What would prevent you from fixing the film right after it's developed? Presumably, if you've gone to the trouble of doing all the previous steps what would prevent you from doing the remaining 3 steps (fix, wash, wetting agent).
I am not criticizing, just trying to understand what this approach would benefit.
Don, thank you for performing this experiment. After reading your comments in my supermarket fixer thread I'd planned to do this but hadn't been able to get into the darkroom this week because of life. It's good to know that I'll be able to process my film using only supermarket items (instant coffee, washing soda, vitamin C, and white vinegar) even if I can't find a community or private darkroom in my travels.
Of course I hope it never comes to this, but backup plans are always good to have, especially now that airports are starting to install CT-based hand-luggage scanners. Again, my thanks.
It was originally in response to a question about the possibility of homebrewing fixer from commonly available ingredients. There is no benefit, other than the film is fully developed so might not suffer from nasty airport scans (these scans can fog film but that fog probably won't show up if the film is not developed after it happens).
So, I just wanted to know if anything bad would happen.
To make the test more complete, you could test both for residual silver (after fixing) and residual fixer (after washing).
Thanks Don - makes perfect sense; I feel silly for having asked, even!
Probably.There are two concerns with storing an unfixed bit of film: (1) image loss and (2) image fogging.
true. In lost a poorly fixed film(exhausted fixer) after ten years of dark storage;refixing helped somewhatPoor fixing can be evident years later.
Poor fixing can be evident years later.
That gelatin will have gone through a lot of unexpected things.
But I wonder if it was was bombarded with X-rays if it would still be as it is
maybe. ..I wonder that, too. But I doubt it would have more of a fogging effect than even 5 minutes of hanging next to a 60 watt bulb.
This is unlikely IMHO.I wonder that, too. But I doubt it would have more of a fogging effect than even 5 minutes of hanging next to a 60 watt bulb.
It seems unlikely the scan would be more intense than direct light from a bulb
unless re-developed, no matter what fogging happens afterward will still just fix out. X-Rays and other forms of normally-encountered radiation don't reduce halides into silver, and whatever the ionic state of the silver halides, they will fix out.
I think if I went as far as developing the film, and then running it through stop bath, I would also fix it, too. I guess this is good to know if I found myself short of fix.
So would I. This was just an experiment to see what would happen. But it is a good thing to know, since it's not impossible someone would start developing film thinking they had a bottle of rapid fix only to find it empty.
unless re-developed, no matter what fogging happens afterward will still just fix out. X-Rays and other forms of normally-encountered radiation don't reduce halides into silver, and whatever the ionic state of the silver halides, they will fix out.
Not necessarily. There is “printing out”
Kodak used to recommend ISO 400 film be hand inspected, but my guess is the latest x-ray machines are too powerful even for slower films. Checked luggage is probably blasted with gamma ray bursts at this point.
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?