Stop Bath.. How important?

[Kirk Keyes]

The word of the master, Per Volquartz. I have never found him to be wrong and I do not waste my time testing every possibility in hopes I can raise my ego by finding a mistake.

I've spent a week with Per with him on his Free Oregon Coast Workshop. He's a nice guy and a very talented photographer.

But maybe you should do some testing for yourself sometimes. You may discover that some popular notions are not true...

Gordon Hutching, in his Book of Pyro recommended saving spent PMK developer to use as an "afterbath" for soaking your developed and fixed PMK films in to increase the strength of the pyro stain on the negatives. I first used PMK in the early 90s, and I followed his suggestion. To me, it initially seemed counter intuitive, but I did it as it was in the Book, and so I did it religiously.

After some time, that counter intuitive feeling got to me and I did some testing and I found that the afterbath merely added an overall stain to the image. The afterbath increased the yellow color of the neg and increased the printing exposure time needed. It was just like cranking in some yellow filtration on my color head - and did not add to the quality of the pyro neg.

By the way, I'm sure you've noticed that the afterbath recommendation is not made anymore. I guess others came to the same conclusion that I did.

Anyway, I questioned the recommendation of a Master. And I learned something by doing some test to find the answer myself. And yes, I stopped following the suggestion of a Master.

 

[Ian Grant]

Gordon Hutching, in his Book of Pyro recommended saving spent PMK developer to use as an "afterbath" for soaking your developed and fixed PMK films in to increase the strength of the pyro stain on the negatives. I first used PMK in the early 90s, and I followed his suggestion. To me, it initially seemed counter intuitive, but I did it as it was in the Book, and so I did it religiously.

He later retracted that, all that happens is an overall base stain is added, it's not a benefit and if patchy highly detrimental. So you did the right thing (in your next paragraph)

Ian

 

[Kirk Keyes]

Ian - I think a lot of the recent popularity of the notion of using water baths is a combination of the "Book of Pyro" suggesting the use of the alkaline afterbath (used PMK developer) and Anchell and Troop's "Film Developer Cookbook" recommendation of an "all alkaline" film development process. Bill Troop suggested the use of waterbaths instead of stop bath with his alkaline fixers.

In a phone call I had with Bill Troop, he told me that a buffered stop bath was the ideal way to use a stop bath. By adding sodium acetate to an acetic acid solution, a buffered stop can be made. It has a much greater capacity than regular stop as it has a greater acidity, yet it has a higher pH than a simple acetic acid stop. The pH can be about 4.5 to 5 and stop film much faster than regular stop baths. I asked him why he did not promote that idea more in his book, and I believe he replied that there's only so much room in a book, and that he thought the average darkroom worker would not want to go to the extra expense of making buffered stop bath, given how inexpensive regular stop bath is.

So I followed the advice of a "Master" - I now use buffered stop bath by adding sodium acetate to water and then adding acetic acid to the solution until the pH is about 4.5 to 5.

 

[Ian Grant]

following directions

1) The manufactures really know what they are doing. Follow the directions.

Steve

Which is you can use either a stop bath or a water rinse. (for films)

While that quote of yours relates to stop bath dilution it's apt for the stage as a whole.

It's your choice which you use, and it's the manufacturers recommendations.

Ian

 

[Steve Smith]

Discussing things is about (or should be at least) finding out how they really are.
Referring to an authority in the field, to their explanations of how things are, is a good thing.
But simply bowing to authority isn't very productive, is it?

Indeed not.

The only way to know how a process works is to try out all possibilities to know why some things don't work.

In the book on pioneering Polaroid inventor Edwin Land (Insisting on the Impossible) it is stated that he liked the process of discovery through failure and would be upset if he immediately found the solution to a problem as it wouldn't give him the knowledge of the way all the variables could affect the process.

Also it's worth remembering that there doesn't have to be just one correct way to do things.


Steve.

 

[Ian Grant]

Ian - I think a lot of the recent popularity of the notion of using water baths is a combination of the "Book of Pyro" suggesting the use of the alkaline afterbath (used PMK developer) and Anchell and Troop's "Film Developer Cookbook" recommendation of an "all alkaline" film development process. Bill Troop suggested the use of waterbaths instead of stop bath with his alkaline fixers.

The plain water rinse stage,was once the norm, it goes back beryond the early days of the first dry (gelatin) plates, but these were dish developed or in racks and a water rinse was quick& easy, and efficient enough.

So historically a plain water rinse has long been understood to work, Film emulsions were far softer pre 1960's but by then Pyro developers or the older film developers like D72 had gone out of mass use.

The advent of 35mm and slow working carbonate free developers meant an acid stop bath could be used safely without fear of pinholes, and manufacturers began recommending them.

People are giving far to much importance to the Stop bath stage, it's "superfluous" as Mason states in Photographic Chemistry, and Kodak & Fuji think so too as they use no stop or rinse in their Roller Transport B&W processes.

Anyone making posts in this thread needs to take that into account before attacking the notion of using a water rinse instead of a stop bath, it makes all their statements farcical.

Rational discussion of the benefits/disadvantages are quite different.

All I can say on my own behalf is that, I do not disagree with what Kodak or any other mfgr says. They say either can be used for film. They say that a stop should be used for paper.
PE

Summing up

1. A stop bath is not necessary at all, neither is a water rinse.

Mason states clearly the stage is superfluous to the overall processing of films or papers, and this is also backed up by both Fuji & Kodak who include no rinse or stop in their mechanic film processing data & Ilford who state that there should be no problem in machines with no facility for a stop bath. That's for films and RC papers.

Needs very good agitation to prevent dichrioc fogging.

We are talking about using a stop bath or water rinse not leaving the stage out:

1. A stop baths purpose is not the removal of all residual developing agents. There's insufficient time, this will continue during fixing and washing.
2. The purpose of a water rinse or stop bath is the slowing of development, which is more immediate with an acid stop bath
3. The second purpose of a water rinse or stop bath is minimising the carry over of developer into the fixer.
4. The advantage of a stop bath is that the pH of the film has been changed, so helping preserve the buffering of the (acid) fixer, potentially prolonging the fixers life & throughput.
5. Stop bath is detrimental with some soft emulsion films with certain developers, due to pin hole issues.
6. If no stop bath is used there have been reports of Dichroic fogging before an Alkaline/Neutral fixer, but in numerous threads Ron (PE) has always recommended the use of a stop bath before TF-4.

It's up to people to decide which of the manufacturers recommendations they use water rinse or stop bath


As Steve says:

The manufactures really know what they are doing. Follow the directions.

Steve

They recommend either, and historically the water rinse is the older and in just short 140 years hasn't been shown to be less effective particularly in terms of the long term stability of the film. There can be benefits for fixer life etc using a stop bath though.

There's a reference to Ansel Adams earlier in the thread and yet many of his great negatives and those of Edward Weston were made using a water rinse not a stop bath so take that into account in your choice.

Ian

 

[lxdude]

OK, that settles it. I'm going to use stop bath, followed by a water rinse. That way I won't have to argue with anybody.:rolleyes:

Poor horse

 

[Worker 11811]

No! It should be a water rinse first! Then follow with a stop bath!

 

[2F/2F]

I use a stop. It is so dirt cheap, why not? The only time I have not used it was in deep tanks, so I didn't have to stand there for half an hour smelling 14 liters of it. I just went straight into the Kodak Flexicolor Fixer after the developer.

 

[lxdude]

No! It should be a water rinse first! Then follow with a stop bath!

Followed by another rinse!



Oooops.

 

[M.A.Longmore]

Just in case we haven't come to a conclusion as yet :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7IU1bzZheWk


Ron

From The Long Island Of New York, and the
Long Island @ Large Format Group, right here on APUG
.

 

[Kirk Keyes]

HEY!

Why don't you guys go out and take photos instead of making fun of us because we care to debate aspects of photography!!!!

Don't you have anything better to do!!?



o:^)

 

[Steve Smith]

Taking photos? What..... of actual subject matter?

Don't be silly, there's testing to do!!!!


Steve.

 

[Worker 11811]

Taking photos? What..... of actual subject matter?

Don't be silly, there's testing to do!!!!


Steve.

There are too many unstirred pots!

 

[ymc226]

Water stop bath?

Using Rodinal 1:50 for Neopan, can I use water as a stopbath or will that affect the fixer.

I usually develop 15 - 18 rolls of 120 film at a setting, so 5-6 tanks of film using the same fixer (3x120mm reel capacity Paterson tanks) and then dispose of the fixer afterwards.

 

[Anon Ymous]

Honestly, stop bath is so cheap that using one won't hurt your wallet, it's false economy not to use one. You'll need some water rinses to have the same effect, but you also need to pay attention to the temperature; large variations can be problematic. If you don't want to use an indicator stop bath, then you may use diluted distilled white vinegar. Dilute 330ml vinegar with 670ml water, making 1l. Discard after processing 20 135 or 120 films.

 

[Ian Grant]

There's a very long recent thread on this. ALL the manufacturers INCLUDING KODAK say in their Datasheets you can use stop bath or water with films, the benefits of a stop bath are in some circumstances your fixer will last longer.

There's no detrimental effects of using water. If you have stop bath then use it, but be careful where developers contain Carbonates

Ian

 

[fschifano]

Yes you can, and it's perfectly OK to do so. I would recommend that you have a supply of tempered water for the job though, enough to do 3 or 4 changes of water for the stop. Do not use straight cold water from the tap unless it's between a degree or two of your developer's temperature. If you're careful and wash the film thoroughly between the developer and fixer, the practice should have little effect on your fixer's life. However, I fail to understand why someone would want to avoid using a proper acid stop bath. The horror stories that go around about pinholes and such being caused by using an acid stop are simply nonsense. I have never, in all the years I've been using an acid stop bath, had it cause a single problem as long as I use it as directed. It's cheap, lasts a long time, and guarantees that development will stop on a dime, making it easier to control the development process.

 

[BetterSense]

I just use 1 fill, quick agitation, and dump of water (tempered, especially with Neopan 400). It saves me trouble of making stop bath and keeping it. I don't see any advantage of stop bath so I just don't use it.

 

[clayne]

I just use 1 fill, quick agitation, and dump of water (tempered, especially with Neopan 400). It saves me trouble of making stop bath and keeping it. I don't see any advantage of stop bath so I just don't use it.

Saves water? Faster than more than one rinse? Helps provide a small balance to the fixer?

 

[BetterSense]

Saves water?

Water is cheaper than stop bath

Faster than more than one rinse?

Not sure about that, if you figure on the other time saved by not having, diluting, stocking, or buying stop bath at all.

Helps provide a small balance to the fixer?

True, but I use 2-bath fixing, and I don't think that there's much alkalinity effect on the fixer after I rinse the film in water.

 

[Jeff Kubach]

I use water as a stop bath myself. Saves a little time by mixing some up.

Jeff

 

[clayne]

Guys. You mix a gallon of stop bath and keep reusing it until it's no longer yellow.

You don't 1-shot it.
You don't mix it each time.

There is no way that water is more efficient.

Edit:

Here's some calculations:

16oz/0.473L KISB == ~6-7 USD
1+63 == 30L of working strength stop-bath
1 CCF == 2800L

In my area, 1 CCF == 2.5USD-14USD, depending on tier, so split the difference, 7USD.
2800L per CCF, 500 ml tank == 6000 full tanks per 1 CCF, or 12000 135-36.
30L of stop-bath, at a general capacity of 20 135-36 per L == 600 rolls, or 20 times the cost.

So just to show I can correct myself, stop-bath is definitely more expensive than water - however time-wise I find stop to be a no brainer - and a very reliable and time-tested part of the process. Personally I don't find myself dumping 1L of stop after only 20 films, but if my numbers are accurate (they feel kinda off), it is what it is.

 

[Ian Grant]

Water works just as well, better if you use a developer with Carbonate as it helps rule out risks of pinholes.

I don't have a real preference for either, I've found my fixer lasts just as well with a water rinse. It needs to be remembered that manufacturers like Kodak recommend either option in their datasheet.

People make to big an issue out of it with films, it's entirely different with prints.

Ian

 

[markbarendt]

Water is cheaper than stop bath

That depends, the water my home uses has to be delivered via a truck and stored in a cistern, it costs 6¢ per gallon.

The bigger issue is simply availability, overuse means I can literally end up with nothing to drink and nothing to flush with for a day or two depending on the weather and that the emergency load I order might cost me 12¢ a gallon.

I have been careful to avoid creating this situation with my darkroom work because it tends to make my wife grumpy.

The other thought is that for those of us who choose to use distilled or specially filtered water the cost approaches $1 a gallon.