1, 2011

The Smith-Victor Company went out of business many years ago, and commercial availability is doubtful because of restrictions on the use and shipment of mercury compounds. After the company went out of business, the formula was released and published in the Dignan Newsletter:

Smith-Victor intensifier
Mercuric chloride 13 g
Magnesium sulfate 60 g
Potassium iodide 30 g
Sodium sulfite 15 g
WTM 1 l
Filter sediment as necessary.
Use in a white tray. Immerse wet negative emulsion side up. Action is powerful. Process for 5 seconds to 10 minutes. Most negatives will take 15 seconds to 2 minutes, but intensification can be continued up to 10 minutes. Wash for 10 minutes. If negative mottles in the wash, clean off the uneven area with cotton. If problems persist, treat negative in a plain hypo solution and start over. It works most strongly on the weak areas of the negative.

pgomena · Apr 1, 2011

The unasked question is, what do you do with the stuff when you're finished with it?

We've all had negatives we'd love to apply this solution to (sorry for the pun.) It's too bad the solution is worse than the problem. Better by far to attempt a re-shoot.

Peter Gomena

bwrules · Apr 1, 2011

I agree. It's not worth risking poisoning yourself.

Robert Hall · Apr 1, 2011

Fearing chemicals is no way to handle them. We deal with all sorts of chemicals in the darkroom. Most of what we handle in the darkroom is toxic up to and including water. The primary concern is dosage. Working with chemicals safely is a matter of proper instruction, storage, and disposal methods.

There are other methods of intensification. One of my personal favorites is the use of dichromate. Keep in mind, that if there is nothing there to "intensify" it will have little effect.

Jim Noel · Apr 1, 2011

Robert Hall said:
Fearing chemicals is no way to handle them. We deal with all sorts of chemicals in the darkroom. Most of what we handle in the darkroom is toxic up to and including water. The primary concern is dosage. Working with chemicals safely is a matter of proper instruction, storage, and disposal methods.

There are other methods of intensification. One of my personal favorites is the use of dichromate. Keep in mind, that if there is nothing there to "intensify" it will have little effect.

I agree we spend too much time fearing chemicals rather than learning proper procedures for handling them.
I used Victors Mercury Intensifier somewhat regularly as a pre-teen and teenager with no apparent ill effects. I don't know of an intensifier today which will work as well, but there are those out there which work well and do not increase the grain size like mercury did. Try sepia toning if you want a good one w/o increased grain.
This is not the only "feared" chemical in the darkroom. For many years pyro went almost unused because of fear, but no one said anything about how to use it safely.
The key is EDUCATION of oneself and acquaintances.
Jim

Ian Grant · Apr 1, 2011

Having run businesses dependant on chemistry there are certain compounds to be avoided, mercury salts are one of them. An issue is the legality of purchase and disposal, these are compounds with tight controls.

The law differs slightly from country to country but you have to show why you are purchasing, may well need a licence and you have to audit their disposal. So it's not as simple as safe handling.

Ian

Crashbox · Apr 1, 2011

Shoot, I reckon I'd better hold on to the 90-plus grams of mercuric chloride I have in stock!!! Bought it about 15 years ago or so, back when the "HAZMAT" fee was only $10-

Semi-OT but in my opinion- if governments actually are banning the usage of certain chemicals- photographers who use them should fall under a grandfather clause... just my opinion.

Pgeobc · Apr 1, 2011

Well, Mercurous Chloride, aka Calomel, was once used internally in human medicine. It is, by comparison, not so toxic. Metallic Mercury is, by comparison, not so toxic, too. However, Mercuric Chloride or Bichloride of Mercury, is a legendary poison. Called Corrosive Sublimate, it was formerly used as a disinfectant. If you are old enough to remember, barbers had a jar of liquid disinfectant into which they dipped their combs between customers. The most common disinfectant used was Bichloride of Mercury. Because it is so hard to get rid of properly and washing it out of photographs likely will put Mercury into the fresh water supply, please find something else to use.

I remeber doctors using mercurial diuretics, which were organo-metallic compounds on old people and they were fine, up to a point. At that point, their patient's kidneys would fail altogether and the patient would die. Then came better drugs.

Allen in Montreal · Apr 2, 2011

I still have a bunch from the "good old days" when anything went to make a great image.
I have not touched the stuff in so long I can't even recall.
Don't think you can just post this stuff anymore.
If you are in Montreal, I will give a bottle to try out, if you agree to post the results.

"Mercury Intensifier

I'v done some reading on Mercury Intensifier manufactured By The Smith-Victor Co. This intensifier is no made because its very toxic. Its a interesting film intensifier in that it goes to the shadow areas of the negative.Can this intensifier still be gotten or made?"

Gerald C Koch · Apr 2, 2011

Metallic mercury is a problem mainly beause its vapor is highly toxic. Fortunately if some is spilled and left unmoved it forms a skin of oxide and dust which lowers its vapor pressure. Typically spils are first covered with sulfur for this purpose. Some organomercury compounds such as methylmercury are extremely toxic. If you are interested google minamata disease.

Mercuric chloride was used to disinfect surgical instruments and its use probably saved numerous lives. Such topical mercury disinfectants such as merthiolate and thimerosal are safe when used for their intended purpose. I was once prescribed merthiolate losenges for a mouth infection.

Robert Hall · Apr 4, 2011

Then did you try toning with them Gerald?

Ronald Moravec · Apr 5, 2011

It is a simply great intensifier for underdeveloped negatives.
But like all, it will not add shadow detail like exposure does.

It can be washed off the film with hypo and you can redo it.

Around 2or 3 paper grade contrast increase can be achieved with extended time or less with short time.

Fantastic stuff.

Philip Jackson · Apr 5, 2011

On one of the original Usenet photography lists somebody who worked as an environmental chemist/toxicologist worked out how many fish you could kill with a liter of VMI. I don't remember the exact details but it virtually amounted to polluting the whole of Lake Michigan.

I was once given some mercuric chloride in a glass jar with a metal lid that was rusting away. I never got around to using it, and eventually did the responsible thing andrepatriated it to my local hazmat collection center.

It's probably the essay by George Krause in the Lustrum Press Darkroom book that revived mercury intensification, but considering that you should be able to get nearly equivalent results with dichromate or silver intensification (which also have the advantage over mercury of being permanent), the safer alternatives should be tried first.

Philip Jackson

joefreeman · May 24, 2011

do your suggested alternatives intensify the shadows before the highlights like vmi does?

Philip Jackson · May 26, 2011

joefreeman said:
do your suggested alternatives intensify the shadows before the highlights like vmi does?

As stated above, the only miracle cure for under-exposure is re-exposure: re-shoot that problem neg if you can.

Intensifiers are characterized as proportional, superproportional, and subproportional. The latter are supposed to increase the lower densities or shadow detail more than the higher densities, which represent the highlights. See Grant Haist, Modern Photographic Processing, New York: Wiley, 1979, vol. 2, p. 4. However the category an intensifier belongs to isnt always clearly stated, perhaps because it may also depend what stage the process is taken to before the treatment is stopped.

L. E. Muehler and J. I. Crabtrees quinine thiosulphate intensifier seems like it might be the best candidate to try as an alternative to mercury. See Kodak Intensifier In-6 in Processing Chemicals and Formulas for Black-And-White Photography. Rochester, N.Y. : Eastman Kodak Co., 1977. 7th ed., updated; Kodak publication no J-1. Its also discussed in a lot more detail in Haist, p. 31-34. In summary, Muehler and Crabtree claimed a 900% increase in density, more than any other single-solution intensifier, but only with 1940s coarse-grained emulsionsit only had a negligible or toning effect with fine-grained films. It is also not permanent: the estimate was at least five years at 75 degrees F and 60% RH.

See Processing Chemicals and Formulas for Black-And-White Photography for Kodak Chromium Intensifier In-4 and Kodak Silver Intensifier In-5, which would probably be considered more proportional than subproportional. This edition still had Kodak's Mercury Intensifier In-1 in it, but I doubt Kodak would want to re-publish it now. They subsequently became much more conscious of safety and pollution issues. Even rinse water used after a mercury intensifier probably shouldn't be sent down the drain.

Incidentally, the stability of pyro is probably similar to the brownish image produced by the In-6 quinone-thiosulfate intensifier. When anybody raises this as an issue, all you get is anecdotes: Ive seen some old pyro negs that seem fine. Maybe pyro stained negs will indeed keep much longer in more optimal conditions, but theyre still inevitably going to fade eventually.

Philip Jackson

joefreeman · May 27, 2011

"Even rinse water used after a mercury intensifier probably shouldn't be sent down the drain."

this may explain why my cat was throwing up after licking my yellow negatives.
but seriously, thanks for all the info; i'm going to look into the thiosulphate intensifier.
i made a post a couple days ago titled "hp5 pyrocat thin edges". if you wouldn't mind taking a look at it (you seem quite knowledgeable), i could use any and all opinions.
take care.

wogster · May 28, 2011

Philip Jackson said:
As stated above, the only miracle cure for under-exposure is re-exposure: re-shoot that problem neg if you can.

The real solution is to know when your camera's light meter is lying to you, and to manually correct the exposure.

One of the issues with meters, is that they assume everything is 18% grey, so as a B&W photographer, you need to train your eye to know what 18% grey looks like, and what 1,2,3,4,5 stops above and below 18% grey look like (hint look at the shade chart for the Zone System). If the scene is say 2 stops above, you set your camera 2 stops below, now your exposure is correct. With sheet film, you have the option of processing each exposure separately, with roll film, you don't, so you use a strict regimen of processing, where the results are predictable. If every exposure is within a stop or so, you don't need intensifiers.

Robert Maxey · Jul 13, 2021

Bob here is all in favor of mercury intensifier. It forces you to make a choice: either learn proper developing and exposure or you will die in a dark room filled with trays, chemicals and bad choices. Smiley!

And... by the way ... forget electronic flash, and switch to flash powder. It will teach you how to fight fires. Ditto nitrate negatives; they help you quit smoking in bed while reviewing your negatives.

All kidding aside, forget about mercury. Not worth the problems it could cause.

Safety Bob says Be Safe!

Paul Howell · Jul 13, 2021

Just out of curiosity what made you dig up a 10 year old post?

mshchem · Jul 13, 2021

Hit on an interesting thread

Alex Benjamin · Oct 26, 2022

Was just reading about this in Eleanor Lewis' Darkroom (Lustrum Press). Photographer George Krause describes his extensive use of Victor's Mercury Intensifier—for intensification of both normal and thin negs but also for its effect on grain pattern—and how he got the up-to-then secret formula from a Smith-Victor employee called Mr. Smith after the product was discontinued.

Here's his description of the following photo: " The portrait of Manelito is printed from a thin, flat 35mm negative. Printing this negative on a high contrast paper gave satisfactory separation between highlight and shadow areas, but lost detail in the shadows. VMI corrected the problem, attacking the thin portions of the negative. Intensification also organized the grain pattern to give the illusion of greater image sharpness."

gone · Oct 26, 2022

I think the fear of poisoning oneself is avoided by understanding what you have to do to safely use it. I would imagine gloves, eye cover, and most of all, really good ventilation (or just don a respirator mask). There are chemicals worse than mercury, it can be handled safely, but safety precautions need to be taken.

In my youth, mercury was everywhere. In thermometers mostly, and we rolled balls of mercury around in our palms in science class. Don't swallow it, don't get it on you and don't breathe it. Common sense things everyone should know if they work in a darkroom. Just do your due diligence and be 100% sure of what it can come into contact w/ when mixing it w/ other chemicals, and what it can't.

GRHazelton · Oct 27, 2022

Someone earlier refered to the Minimata tragedy. Here's a Wiki: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minamata_disease
As photographers we should all be aware of W Eugene Smith's powerful reportage of the Chisso Corporation's contamination of the ocean and the effects of seafood contaminated with methyl mercury on the folks who ate that seafood.
Smith was savagely beaten by thugs hired by the Chisso Corp in reprisal for the publicity engendered by the photo below.
His iconic photo of Tomoko and Mother in the Bath https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tomoko_and_Mother_in_the_Bath is, I am certain, familiar to all of us.

RalphLambrecht · Oct 27, 2022

Louis Nargi said:
I'v done some reading on Mercury Intensifier manufactured By The Smith-Victor Co. This intensifier is no made because its very toxic. Its a interesting film intensifier in that it goes to the shadow areas of the negative.Can this intensifier still be gotten or made?

You wouldn't want it even if you could get it!

Mercury Intensifier

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency