Sistan/Ag-Stab destroyed most of my portfolio

Brentwood Kebab!

A
Brentwood Kebab!

  • 1
  • 1
  • 71
Summer Lady

A
Summer Lady

  • 2
  • 1
  • 99
DINO Acting Up !

A
DINO Acting Up !

  • 2
  • 0
  • 56
What Have They Seen?

A
What Have They Seen?

  • 0
  • 0
  • 71
Lady With Attitude !

A
Lady With Attitude !

  • 0
  • 0
  • 60

Forum statistics

Threads
198,777
Messages
2,780,713
Members
99,703
Latest member
heartlesstwyla
Recent bookmarks
1

miha

Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2007
Messages
2,961
Location
Slovenia
Format
Multi Format
I have tested Sistan type materials as a function of wash and have found that the Sistan chemistry effect goes up as wash quality goes down. So far my tests are nearly 10 years old. With the right combination of chemistry and time, I can fully wash an RC print in 15".

PE

Is RC chemistry-sensitive then?
 

miha

Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2007
Messages
2,961
Location
Slovenia
Format
Multi Format
Can you elaborate. Running water for 2' should suffice. Fix strength (1+9 vs 1+4) and time don't matter with RC?
 

Photo Engineer

Subscriber
Joined
Apr 19, 2005
Messages
29,018
Location
Rochester, NY
Format
Multi Format
I never said anything like that.

Current wash directions differ between Kodak and Ilford and also between FB and RC papers. Follow the ones that suit you best.

I have mixed custom chemistry which allows RC wash times to be reduced to 15" in running water and the prints are still good after nearly 10 years. That is CUSTOM chemistry which is normally available. It cannot be done with existing off the shelf chemistry.

PE
 

miha

Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2007
Messages
2,961
Location
Slovenia
Format
Multi Format
I never said anything like that.

Current wash directions differ between Kodak and Ilford and also between FB and RC papers. Follow the ones that suit you best.

I have mixed custom chemistry which allows RC wash times to be reduced to 15" in running water and the prints are still good after nearly 10 years. That is CUSTOM chemistry which is normally available. It cannot be done with existing off the shelf chemistry.

PE

Hi PE, so RC wash rate does depend on chemistry (custom fixer). This is what I meant with chemistry-sensitive in my previous post.
 

Jim Jones

Subscriber
Joined
Jan 16, 2006
Messages
3,740
Location
Chillicothe MO
Format
Multi Format
In the early years, the durability of images on RC paper was suspect. From 1973 to 1975 I submitted a few thousand 8x10 prints on Kodak Polycontrast Rapid RC paper to a college PR department on speculation. Those they did not accept, and many that were never submitted, have been stored in the original Kodak 250 sheet boxes since then. Processing was minimal: the fix was followed by shuffling about 30 prints at a time through three changes of water in dishwashing trays. This morning 12 out of about 250 of those prints showed some signs of deterioration. That degree of reliability would be unacceptable to most photographers, but was adequate for its original purpose.
 

RalphLambrecht

Subscriber
Joined
Sep 19, 2003
Messages
14,649
Location
K,Germany
Format
Medium Format
Can you elaborate. Running water for 2' should suffice. Fix strength (1+9 vs 1+4) and time don't matter with RC?

Itis best to fix strong and short rathwr than weak and long tp prevent fixer from penetrating exposed paper fibersThis way,washing is most effective:cool:
 

miha

Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2007
Messages
2,961
Location
Slovenia
Format
Multi Format
Sure, but we are talking RC here, meaning no fibers.
 

Photo Engineer

Subscriber
Joined
Apr 19, 2005
Messages
29,018
Location
Rochester, NY
Format
Multi Format
Wash rate and fix rate varies with ALL films and papers. This is just a matter of physics. We pick the best for our workflow and materials.

PE
 

Svenedin

Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2016
Messages
1,191
Location
Surrey, United Kingdom
Format
Med. Format RF
Sorry to resurrect an old thread but I was searching for further info on Sistan and chanced upon this thread.

I found this information on the Adox.de website:

"REMARK: ADOSTAB IS NOT RECOMENDED TO TREAT IMAGES ALREADY ARCHIVED UNDER UNKNOWN CONDITIONS. IN THIS CASE ADOSTAB MAY -JUST LIKE ANY OTHER TONER- MAKE ALREADY EXISTING DEGENERATIVE SYMPTOMS VISIBLE AFTER THE PROCESS."

and this:

"Only use ADOSTAB directly at the final bath of the process on well fixed and well washed prints. ADOSTAB is not a wash-aid. Like any other toner it will create marks and spots on not well fixed/washed images."

http://www.adox.de/Photo/adox-chemistry/toners-helping-aids/adostab/
 

pentaxuser

Member
Joined
May 9, 2005
Messages
19,941
Location
Daventry, No
Format
35mm
Svenedin's post has prompted me to ask whether polyglot ever told us what he did to solve the issue for any future prints he "stabbed"

I can't see any feedback from the OP or am I missing something? It would be nice to know what happened later. Was there a happy ending and if so, what was it?

pentaxuser
 

Gerald C Koch

Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2010
Messages
8,131
Location
Southern USA
Format
Multi Format
Archival washing depends no only on time but also the water exchange rate.

I have prints that are decades old and none show any problems. Being attentive toward your washing technique is essential.
 

RalphLambrecht

Subscriber
Joined
Sep 19, 2003
Messages
14,649
Location
K,Germany
Format
Medium Format
I'd had problems with a couple of Foma RC prints (there was a url link here which no longer exists) when framed, and Sistan was recommended as a good preventative measure. So I bought a bottle, made up a batch and processed basically my whole back-archives of B&W RC prints, including from other paper vendors.

Well, that was a Really Stupid thing to do, because it has destroyed over half of my prints with serious bleaching in disgusting dribbly patterns that formed over about 8 weeks in dark storage. I'm talking about the loss of hundreds of dollars of paper and hundreds of hours of darkroom work here - prints that were in perfect condition are now good only for the bin - and I am extremely angry about it. I'll post some scans tomorrow, but believe me, the damage varies from "a spot" to "catastrophic"; it seems to be increasing and I suspect that I am going to lose all of my RC B&W prints. About 6 years worth!

Consider yourself warned in the most dire fashion possible.
I feel your pain and I'm sorry for your loss;Fortunately this never happened to any of my Sistan-treated RC prints.I'm not awRE of silver stab to be a danger to RC prints but I am aware thatbsistan residue left on the print can cause issues.Did you wipe these prints off well?
 

removed account4

Subscriber
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
Messages
29,832
Format
Hybrid
in case someone might be wondering what the instructions say ...


it seems that adostab, sistan and ag stab are all the same stuff, just different concentrations as a stock solution.

sistan
http://mauglee.kitox.com/files/agfa_bw_film_chemicals_en.pdf

adostab
http://www.adox.de/Photo/adox-chemistry/toners-helping-aids/adostab/

ag-stab
https://www.macodirect.de/en/chemis...compard-ag-stab-image-silver-stabilizer-500ml

the agfa page suggests it is for film only
and the other articles say it is for prints as well ..
wash well, agitate in dilute product and wipe dry droplets on front and back
which may cause stains.

you shouldn't wash the product off, it is a final rinse

sorry, i can't find Ctien's writings on its use. i think it is in his 2nd edition you might
be able to find on his website here>>> http://ctein.com/booksmpl.htm
 
Last edited:

Photo Engineer

Subscriber
Joined
Apr 19, 2005
Messages
29,018
Location
Rochester, NY
Format
Multi Format
Because proprietary ingredients or ingredients below a certain level need not be listed if they fall outside of certain limits of toxicity, we cannot be sure that the formulas are as listed in the MSDS.

PE
 

removed account4

Subscriber
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
Messages
29,832
Format
Hybrid
i guess one can contact maco and adox and ask them if
their product is a direct replacement for sistan ..
according to what i have read they are pretty much the same thing
without taking into account trace ingredients ...
kind of like dektol vs d72 ... the same but different
 

miha

Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2007
Messages
2,961
Location
Slovenia
Format
Multi Format

NB23

Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2009
Messages
4,307
Format
35mm
Interesting post. Really sad for the op!

we are 7 years later... anyone else has had sistan treated prints go bad?
 

AgX

Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2007
Messages
29,973
Location
Germany
Format
Multi Format
Glancing through this thread I still think Polyglot did not apply Sistan correctly.

Imagine the amount of that compound diffused into the emulsion per area unit, and then think of a droplet deposited on this areas, drying out. The mass of compound in and on the emulsion now will be greater by magnitudes.
 

pentaxuser

Member
Joined
May 9, 2005
Messages
19,941
Location
Daventry, No
Format
35mm
Glancing through this thread I still think Polyglot did not apply Sistan correctly.

Imagine the amount of that compound diffused into the emulsion per area unit, and then think of a droplet deposited on this areas, drying out. The mass of compound in and on the emulsion now will be greater by magnitudes.
Yes unless almost no-one else uses those chemicals on Photrio, I would have expected others to mention the same problem as he did and I cannot recall any such thread

pentaxuser
 

RalphLambrecht

Subscriber
Joined
Sep 19, 2003
Messages
14,649
Location
K,Germany
Format
Medium Format
I'd had problems with a couple of Foma RC prints (there was a url link here which no longer exists) when framed, and Sistan was recommended as a good preventative measure. So I bought a bottle, made up a batch and processed basically my whole back-archives of B&W RC prints, including from other paper vendors.

Well, that was a Really Stupid thing to do, because it has destroyed over half of my prints with serious bleaching in disgusting dribbly patterns that formed over about 8 weeks in dark storage. I'm talking about the loss of hundreds of dollars of paper and hundreds of hours of darkroom work here - prints that were in perfect condition are now good only for the bin - and I am extremely angry about it. I'll post some scans tomorrow, but believe me, the damage varies from "a spot" to "catastrophic"; it seems to be increasing and I suspect that I am going to lose all of my RC B&W prints. About 6 years worth!

Consider yourself warned in the most dire fashion possible.
Ifeel for you. Luckely I didn't have the same experience. These problems have been reported with prints where someSistan residue was left on the print. The proper procedure apparently is:
1. soak in Sistan for the recommended ime
2. wipe off all Sistan residue with a rubber squeegee
3.do not was again; just let it dry.
following this procedure, it seems likely that some Sistan residue is left on the print causing damage. I always used a squeegee, sufficiently large to wipe the entire print clean and thereby never had an issue. I once did a test on the effectiveness of Sistan and decided that a brief direct sulphide toning was sufficient and the better option. So, I dropped Sistan from my workflow.
 
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:



Ilford ADOX Freestyle Photographic Stearman Press Weldon Color Lab Blue Moon Camera & Machine
Top Bottom