Hello
after many months of producing pt/pd prints without too many issues I have now run into an problem where the last six prints are covered in white blobs especially in the mid-tones and the highlights are overexposing. In fact, looking at the prints it appears that the issue with the highlights is getting worse!
So far I have tried:
A new batch of Ferric Oxalate
Testing PH of my Potassium Oxalate developer (it's 6).
Filtering my developer
Changing the contact frame
Using a hake brush and a puddle pusher - both produce the same problem
A new pack of paper - Hahnemule in both cases
Completely fresh clearing bath
Using and not using tween
Has anyone had the same problem and, if so, what the solution to this problem?
Agreed. This sort of problem is nearly always paper-related. The exact cause is a matter of Higher Paper Science - i.e., we'll probably never know, but switching to another paper usually helps.Print w/ same chemicals, etc but change the paper. That would be my first guess.
I blowdry my coated paper, but only with the cool air setting, and only long enough to get it surface dry to the touch.I had issues with a previous batch of Hahnemuhle PR. Also, my tap water is very alkaline, so for clearing my kallitypes, I have to put in a wee bit of vinegar. Acidifying the paper may help. I have also gotten into the habit of putting one drop of Tween in the sensitiser, and letting the coated paper air dry. I used to hit it with a blowdryer. Stopped that insane practice.
Update
Short version: it wasn't the paper. It was the clearing bath
Long version: the following day after the previous post I checked the Bergger print again and found that the mottling was still present, although much reduced. Applying the principle of only changing one thing at a time I did another print with the citric acid 3 x bath and checked the print the following day to see no mottling but there were now slight yellow stains so did another print, with Hahnemule and it was all good.
Looking back over my notes I saw that I had opened a new tub of sodium metabisulphite (same CAS number as sodium sulfite from B&S) and tipped the end of the old one into it. The first few prints would have used the residue of the old batch and then the new one would have come into use and it would seem that that is the cause. I've ordered a new tub of sulphate and will throw the other one away.
Good!Sorry, meant sulphite and not sulphate.
That's the bottle which was supplied by B&S. I just spotted that it's bisulfite and not sulfite so that's my mistake. However, aren't bisulfite and metabisulphite different?
Thanks for your reply and clarification. I now feel slightly less stupid because it wasn't entirely my mistake. I simply took it that the CAS number on the label was what I had to order and that the name was simply a difference between American English and English English. My take away from your reply is to prioritise the chemical name and research further if in doubt.
Which is likely why it was mislabeled. I wouldn't be surprised if at least 50% of the jars of 'bisulfite'/'bisulphite' are mislabeled this way.When either sodium sulfite or sodium bisulfite are dissolved in water the resulting anion is the same... sulfite SO32-. The composition vis-a-vis the cations will be a bit different as will the concentration of the various species, but in all likelihood the solution should work as intended.
Nooo...but you said they swapped sulfite and bisulfite (or metabisulfite). That's quite a different matter, and much more significant for photographic purposes, than the fairly innocuous mistake of selling metabisulfite as bisulfite or vice versa.I now feel slightly less stupid because it wasn't entirely my mistake.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?