No! Please not Provia!

[StoneNYC]

Internet cite please.

It's on the forum within the first page or two of new post replies here on APUG

*sigh* EDIT: here... (there was a url link here which no longer exists)

Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[pukalo]

Getting way off topic of original post, butt Blix is NO PROBLEM at all for use and discard home development. For use within 4 weeks of mixing, it is still potent and removes all silver. Tetenal E6 kit which uses blix gives results as good as the old Kodak. 7 Bath kit, but is much more convenient and simpler to use.
I base this on several hundred rolls over several years with the Tetenal kit.
Blix is nbe good for a replenishment system like labs use, in which the base chemical stock is used for many months, and slowly topped up or replenished with fresh chems. It is not long term stable and should be used and discarded within 4 weeks.

 

[brianmquinn]

I can agree on the need for a stabilizer but the Tentenal kit includes one.

As for Storage Kodak wrote in the instructions for their 6 bath kit,
“For best results, store mixed solutions a maximum of 4
weeks if stored under nitrogen or 1 week if stored in partially filled bottles. “

So I don’t see that is being a longer shelf life then the 3 bath Tentenal kit.

 

[StoneNYC]

I'm not an expert but PE is and so I'll believe what he said... That's all


Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Roger Cole]

PE has stated many times that the blix does not fully eliminate all the silver and that over time the image can degrade, also the Arista kits don't contain stabilizer which they don't tell you you need in order to avoid color fading... I can't speak for the tentenal kits on the stabilizer but blix is still blix. It also doesn't last very long, were a separate fixer and bleach will last much longer once mixed so you can space out your use of the chemistry instead of worrying about it oxidizing too soon.


Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk

Not to dispute PE and I can't vouch for the longevity, but many of us have had absolutely no problems with three bath kits. When they first came out I was doing a lot of E6 and compared six and three bath and actually preferred the results of the Unicolor 3 bath versus the Unicolor 6 bath I had been using, by a slight margin.

Six bath is better, I won't dispute that, but if I decide to do E6 myself again, and I probably will, I will happily use three bath.

And since the kits come with the same amount of each, it doesn't really matter if it doesn't last as long. It will outlast the developer and that's all that really matters. Save up enough rolls/sheets to use the capacity of ever how much it takes to cover the film in your tanks, process that much film, and discard the solutions.

 

[Roger Cole]

I can agree on the need for a stabilizer but the Tentenal kit includes one.

As for Storage Kodak wrote in the instructions for their 6 bath kit,
“For best results, store mixed solutions a maximum of 4
weeks if stored under nitrogen or 1 week if stored in partially filled bottles. “

So I don’t see that is being a longer shelf life then the 3 bath Tentenal kit.

Kodak is notoriously conservative on storage life estimates. You can usually at least double their figures IME.

OTOH, as I said, mix up only enough to do the film you need to process, and dispose of the solutions. Storage life of working strength is, to me, a non-issue. Storage life of partially full opened concentrates IS, but doesn't seem to be a problem with E6. I kept the old Unicolor stuff long enough to use up an entire gallon, better part of a year best I remember, with no problems at all.

 

[brianmquinn]

I'm not an expert but PE is and so I'll believe what he said... That's all


Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk

I respect PE, and I assume you do too since you have cited him.
Please let me know where and when did he said that the Tentenal kit was not good for home processing?
HOME PROCESSING - That is where you started this on Post #97.
NOT lab processing see post #102 and read it carefully.
Please provide a direct link to that post where PE said that the Tentenal kit was not adequate for home processing.
I have searched and can't find one.

 

[brianmquinn]

Kodak is notoriously conservative on storage life estimates.

I totally agree.

 

[StoneNYC]

I respect PE, and I assume you do too since you have cited him.
Please let me know where and when did he said that the Tentenal kit was not good for home processing?
HOME PROCESSING - That is where you started this on Post #97.
NOT lab processing see post #102 and read it carefully.
Please provide a direct link to that post where PE said that the Tentenal kit was not adequate for home processing.
I have searched and can't find one.

There are many, I'm not going to waste my time reading through the past year of threads I'm subscribed to just to cite PE, sorry, if you don't believe me then don't. Sorry but I'm subscribed to about 1,000+ threads...


Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[brianmquinn]

If you will not waste your time to cite a source I assume you have none. Do not post and say something unless you can back it up.
You have about 3,000 post in the last year. Most of them are just your BS.
Of course as you also posted,
"...of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong."

 

[wildbill]

If you will not waste your time to cite a source I assume you have none. Do not post and say something unless you can back it up.
You have about 3,000 post in the last year. Most of them are just your BS.
Of course as you also posted,
"...of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong."

HAHAHAHAHAHAH!

BS, that's bachelor of science, right?

 

[StoneNYC]

If you will not waste your time to cite a source I assume you have none. Do not post and say something unless you can back it up.
You have about 3,000 post in the last year. Most of them are just your BS.
Of course as you also posted,
"...of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong."

Really? How old are you?

I use my phone and I'm not often on the computer so it would be very difficult to search posts, especially when the threads dealing with E-6 info often get to the 200+ post count, it would just be difficult and could take hours on my phone, it doesn't mean he didn't say it, if you want the information why don't you search all the threads I've posted in and then tell me it was easy to find.

Just because someone doesn't want to cater to your will doesn't make them wrong.

Why are you so hostile/aggressive about this anyway?


Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[lxdude]

Do not post and say something unless you can back it up.

Is that the rule here? Can you back it up?

 

[Truzi]

So, how 'bout that local sports team.

 

[StoneNYC]

Is that the rule here? Can you back it up?

I don't believe you're asking a valid question, can I see another post where someone has asked this question before?


Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[brianmquinn]

I searched and While PE is not a fan of blix here is something he wrote:

"There is no connection between archival quality and the use of blix or bleach-fix. The argument is removal of silver from color films which affects grain, sharpness and color repronduction. In E6 films, it can also affect whites."

"With a blix, there is a chance to have silver retention with some film / blix combinations. This is due to the heavy silver load, the type of silver developed, and certain inhibitors used in color films to control image quality. The dyes also act to protect the silver from the bleach and so the dye cloud must be rendered penetrable by the blix.

There are ways to limit any problems with blix kits.

Use a long blix time! Use 2x – 4x the suggested time or more. It will not hurt. It does make the process longer.

Mix the two parts right before use and in the quantity you are going to use. Don’t re-use it. But, this increases cost."


The link to the full thread titled "Just how bad is blix vs bleach & fixer?" is here.
(there was a url link here which no longer exists)


Also of interest is the post "The definitive word (I hope) on color stabilzers! " by PE
(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

 

[StoneNYC]

I searched and While PE is not a fan of blix here is something he wrote:

"There is no connection between archival quality and the use of blix or bleach-fix. The argument is removal of silver from color films which affects grain, sharpness and color repronduction. In E6 films, it can also affect whites."

"With a blix, there is a chance to have silver retention with some film / blix combinations. This is due to the heavy silver load, the type of silver developed, and certain inhibitors used in color films to control image quality. The dyes also act to protect the silver from the bleach and so the dye cloud must be rendered penetrable by the blix.

There are ways to limit any problems with blix kits.

Use a long blix time! Use 2x – 4x the suggested time or more. It will not hurt. It does make the process longer.

Mix the two parts right before use and in the quantity you are going to use. Don’t re-use it. But, this increases cost."


The link to the full thread titled "Just how bad is blix vs bleach & fixer?" is here.
(there was a url link here which no longer exists)


Also of interest is the post "The definitive word (I hope) on color stabilzers! " by PE
(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

I concede I was wrong about the archival bit but was correct about the colors being off bit.

Either way I would prefer not to have to blix something for 2-3 times the amount if I don't have to.

Either way its still not as good as a 6 bath and I'm not happy till a 6 bath exists for the US again.

If you're happy with your 3 bath that's great, but I'm not.

Thanks for doing the search, that was the thread I was thinking of.

On a side note I'm glad you enjoy E-6 films, the more E-6 users the better.


Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[brianmquinn]

Agreed 6 step is "better" (reasons are listed in the threads linked to) but as long as there are ANY quality E6 kits it is good.
I hate it when there is a bad product out there that makes people think it is all garbage and give up on color home processing.
Even a good product can get a bad reputation if it is used incorrectly and then people start to bash it on the web.

 

[StoneNYC]

Agreed 6 step is "better" (reasons are listed in the threads linked to) but as long as there are ANY quality E6 kits it is good.
I hate it when there is a bad product out there that makes people think it is all garbage and give up on color home processing.
Even a good product can get a bad reputation if it is used incorrectly and then people start to bash it on the web.

Fair enough ill shush as yo not cause off-putting from E-6


Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Roger Cole]

Good grief, what's the difference between extended time in one bath versus shorter times in two baths? In my case I'm using a Jobo and reading while the machine spins, with one eye on the timer anyway. While I don't want to take two hours or anything doubling blix time is a complete shrug.

And as for colors etc. - again I compared a 6 and 3 bath kit from the same manufacturer and actually slightly preferred the 3 bath results. Not by any big margin as I doubt even the pickiest would have noted the difference unless looking closely for it side by side.

And it doesn't actually cost more to use the blix and discard when it comes in a kit of the same quantity as the other solutions. It would if you bought it separately.

I can understand preferring 6 when available but the fact they aren't readily available is really a non-issue.

 

[lxdude]

Good grief, what's the difference between extended time in one bath versus shorter times in two baths?

Saturation?

 

[Roger Cole]

Saturation?

Well that's not really my point. My point was that it makes no sense to me to complain that doubling the blix time for a three bath processing scheme makes it too long when your preferred alternative is a six bath that will almost certainly take even longer than three baths including a double blix time.

 

[coigach]

So sad... I still long for BW positives.

http://www.dr5.com/blackandwhiteslide/filmreviewdev1.html