- Joined
- Oct 11, 2006
- Messages
- 2,185
- Format
- Multi Format
As you say, it makes sense to discard a water stop bath and not reuse it. My processor (Phototherm) discards the water stop bath with each use.Well, one thing observed is that if a water rinse is like the second bath of a 2 bath developer, it is then not useful to reuse it. It should either be dumped right away or be one consisting of running water.
As for Metol not being mentioned, that is where I come in. Note my comments above about PPD being retained in color processes. A process with a stop or an acid stabilizer extracts the PPD from the coupler droplets. I have the advantage of having talked to Grant about this and other problems and know that Metol is very hard to remove from coatings without an acidic extraction of some method. I mentioned all of this before.
Remember that this work of Grant's was done while he worked at EK and was heavily redacted. There were internal reports on this subject, but he had to go to an external report and use that report and rely on others to generalize what might happen if you did not have an all alkaline process.
This is a very difficult subject with many different views having been expressed. I have used both, when there was no acid present to make stop or some such. But, mostly I use a stop.
As for non uniformity, it goes up with format size and with paper vs film. Remember that this work was done in the age of fiber based paper supports and thicker film coatings.
The attached images are not properly identified. The first image is from Anchell and Troop. Sorry Steve, sorry Bill.
PE
I have found that a stop bath always works, but a rinse does - until it doesn't for one reason or another. And then you have lost work and spend a lot of time trying to figure out what went wrong.
PE
the stop bath is the way to go even that is true that pinholes may develop in a too-acidy environment.Just avoid that by sticking to the manufacturer's instructions.Water Vs. stop bath and film development
In the last couple of months, I've seen odd density variations in my Plus-X and FP4+. On the long edges of each frame is a subtle area of increased density which runs the lenght of the frame.
I develop in a steel tank with steel reels of course. For the last couple of years I've been using water as a stop bath as I was told I risk pinholes in the film when using stop bath of too strong a concentration. Rather than determining the correct concentration, I switched to water as it is 'supposedly' as effective as stop bath.
I switched back to stop bath for my most recent roll of film and the density problem also disappeared. There were no other process changes. Is it possible that a water stop bath is less effective in stopping development at the edges of the film where it is in contact with the reels?
good to know.one more reason to use a stop bath.Pinholes will not take place with modern films. It was only observed in certain deep tank automated processes and became "fake news" due to over reporting.
PE
Pinholes will not take place with modern films. It was only observed in certain deep tank automated processes and became "fake news" due to over reporting.
PE
If you read the seminal book by George Eaton, he explains that pinholes only took place in soft films in deep tank commercial processors where the film was under pressure due to the depth and then rose quickly to the surface due to the motion in the tank.
ALSO, the developer had to use Carbonate because CO2 was the source of the pinholes.
PE
YesDo you use a stop bath in B/W processing?
No, never have, never had a problem either.Do you use a stop bath in B/W processing? I did a test using stop bath vs tap water wash. Here is the comparison result:
Stop Bath? or Not? – H. M. Lai's Film Blog
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?