• Welcome to Photrio!
    Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.
    Click here to sign up

The definitive word (I hope) on color stabilzers!

That would work, but it would involve comparable risks as using formalin. The main difference is that you won't have a bottle of formalin solution that you have to open up once in a while. I always just use formalin because I have it on hand, but the hexamine stabilizer should work just as well!
 
Ended up finding formalin online a lot cheaper than any stabilisers so I went with that.
I always exercise caution when handling chemicals.

Thank you for all the help!
 
That makes perfect sense
I know some people prefer to do work with formalin outdoors. There's something to be said for that.

Enjoy your color photography!
 
Daaamn, read this after I processed and cut more than 100 films. Jeezakrice.

Okay, so I used the 2-bath (no third stabilizer bath) Cinestill.

How likely will my films degrade in the future? All Fuji C200 and 400 post-2000.

Thanks
 
I think post 2000 C200 is unlikely to be based on the old dyes that require a stabilizer. At least going by what PE told us back when he was still with us. I don't think Fuji ever released any info on what specific dyes they use and how they use them - perhaps someone can correct me on this if I'm wrong.
 

But wouldn't a fungicide still be needed to prevent fungus from eating the delicious gelatin?
 
If you read PE's first post in this thread it seems to answer the question. The remaining uncertainty would be around films with a develop before date around 2000 - are they the new type, or the old type? The switch in processes would have been done with Fuji's equal involvement. Other non-Kodak brands would probably have been involved as well.
 
albada said:
But wouldn't a fungicide still be needed to prevent fungus from eating the delicious gelatin?
Click to expand...

Yes - the modern final rinses provide a non-formalin version of this.
 
MattKing said:
Yes - the modern final rinses provide a non-formalin version of this.
Click to expand...

There isn’t a final rinse with the 2-bath cinestill kit.

Only developer, then blix.
 
Kilgallb said:
I just mixed a cinestill so called no stabilizer, and to my surprise there was an envelope of stabilizer in the package
Click to expand...

On their site, Cinestill mentions that today's dyes do not require stabilization but that it is not a bad idea to use a stabilizer or final rinse to protect the emulsion against bacteria.
 
Hope I’m not being too much of a forum necromancer by bringing this thread back to life.

I have some E-6 films I’ve developed recently using DIY chemistry. So no stabilizer. They’re already dry and in storage.

Any reason I couldn’t go back days/weeks/months later and stabilize them with photo flo and formalin?

Also where is a good place to source formalin in the US?
 
There’s no reason you shouldn’t stabilize your negs at a later time, if you have to. I’d pre-soak them first, then do the usual 2 minutes in stabilizer.

Also, It’s good practice to re-stabilize, if you need to re-wash negs.
 
I think BHuji is asking about transparency film, not negatives.
 
BHuij said:
I found what looks like a decent source for 37% formaldehyde solution - it's not just in water though, it has 10-15% methanol as well. Will the adversely affect its use in a stabilizer solution?
Click to expand...

They all do, it improves the solution's keeping properties.
 
Sounds good. I ordered some and refreshed my memory looking at the MSDS. My mama didn't raise me to fool around with no formalin. Double gloves, and super careful storage for this stuff.

Anyone have any idea what the shelf life or capacity for this stuff is? At some point of course I will have to dispose of some. Following PE's recipe of 10ml 37% formalin to 1L of at-strength PhotoFlo means that my final stabilizer solution will be 0.37% formaldehyde. My local guidelines appear to state that any formalin solution less than 2.9% formaldehyde is okay for drain disposal. Sounds like I don't need to go out and buy a commercial neutralizer here?
 
Can I use 10 mL of 37% formaldehyde with distilled water to make 1 L as separate solution without photo flo?
 
tustel said:
Can I use 10 mL of 37% formaldehyde with distilled water to make 1 L as separate solution without photo flo?
Click to expand...

Yes. The lifetime of the dilute formalin will be reduced, but this won't matter much since you'll probably use it up long before it starts to polymerize.
 
How about ECN-2 film? Kodak does prescribe a stabilizer (Kodak Stabilizer Additive) in final rinse, but adds that in case of biological growth Proxel GXL may be added. This suggests that Kodak stabilizer additive is not formaldehyde-based and its role is only to protect dyes against reaction with colour couplers.
Photo Engineer wrote in the beginning that only recent C-41 films received a treatment against dye-coupler reaction, so I guess a stabilizer is a must in ECN-2, too (if longevity of the negative is needed).
Also I wonder if cross process of C-41 film with CD-3 based developer affects their dye stability. After all CD-3 creates slightly different molecule with a colour coupler than CD-4 does...
 
I am not a chemist, so I don't know the answer to most of these questions.

What I do know is that none of the ingredients in the prebath, developer, stop, bleach, or fix in my DIY ECN-2 chemistry are on my personal list of known stabilizing agents. Since I have photo flow/formalin stabilizer mixed up already for E6, I just put my ECN-2 films in there before hanging to dry. So far it has not hurt anything, and if indeed it acts as a color stabilizer and anti-biological-growth agent as well, all the better. If nothing else I have the effect of the photo flo working in my favor
 
This "Kodak Stabilizer Additive" component is not actually a stabilizer, but a surfactant like Photo-Flo 200. Also, the remark about Proxel GXL apparently refers not to the film, but to the specific baths where it is listed when the chemistry sits in the drums.
 

Attachments

  • Kodak Stabilizer Additive.jpg
    244.3 KB · Views: 186
Thanks for explanation. So it would mean that Kodak Vision films are inherently stable without need for a stabilizer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register