Hans Borjes
Allowing Ads
From yellow-green (with the emphasis on green) to a more neutral tone.Alessandro Serrao said:In what direction?
It seems to me that sodium hydroxide is contained in sewage disposal cleaner. How about thiocarbamide, how harmful is that?Alicouscous said:You can use thiocarbamide with sodium hydroxyde as a fogging agent . If you change the ratio thio/hydro you can change the final image tone .
Alessandro Serrao said:But a print emulsion is not like a film emulsion: thus the outcome would be unpredictable.
The film is very white during second exposure. I once tried to re-use the clearing bath as suggested by the recipe of Kai Rechtenbach, but found the film to be very yellow (just like the clearing bath itself a few days after first use). Since then I make single use of the clearing bath.Alessandro Serrao said:Maybe you should carry the steps from mid-bleaching on in daylight so you can check the clearing time (could be also that, due to the increased area of 120 with respect to 35mm, you should increase the strenght or the clearing time).
I have increased the number of rinse steps to 4x30sec after the bleach from 2x30sec at the beginning; the rinse water is clear at the fourth rinse step. However, rinse after clearing bath is only 2x30sec - this is maybe not enough, I have once noticed that the exposure bath is slightly acidic, as indicated by some prickling on my thumb.Alessandro Serrao said:Are you fully washing the film between each steps?
Thanks for the info, I will Google a little bit for it. Have you tried one of these formulas?Gerald Koch said:A 2% solution of sodium sulfide can be used as a fogging second developer. This is Kodak T-19 and produces a sepia image. You can also use sodium hydrosulfite (sodium dithionite Na2S2O4). This is used in Kodak FD-70 and FD-72. IIRC these formulas produce a black image.
Hmm, does that mean you simply added the sodium (hydro)sulfi(d/t)e to the second developer? Or, solved it in water to have a fogging agent without any other additional substances? Can you share in detail what you did, which concentration, which processing time at which temperature?Gerald Koch said:Sodium hydrosulfite was used in Kodak's reversal kit and I have used that in the past. I have not had any problems in the past with either sodium sulfide or sodium hydrosulfite. Modern emulsions are quite robust. However, I would suggest testing the film that you are using first.
Well, these formulas can be seen on various places of the web already. I was asking specifically what you are using. Without processing time and temperature, I assume you don't use this formula?Gerald Koch said:Kodak FD-70 ...
Kodak FD-72 ...
In your process you describe "Secondo sviluppo: in solfuro di sodio 20g/500ml (30ml) per 3 minuti, 1 inversione di 5 secondi ogni 15 secondi".Alessandro Serrao said:However to cut a long story short I've found that a concentration of 0.5% sulfide is quite sufficient provided the film is treated no more than 3 or 4 minutes...
Thanks for that information. It has been many years since I did any reversal processing.Alessandro Serrao said:Gerald,
the formula where it says 20g sodium sulfide in 1 liter of water refers to the "cine" reversal film processing, not the kind we are using (35mm or 120).
The "cine" film are hardened more at production while the "normal" counterparts are not (except T-Max).
Believe me, I've tried a 2% concentration of sodium sulfide and it just peel off any emulsion from the triacetate base of almost any film (T-Max is a little tougher than the rest).
However to cut a long story short I've found that a concentration of 0.5% sulfide is quite sufficient provided the film is treated no more than 3 or 4 minutes...
I have used FD-70 but it was so long ago that any film specific information would no longer be relevent.Hans Borjes said:I was asking specifically what you are using. Without processing time and temperature, I assume you don't use this formula?
We have now the evidence that at least in the Foma reversal process with 2 subsequently processed Fomapan R100, less second exposure resulted in less yellow intensity. However from my experiments with FP4 and Rodinal I know that further reducing the second exposure results in yellow curtains, that appear on the heavier fogged parts of the film only.Hans Borjes said:I have been continuing to experiment with light reversal, and I have found that it is possible to do an even fogging exposure of FP4 120 film with a relatively high amount of light (100W, 40cm, 2x3min), but: the entire film now shows a yellow image tone. I have increased the time for the first developer already to compensate for the density, but I have the feeling that this yellow tone could be related to remains of sulphur from the sodium metabisulphite clearing bath that gets "burned" into the emulsion by the light?
Is that a known effect that a yellow curtain is created by light reversal?
This would be quite a logical explanation why Ilford recommends to add sodium thiosulphate to the first developer. Why don't they point out what it is good for, if that's used to prevent the yellow effect?Alessandro Serrao said:The Foma kit says to use the same solution as a first and second developer. It means that Foma doesn't put any halide solvent in the first developer so as to reuse it as the second one.
Try to use the first Foma developer with any halide solvent and just prepare a fresh second developer withou the halide solvent.
It can solve your problem.
The water in my Jobo CPE-2+ reaches a temperature of 21°C already when left at room temperature, even with the heating turned off. So I guess I would not be able to use the thermostatic feature of the machine when running the process at 20°C.Alessandro Serrao said:I would strongly suggest to avoid running the reversal process to 24°C, especially if you use a permanganate based bleach.
Infact permanganate, although being less toxic, has some disadvantages over the dichromate because it softens the gelatine (in reality it's not the permanganate that softens the gelatine per-se, it's the huge shift between a highly alkaline solution of the first developer and the highly acidic bleach).
I'd suggest to use a temperature between 18°C and 20°C maximum and be sure to have all solutions (including the washing steps) at THE VERY SAME temperature, and I means with no more than 0,3°C worth of difference (much the same as in E6 process).
I don't think so for the following reasons:Alessandro Serrao said:This is extremely interesting: I've never tried halving the permanganate concentration. Maybe your problems for yellow-cream image residues (which leads to image fogging) can derive from underbleaching that way?
It would actually be very desirable that A&O Agfa adds to its portfolio of Rodinal and other chemicals a reversal chemistry set and a matching reversal process where all parts can be purchased separately. This is the common fault of the Foma and Kodak reversal process: you have to discard unused chemicals. In the Foma process the bottleneck is the first developer that cannot be stored long enough once the package was opened, in the Kodak process it is the bleach stock solution that gets oxidised.Alessandro Serrao said:I'm just keep asking myself a thing: with the demise of Agfa, could one get his hands on Scala chemicals???
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?