Photo-Flo in the Developer? Hell Yes !!

[david b]

Like a few others here, I have had issues with bubbles during development.
(there was a url link here which no longer exists) not long ago about these issues.

I thought I had it taken care off by removing the reels during development, with the lights off of course, but the bubbles seem to have returned.

But tonight, I did 2 tanks of film (4 rolls) and added two drops of photo-flo to the developer and the film looks greats. No bubbles at all.

My tanks hold 1000ml.

I just completed a third tank, and the negs look great.

I am not claiming success until I see the contact sheets.

But for those of you who might be having issues, give it a try. Get an eye dropper and add a single drop of photo-flo per 500ml.

Good luck.

 

[m_liddell]

I have been plagued by this problem for years now and tried everything I can think of (and have read on here) and the issue remined.

I will try this out as soon as I can!

 

[Ian Grant]

Yes, just posted similar in a recent thread.

I posted (there was a url link here which no longer exists) of some tests I did with no lid on the tank and one or two drops of Photo-flow were sufficient to cure the problem. Not all devs need it as some commercial devs contain Calgon or similar and traces of a surfactant to prevent the bubbles. There are plenty of old patents to show this was a known problem a few years ago.

Beware not to use too much Photoflow or that causes even worseproblems with foaming.

Ian

 

[John Simmons]

The problem with using Photo-Flo is that over time residue will build up on your reel and cause a significant increase in density on the edges of your negatives. Edwal makes a product specifically for this purpose that does not cause this problem. The product is Edwal LFN which is a low foam wetting agent. One drop added to your developer will do the trick. It is a complete substitute for photo-flo.

Regards,
John

 

[SuzanneR]

Anyone try this with LFN?

 

[SuzanneR]

oops... John, I didn't hear you typing, question answered!! Thanks!!!

 

[Ian Grant]

John, I've been using most of my reels for well over 30 years, a couple for 40 years and in that time I have never had problem with a build from any commercial Photo-flo / wetting agent.

Ian

 

[eclarke]

My brother in law worked in the photo lab at RIT to support himself through school there. They used Lux liquid dish soap...Evan Clarke

 

[psvensson]

Ilford films contain wetting agents already, and cause minor foaming in the developer. I don't know about other brands.

 

[kodachrome64]

Do you still have to rap the tank on the table in between agitations if you use a wetting agent? Photo-Flow is cheap as dirt and if it will help me not have to do that (or do it less) I would certainly put it in the dev. As it is, I hit the tank firmly on the counter or against my hand in between every agitation and have never had problems with air bells, though I eventually my hand gets sore.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Wetting agents tend to speed up development, so you may have to adjust development time with some films. The gunk that forms will actually form from any surfactant if it dries on a reel. Surfactants are like "snot" (sorry) when they dry down and stick to everything. Gluey little critters form.

PE

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

I finally beat the problem of foaming in the developer, but noticed once I started using HC-110 developer that I got a lot of foam again. But no air bells strangely enough. I also had my problems using Pyrocat. No other developer gave me the same problem. It was mostly a problem doing stand development, with semistand or regular agitation there is enough agitation to dislodge or move the air bells around. I've come to learn that Pyrocat is designed mainly for continuous agitation, so I'm not complaining. It's great film developer.
It's only on the edge anyway, not in the middle of the film, so I didn't particularly care. Now I use mainly Rodinal and no foaming, no particularly large amount of air bubbles. I rap my tank really hard on the counter top before I set it down to stand for an hour. But I put a towel in between so not to damage anything. It works for me.
My reels are about ten years old and are of a brand I can't remember. They're plastic and have kept pretty clean.

I take the film out of the tank and out of the reel before I dunk it in a second container that contains Photo Flo.

- Thomas

 

[Monophoto]

This subject is ancient history - I recall reading a discussion about using wetting agents in developers to avoid bubbles in one of the photo magazines (probably either PopPhoto or Peterson's) back in the 1970's. And as Ron points out, the warning at the time was that the addition of a wetting agent could affect development, so it would be prudent to test before jumping in.

Also, the issue of the gumminess of wetting agents has been discussed ad nauseum. The solution is simply to use a much weaker solution - more water per 'capfull' of wetting agent. I mix the stuff half as strong as recommended, and have never had a problem.

 

[kodachrome64]

I use Photo-Flo at a much lower dilution than recommended also but I never put my reels in it. I remove the film from the reel and dunk it in another container which has about a liter of water in it with a 1.3 mL of Photo-Flo 200.

I wonder if, added at the aforementioned strength, it would have any other effects than intended. Maybe it's weak enough where it won't gum up if washed off the reels immediately. Maybe it will also not necessarily speed up development. Hmmm...I think this needs to be tested.

 

[Andrew Moxom]

So there goes the neighborhood. Sorry to hear that you are having these problems again David.... These issues truly suck!

There are some like me that like to keep photo-flo away from my reels and tanks as I've had problems in the past with edges of the film getting strange marks on them that went away after a serious scrubbing in bleach and non use of photo-flo..... Is there any scientific evidence as to what is the best practice? I am at a loss as to know what is the right way and have had film anomalies with and without using photoflo in my tanks.... Right now I am having film anomalies again... No photo-flo on my reels or in my tanks.... Anyone have any clear evidence on the action of either and whether there is something to be gained by putting photoflo in with the soup?

:munch:

 

[PVia]

Use a 1 or 2 minute pre-soak...you shouldn't have any trouble with air bubbles.

 

[david b]

Tried the pre-soak too. I've always done it that way.

Still the bubbles persist (ed).

 

[wclavey]

Use a 1 or 2 minute pre-soak...you shouldn't have any trouble with air bubbles.

Yes, I have struggled with airbells too, even with a presoak, primarily on Arista EDU 4x5 film. TMY-2 developed the same way in the same tanks, with the same chemicals never showed the airbell problem. So I decided to add 3 drops of Photoflow to the presoak and the airbell problem disappeared.

It was my rationale that there is something about the Arista (Foma) emulsion that made the airbells more difficult to dislodge that is not a problem in the Kodak emulsion, where the presoak alone took care of the problem.

But whatever the reason, 3 drops of Photoflow in 1000 ml of presoak water fixed it.

 

[2F/2F]

The problem with using Photo-Flo is that over time residue will build up on your reel and cause a significant increase in density on the edges of your negatives.

Do you have any examples you could show us?

 

[Trask]

Try my formula: 4 ml Listerine Mint mouthwash and two drops Photo-Flo in 400ml distilled H2O as a pre-soak -- 4 minutes or so. Gets rid of that pesky anti-halation layer, enough residual wetness stays on the film to help avoid bubbles when you add developer, and your friends and co-workers will enjoy your company. It works a treat, as our UK friends might say.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Listerine is a waste. It is mostly Thymol and there is usually a Thymol type compound or a Phenol in the film itself.

PE

 

[John W]

Regarding preventing gumming up reels with photo-flo, is there an effective protocol to clean the reels after development? Or is a gumming-up and eventual harsh-cleaning cycle about as good as it gets? Right now, I clean off the reels with hot water until they seem to lose that 'photo-flo' feel, just as a matter of general kit care.

 

[wclavey]

Water in our part of TX is very hard, and I found that plastic reels (Paterson & Jobo) tended to get "sticky" after a while, even washing them in warm water after each use to get rid of the Photoflow, and the film would start to hang up in them when they were loaded. My metal reels (what I use the most) seem fine, but the film does not slide all along the reel when loading them or they may have shown the same problems. I now run all the reels through the dishwasher once a year or so, when I can feel the loading start to drag, and that seems to keep them working fine and has had no ill effects on the reels. I put the plastic reels on the top rack away from the heating elements and I put the metal reels on the bottom rack.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Regarding preventing gumming up reels with photo-flo, is there an effective protocol to clean the reels after development? Or is a gumming-up and eventual harsh-cleaning cycle about as good as it gets? Right now, I clean off the reels with hot water until they seem to lose that 'photo-flo' feel, just as a matter of general kit care.

I use 100F water and a small brush to clean the reels. I have both plastic and SS reels.

I've never had a sticky deposit.

PE

 

[notmatt]

I use concentrated dishwasher detergent, plus some washing soda, and hot water, and just let things soak until the water cools, then rinse thoroughly. I'm working on the theory that it's a similar problem to soap-scum build up caused by hard water.

I haven't gone too far to test that theory, but I'll note that it was a much more pernicious problem for me in Scotland with very hard water than it is in Vancouver where it's fairly soft - I just do it now out of superstition.