Photoflo in developer.

[Amund]

I`ve used Photoflo in the prewet and developer when tray processing in HC-110, to avoid scraching the film too easily. And it`s great, the film is much easier to handle when doing 8-10 sheets at the time.
Is there any reason I can`t do this with PMK and Pyrocat HD too?

 

[Amund]

No opinions on this?

Well, I`ll let you know if it makes Pyrocat HD explode tomorrow.

 

[kwmullet]

I may try this with Diafine and a Yankee sheet film tank. We're having issues with uneven development, even if we use 6 sheets instead of 12 (double-spacing them). I figure surface tension is an issue and a wetting agent could hep fix that. I'd hate to corrupt my Diafine, though. I figure I've got maybe a year's worth of use out of it still.

-KwM-

 

[Amund]

Have done this with both PMK and Pyrocat HD now, and all negatives came out great.

 

[Photo Engineer]

I have read up on the activity of the ingredients of photo flo on development.

I have found that one of the ingredients in photo flo can act as a development accelerator under certain conditions. It is often used as an addendum in B&W films and papers for this purpose.

So, please be careful, as the addition of photo flo to a developer might cause overdevelopment. Even though it has apparently not caused any problems so far, does not mean that it might not in the future with a given combination of film and developer.

PE

 

[Gerald Koch]

I know that years ago Kodak warned against adding Photo-Flo to its developers.

 

[dancqu]

I know that years ago Kodak warned against...

Perhaps proscribed because of the method of use.
Specifically Kodak may have had tank or reuse of
chemistry in mind. Dan

 

[avandesande]

There are other surfactents that should be completely inactive in a developer. Tween?

I have read up on the activity of the ingredients of photo flo on development.

I have found that one of the ingredients in photo flo can act as a development accelerator under certain conditions. It is often used as an addendum in B&W films and papers for this purpose.

So, please be careful, as the addition of photo flo to a developer might cause overdevelopment. Even though it has apparently not caused any problems so far, does not mean that it might not in the future with a given combination of film and developer.

PE

 

[Photo Engineer]

There are other surfactents that should be completely inactive in a developer. Tween?

Tween might be in the same chemical family as the ingredient in photo flo that causes increased development rates.

I'm going to look at a specific set of antifoaming spreading agents that might be better. I have gotten 3 samples of these to try.

If they are OK and are not in the same chemical family then I will post the information.

I have a lot to do, so it may be later this summer. Sorry about that.

The chemicals that are potentially harmful are the polyethoxy ethyl alcohol derivatives. They are not really harmful as such, but can lead to increased development rates if my understanding of this is correct. It may be that the amount and the particular polymer chosen for photo flo 200 is not active in this way. I simply urge caution. Commercially, I believe that some of these are sold under the name Triton X 100.

PE

 

[Gerald Koch]

It's been so long, but it was my impression that the problem caused by Photo-Flo was not simply foaming but either fog or excessive development.

 

[Amund]

Thanks for your input.
I got this tip from someone who has used photo-flo in his developer(hc-110) for 10+ years without any problems, so I`m not afraid to use it in HC-110, and from what I can see , it wasn`t a problem in PMK or Pyrocat HD either...

 

[Photo Engineer]

It's been so long, but it was my impression that the problem caused by Photo-Flo was not simply foaming but either fog or excessive development.

The fogging and excessive development is one that I have heard as well.

Photo flo can be shown to accelerate the development of some emulsions. I have done it with one of my own coatings, but this is not proof. I have heard it from co-workers at EK and it has been used in coatings there for the same purpose. In fact, that is the reason I tested it in my coatings.

It may be though that the level used is important, emulsion and type is important and etc. In my experiments, it accelerated one emulsion and had no effect on another.

PE

 

[Amund]

The fogging and excessive development is one that I have heard as well.

Photo flo can be shown to accelerate the development of some emulsions. I have done it with one of my own coatings, but this is not proof. I have heard it from co-workers at EK and it has been used in coatings there for the same purpose. In fact, that is the reason I tested it in my coatings.

It may be though that the level used is important, emulsion and type is important and etc. In my experiments, it accelerated one emulsion and had no effect on another.

PE

It`s nice to know that know that I could run into some troubles doing this, so far I`ve only used Tri-X 320, and will be careful with other emulsions and test first...

 

[Monophoto]

I have a very faint recollection of a discussion of this subject in one of the photo magazines many years ago.

I believe the general concensus was that reducing the surface tension of the development solution would help achieve even development. On the down side, I believe there was some concern that PhotoFlo might retard development.

I guess my thought on this is that the combination doesn't explode, it's probably safe. But its not possible to predict exactly what impact it will have on development - either as acceleration or retardation. The only way to answer that is to do some testing.

 

[Photo Engineer]

I have a very faint recollection of a discussion of this subject in one of the photo magazines many years ago.

I believe the general concensus was that reducing the surface tension of the development solution would help achieve even development. On the down side, I believe there was some concern that PhotoFlo might retard development.

I guess my thought on this is that the combination doesn't explode, it's probably safe. But its not possible to predict exactly what impact it will have on development - either as acceleration or retardation. The only way to answer that is to do some testing.

Yep, testing is always good.

And, in the final analysis, no matter what anyone says, I say "Use what works for you".

PE

 

[lee]

we tried photoflo in graphic arts developers and found that the stuff made the film to slippery to travel thru the processors we were using at the time. It was very hard to wash off the rubber rollers also. We quit using it after that.

lee\c

 

[Gay Larson]

ok, please don't think I'm stupid but I recently developed a roll of 120 film in a jobo and had not rinsed it well enough after the last developing session so I had photoflo in my developer and now I have what looks like bubbles in my negatives. It's a nice roll too and I wish I could get the bubbles off the negatives. any suggestions, am I way off this topic?

 

[Gay Larson]

well do you all think I'm stupid and just don't want to say so???

 

[Photo Engineer]

Gay;

I can truly say that what you did is NOT stupid. It is just one of those things that take place. Now I've done stupid things! And no, I won't list them here, as they are too embarassing!

PE

 

[donbga]

I`ve used Photoflo in the prewet and developer when tray processing in HC-110, to avoid scraching the film too easily. And it`s great, the film is much easier to handle when doing 8-10 sheets at the time.
Is there any reason I can`t do this with PMK and Pyrocat HD too?

Instead of using Photo-Flo simply use a pinch, and I do mean a pinch, of sodium carbonate in your pre-soak water. I've been doing this for years and it works great.

 

[dancqu]

well do you all think I'm stupid ...???

Give yourself break! Forgetful is the word.
Stupid equals ignorant. Dan

 

[Gay Larson]

well what is the consensus, is the film completly ruined or is there a way to fix it?