• 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

Tool of the Devil, or Useful Darkroom Implement?

Is this the tool of the Devil?

  • Definitely the tool of the Devil

    Votes: 45 84.9%

  • Something I use occasionally

    Votes: 6 11.3%

  • Something I use every time I develop film

    Votes: 2 3.8%
  • Total voters
    53
OK, name one developer or fixer that is no a combination of "chemistry' or compounded as a chemistry.
 
eli griggs said:
OK, name one developer or fixer that is no a combination of "chemistry' or compounded as a chemistry.
Click to expand...

As someone with degrees in chemistry, the photo industry is the only one I’ve encountered that uses the word in that manner.
 

Still a great improvement of calling film development "souping the film".
 
SodaAnt said:
As someone with degrees in chemistry, the photo industry is the only one I’ve encountered that uses the word in that manner.
Click to expand...

I'm assuming you would prefer "chemicals". I do as well, but using "chemistry" instead doesn't bother me.
 
SodaAnt said:
As someone with degrees in chemistry, the photo industry is the only one I’ve encountered that uses the word in that manner.
Click to expand...

That would be because most photographers, even ones who mix up their stuff from bulk chemicals, don't know any chemistry. May as well just call it magic. X does this and Y does that but you don't need to understand why or how to make it happen. So developer, stop, fixer, toner, reducer, intensifier - all those things go in a big box generically labelled "Chemistry".
 
Hmmm, I was never bother by the various terms used in photography whether “chemistry,” “souping,” or “shooting” but for inexplicable reasons that I’d probably need therapy to unearth the reasons for, I do cringe when high school teachers refer to their students as “kiddos” or pet owner refer to their animals as their “fur babies.” Heck, I cringed just typing that.
 
Lots of confusion around terms like “hypo”. Many refer to hypo clearing agents as “hypo” when hypo really means fixer, i.e. thiosulfate solutions.
 
SodaAnt said:
Lots of confusion around terms like “hypo”. Many refer to hypo clearing agents as “hypo” when hypo really means fixer, i.e. thiosulfate solutions.
Click to expand...

I find that it helps when you tell them that the really old name for the active ingredient in fixer was sodium hyposulfate, so if you aren't really old, calling anything "hypo" makes you look out of date .
 
I've gone through many trials and tribulations trying to get my negatives dry and clean without spots, scratches or dust. I settled on a very specific routine that works for me and it involves a Yankee sponge squeegee. I do have ONE VERY SPECIFIC rubber one, an older Vivitar branded thing, that works well and I tried a few, but the Yankee does the best job in the process I settled on. I'd love to not need one but I get ridiculous drying marks if I don't squeegee. And yes, I use a wetting agent and distilled water only.
 

It would be interesting to hear from Ilford as to why they made such a catastrophic mistake in this promotion and it just goes to show that manufacturers of photographic products, be it chemistry or cameras know very little or care very little about photography.
 
SodaAnt said:
Lots of confusion around terms like “hypo”. Many refer to hypo clearing agents as “hypo” when hypo really means fixer, i.e. thiosulfate solutions.
Click to expand...

Hypo is fixer, but for some an insertion device for drugs of choice.
 

I respectfully disagree with your opinions quoted above.
 

Used carefully, a squeegee is a perfectly benign implement. Used improperly, or if it’s not cared for properly, then it can damage film.
 
Philippe-Georges said:
During WWII the resistance in France used red wine as a developer, horse urine and seawater as fixer…
Click to expand...

Yes, but, in every case, the compounds and the molecules and atoms, are specific mixtures of chemistry, including the final product, no?
 
SodaAnt said:
Used carefully, a squeegee is a perfectly benign implement. Used improperly, or if it’s not cared for properly, then it can damage film.
Click to expand...

A squeegee is an implement of impatience, as if you let film dry naturally over 24 hours there is no problem.
 
eli griggs said:
Yes, but, in every case, the compounds and the molecules and atoms, are specific mixtures of chemistry, including the final product, no?
Click to expand...

No - they are specific mixtures of chemicals.
"Chemistry" is the study of chemicals.
 
I had a squeegee given to me when I bought my secondhand darkroom equipment. I was new to the game and not then a member of Photrio so ignorance was bliss in the genuine sense of the word bliss as I never had a problem with it nor did I check each time that the blades had not picked up some grit or other particle that might scratch the film so I was lucky I then realised post membership of Photrio then called APUG that unless I did checks there was some risk. I did the checks and I had no problems However I then tried my squeezing the film between my middle fingers and that avoided the need for a check of the blades each time to ensure there were grit free and wet and flexible

So a good squeegee, properly handled can be fine but it is quicker now to do it with middle fingers

pentaxuser
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register