At this advanced age in life, I find myself having set up quite a nice little darkroom in a mostly unused bathroom. Better darkroom that I ever had. Anyway, I've pulled out a lot of old things I've had for many years. Some since the 70's. Chemicals, paper, equipment, and I'm pleased with the percentage of various stuff still proves adequate to get going till I order new supplies. But lets get to the question. I dug up these 2 unopened bottles of KRST. I mixed up some, first at 1:10, and it did nothing. I mean nothing at all. So I upped it to 1:5. Still nothing, after 1-2 hours of a test print dunked in it. But I also remember back in the day, some papers would not selenium tone no matter what. Seems like they were always RC papers. So, I'm posting my question with a photo of both. Is it the old paper, the old toner, or both? FWIW, My sense of smell is shot, but I swear I sense the slight smell of ammonia, which is a familiar smell from my young days for selenium toner. Thank you.
Old Kodak Selenium Toner Question.
-
A
- Thread starter F4U
- Start date
Recent Classifieds
-
For Sale FS: KW Praktina FX w/ 50mm f2.8 Zeiss Tessar. Repair, Display or Parts
- Started by AnselMortensen
-
For Sale Awesome Agfa Ambi Silette 3 Lens Outfit
- Started by pdccamerqs
-
For Sale For Sale or Trade! Schneider 65mm f/8 Super Angulon
- Started by pdccamerqs
Forum statistics
MattKing
Moderator
llford Multigrade IV paper was designed to give extremely consistent results when used in a wide variety of circumstances, employing a wide variety of developers.
One of the consequences of those design goals was that the paper is relatively resistant to toning, and particularly resistant to selenium toning.
In addition, Multigrade IV could be quite old, and that selenium toner is very, very old, and the combination of old paper with very, very old selenium toner may very well reduce the response.
Just a reminder: selenium toner requires careful handling. Dried selenium toner residue is very bad for you if inhaled.
Does the paper say Harman Technology in the small print on the back label, or does it say Ilford Imaging?
If it says Ilford Imaging, it definitely is old.
One of the consequences of those design goals was that the paper is relatively resistant to toning, and particularly resistant to selenium toning.
In addition, Multigrade IV could be quite old, and that selenium toner is very, very old, and the combination of old paper with very, very old selenium toner may very well reduce the response.
Just a reminder: selenium toner requires careful handling. Dried selenium toner residue is very bad for you if inhaled.
Does the paper say Harman Technology in the small print on the back label, or does it say Ilford Imaging?
If it says Ilford Imaging, it definitely is old.
It's Ilford. And it's a wee bit age-fogged. But nothing I can't put a dab of KBr in the Dektol to knock out. Surprisingly I had a full box of Kodabromide from 1961 that was age-fogged pretty bad. But not so bad I can't load down my Dektol with KBr and use for contact proofs. The Polycontrast Rapid from the 70's and 80's, and the full box of Agfa Portriga Rapid all turned slap black in 30 sec or less. I thought it was the paper and not the toner (mostly). I'm going to keep it for now till I find some cheap fiber base. BTW, I mixed up this gallon of Dektol 5-6 years ago. It was slightly brown, but I've seen far worse. Worked perfect. Thanks.
I've used old Kodak selenium toner, no trouble. As Matt said, Ilford MGIV doesn't respond much to Selenium. I use KRST 1+3, it gives a slight increase in D-max with cold tone papers. I dilute it for warm tone papers, warm tone paper responds dramatically to toners.
I have KRST in 1 qt original glass bottles 1960's 1970's ? (people gave it to me) still works. Selenium salts are nasty, no tasting.
I have KRST in 1 qt original glass bottles 1960's 1970's ? (people gave it to me) still works. Selenium salts are nasty, no tasting.
MattKing
Moderator
Ilford Imaging labelling means before the receivership in 2005 - but it could be much older than that.
The current Ilford RC paper - often referred to as Multigrade V, but not actually labelled as such, is apparently intentionally engineered to be more responsive to toning than Multigrade IV RC.
With stronger (and fresher?) selenium toner, the Multigrade IV eventually responds, but you may not be happy with the resulting image tone.
Which one does better, KBr, which I have, or Kodak Anti-Fog, which I don't have? I'm a cheapskate. Maybe worse than Jack Benny. I'm already not happy with this batch of old paper. I want some brand new Kodabromide or Medalist single weight fiber base. I never liked RC paper.
MattKing
Moderator
Jack Benny was born more than 130 years ago - your reference might not be picked up by everyone
I doubt there is a single answer for your question, and you certainly can't go out and buy a new package of Kodak Anti-Fog to experiment with.
The performance of either one will probably vary from package to package of fogged paper.
Compared to now, many of the early RC papers such as the early Kodak Polycontrast made more liberal use of trace amounts of incorporated, developer-like components to fine-tune speed and contrast. That inclusion means that those early paper, beings so long past their use before dates, will most likely be unusable due to fog.
Thanks again Mr King. Tomorrow I will get in my new darkroom for more experimentation. So far I'm rather pleased with the way some of this old outdated materials and equipment are performing. It's almost as if I haven't missed a lick after these many years. as for brother Jack, he rode in a 1923 Maxwell. I'm not that old or rich that I get to have a chauffeur/butler. I still have to drive my own 1956 Studebaker Commander and operate the 3 speed on the tree. That's my camera/RC plane car. I suppose I mentioned him because I still remember the day in 1974 as a youth, walking out to my "darkroom" in that boiling hot yard shed, where my enlarger and trays were, and a radio. Jack Benny had died. I never liked surprise obituaries about good people when I'm having fun.
MattKing
Moderator
I agree, with one caveat.
Bottles as old as the one pictured can deteriorate to the point of leaking.
The easiest way to verify the correct working of the toner is to use it with a paper that tones readily. Something like Fomatone. Lacking that, you could take any kind of paper and develop it only halfway so that it yields a very warm-toned image to begin with. Then test the toner on it to see if it has any effect. By severely underdeveloping the paper, you end up with a much smaller silver particle size that's far more susceptible to toning, and that will also show a color shift much more readily.
Given the age of that bottle of toner, I'd not be surprised if it turned out to be dead. The black residue caked to the inside of the bottle (note the shadows) is probably the selenium that has deposited on the walls of the bottle.
Given the age of that bottle of toner, I'd not be surprised if it turned out to be dead. The black residue caked to the inside of the bottle (note the shadows) is probably the selenium that has deposited on the walls of the bottle.
Potassium bromide restrains but can also warm the tone of the print, if you use enough of it. The other readily available restrainer is benzotrazole and that will restrain to the point of killing your developer if you use too much. It will not warm the tone of the print, though - if anything, it cools it. I find benzo the better restrainer for fogged paper.
Good luck finding Kodabromide that's not fogged. I think you might have better luck finding Medalist that is usable. All the packs I have are still fine.
This!
Matt, mine was in the original plastic gallon jug too!
| Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links. To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here. |
PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:  |