Washing Film - Best Environmentally Friendly Way to Do It?

Keith Tapscott. · Dec 27, 2008

Simon R Galley said:
Dear All,

We must do everything possible to reduce the waste of water in our processes.....I am always amazed at the 'over washing' of RC prints, 60 to 90 seconds is all it needs, 2 mins if you are being ultra cautious.....

Simon ILFORD Photo / HARMAN technology Limited :

Thanks Simon, I usually wash RC prints for 4 minutes, so I will remember that next time. I use Ilford`s rapid non-hardening fixer as recommended at the 1+4 dilution.

Andrew O'Neill · Jan 16, 2009

Film is easier to wash than fibre papers. I just let the film sit in water for 5 minutes, dump, add water and another 5 minute sit, dump...and then two more times. Before I do all of this, the film gets a run through HCA.

Bruce Watson · Jan 22, 2009

TMY-2, Jobo 3010 tank, four washes

I just calibrated my washing method. I tested with Photographers' Formulary Residual Hypo Test (cat. no. 03-0150). The test method is to wash your film however you want to, then soak a piece of clear film (that's completed your process of course) in the Residual Hypo Test solution for three minutes. The less stain in the test sample after three minutes, the better the wash.

My process: 5x4 TMY-2, Jobo CPP-2, Jobo 3010 tank, 30 rpm, 20C. Ten sheets at a time in one liter of XTOL 1:3, dilute Kodak Indicator Stop (because I have a ton of it laying around), Kodak Rapid Fixer (no hardener), then washing:

Four washes in the 3010 tank on the Jobo at 30 rpm reversing every 2+ revolutions like normal. Washes of 500ml distilled water, for 1, 1, 2, and 4 minutes. NO HYPO CLEAR used. Just those four washes.

For testing in my last film run I ran an unexposed sheet. I cut a corner off this processed sheet for the Residual Hypo Test.

Test results: No stain detected (best result possible). I placed the cut corner on top of the rest of the sheet and still couldn't detect any stain. Even when looking at it on a light table.

My conclusion is that the "Ilford wash method" works very well indeed for my workflow. Total wash water for 10 sheets of 5x4 film is just two liters of (distilled) water, or 200ml per 5x4 sheet. Pretty efficient I think.

My secondary conclusion is that every workflow is different, and the only way to really know if you are washing your film (or paper) sufficiently is to test your process.

fotch · Jan 23, 2009

Bruce Watson said:
For testing in my last film run I ran an unexposed sheet. I cut a corner off this processed sheet for the Residual Hypo Test.

Test results: No stain detected (best result possible). I placed the cut corner on top of the rest of the sheet and still couldn't detect any stain. Even when looking at it on a light table.

My conclusion is that the "Ilford wash method" works very well indeed for my workflow. Total wash water for 10 sheets of 5x4 film is just two liters of (distilled) water, or 200ml per 5x4 sheet. Pretty efficient I think.

I remember reading an earlier thread that recommenced two test, not just one. Made sense for me.

"And, the use of the silver nitrate test for hypo and silver sulfide for silver is a good pairing of tests to check the quality of the wash."

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

dancqu · Jan 24, 2009

ZoneIII said:
Two ways to greatly reduce fiber-based print washing times .....

Reduced print washing times are one thing and one's time
spent in seeing to a thorough wash is another. As for myself
the prints can take all day as long as I have not expended
but little time in seeing to their being clean. The following
workflow requirers only two trays and some thin
polyester batting or similar material.

Prints from a very dilute one-shot fix are placed into a hold/soak
tray; each print bottom and top with separator. So far I've spent
no time washing the prints. The most is made of the hold/soak
water. The water is drained into a second tray and stirred.
The prints and separators from the first hold/soak tray
are transferred to the second. The transfer of water
and prints takes only a few minutes.

One or two additional fresh water transfers are made. Each
transfer being doubled so as to make the very most of the
least amount of water. Weather one or two the last soak
is overnight. The last transfer is made early in the day
with a short last soak following.

I call it the Alternate Two Tray Still Water Diffusion Method.
THE LEAST water way to wash. See my just previous post
this thread. Fred Picker endorsed. Dan

Photo Engineer · Jan 24, 2009

fotch said:
I remember reading an earlier thread that recommenced two test, not just one. Made sense for me.

"And, the use of the silver nitrate test for hypo and silver sulfide for silver is a good pairing of tests to check the quality of the wash."

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

I do not remember who made that statement, but it is prudent advice. A test for HQ and Metol might be warranted as well. In any event, you may note that Bill and I are banned from that thread. I am loathe to continue any discussion along these lines.

PE

dancqu · Jan 25, 2009

OK, so it's whether, not weather. Dan

removed account4 · Jan 25, 2009

thanks fotch,

i really forgot what a train wreck of a thread that was.

eli griggs · Jan 25, 2009

I don't use a chemical stop-bath for film or paper, so when processing film, I change the tank water by fill-and-dump six times between developer and the fix and use the Ilford Method for a final wash.

I prepare my wash water ahead of development by keeping gallon jugs of tap water with the prepared solutions and distilled water I use for mixing and processing, thus everything is in the same temperature range. This also means I am not running water while processing and a small, two reel steel tank can be processed with less than two gallons of tap water.

If I needed to use distilled water only, I'd use the Ilford Method for both washes and reduce wash-water usage to under a gallon. I believe distilled water is currently 54¢ a gallon at WalMart.

I use TF-4 fixer to reduce print wash times, as well as a wash aid, if doing paper base and I'm using a low-flow, battery-box 'archival' washer with the outlet feeding a common tray washer for an initial first rinse.

Eli

dancqu · Jan 25, 2009

eli griggs said:
I don't use a chemical stop-bath for film or paper, so when processing
film, I change the tank water by fill-and-dump six times between
developer and the fix and use the Ilford Method for a final wash.

Between the developer and fix, six changes of water. And myself,
none. That goes for paper as well, no stop. I've only had good
results from doing so. I attribute the good results from the
use of very dilute one-shot fixer. Dan

dancqu · Jan 27, 2009

A Down Side

dancqu said:
I call it the Alternate Two Tray Still Water Diffusion Method.
THE LEAST water way to wash. See my just previous post
this thread. Fred Picker endorsed. Dan

I've repeated above only the last paragraph of my post 80 this
thread. Although the developer may be of any usable strength
the fixer used with the processing method I detailed is used
one-shot. The very dilute fixer is down the drain after one
or a few same time processed prints. That adds a little
to the method's overall use of water.

The volume of fixer used must be a multiple of the number
of prints same time processed in order to maintain the
fixer's silver levels within 'archival' levels.

With one shot developer, single tray processing is possible.
With one shot very dilute fixer a single fix yields 'archival'
results. With fresh chemistry each or a few prints same
time processed there is no carry forward build up of
chemistry. I've found no need for a stop bath of
any sort. All in all some big Pluses, +++. Dan

John W · Feb 6, 2009

dancqu said:
The very dilute fixer is down the drain after one
or a few same time processed prints.

Perhaps I'm missing something, but dumping used fix seems... counter-productive, especially in a thread focused on water-conservation. If I understand correctly, all the unexposed silver from all the prints you process goes down the drain instead of through some form of silver-recovery. Why is this a good idea...? :confused:

CBG · Feb 7, 2009

Photo Engineer said:
... A test for HQ and Metol might be warranted as well. ...

I'm curious, how does one test for HQ or Metol?

C

Photo Engineer · Feb 7, 2009

IDK. I think there probably is one for HQ, as one oxidation product is bright green. I'll give it some thought.

PE

Anscojohn · Feb 7, 2009

Photo Engineer said:
IDK. I think there probably is one for HQ, as one oxidation product is bright green. I'll give it some thought.

PE

*****
Pardon, all, if I missed a point by reading the first few posts then skipping to the end. But I did notice one thing that was not made explicit early on: and what ye olde lab ratz taught me----take the film, or the prints, out of the water before you dump the water. That way, one is not redepositing some of the fixer back on. That's the way I have always done it, when not using a steady wash stream. Of course, I am fully ready for all the experts to tell me why the old guys who did this were wrong.

dancqu · Feb 7, 2009

John W said:
Perhaps I'm missing something, but dumping used
fix seems... counter-productive, especially in a thread
focused on water-conservation.

That is the "Down Side" I mentioned in the post to which you
have referred. A voluminous fixer, very dilute, very little loaded
with silver, goes down the drain. On the other hand only one fix
is needed for 'archival' results. Also I've found a stop of any
sort to be unneeded. For those using a water stop that
could be a Big savings in water.

As for silver down the drain I've a mind to solve that problem
by sulfide or oxidation treatment, or simply allowing the used
fixer to oxidize. Either way a precipitate will form which can
then be removed. Dan

John W · Feb 7, 2009

dancqu said:
A voluminous fixer, very dilute, very little loaded
with silver, goes down the drain. On the other hand only one fix
is needed for 'archival' results. Also I've found a stop of any
sort to be unneeded. For those using a water stop that
could be a Big savings in water.

Ah, thanks for the clarifications. The point about eliminating the stop is interesting. I'm planning on using single-tray processing for larger silver prints when my new darkroom is completed. I have ready access to a silver recovery unit, so I might just use a large drum to store (and partially evaporate?) spent one-shot fix before disposal.

dancqu · Feb 10, 2009

John W said:
Ah, thanks for the clarifications. The point about eliminating
the stop is interesting. I'm planning on using single-tray processing
for larger silver prints when my new darkroom is completed. I have
ready access to a silver recovery unit, so I might just use a large
drum to store (and partially evaporate?) spent one-shot
fix before disposal.

Four minutes with the slow very dilute sodium thiosulfate fixer
I use has them clean. Not bad IMO considering no stop and only
one fix needed to guarantee 'archival' results. The ph neutral fix
is fresh each print or few at same time processed.

Also the developer is used very dilute. Were it Dektol 1:7.
So carry forward of developer is minimal and into
a neutral fix. Dan

JustDave · Apr 2, 2009

Photo Engineer said:
Just FYI, Bill Troop and I are working on a new type of fixer which should allow a shorter wash cycle for film and paper than any other fixer now on the market for B&W products.

PE

Oy! Ok, this refers back to the answer you gave me on another thread (the house brands vs. named) regarding Kodak fixers with hardeners. I figured I'd come over here to pursue it because it'd be more on topic here on this thread.

From what I understand, the hardener component will add to wash times. So, by using a fixer that doesn't have a hardener, you do not need to wash as long. Kodak, currently, doesn't sell a non-hardening fixer from what I can see.
So, what I'm asking is, in the meantime while you guys are coming out with that new fixer (Kodak?), we could use a non-hardening fixer to save water and if we add in some sort of hypo clear product, we can save even more? That's assuming a product that doesn't need the hardener, of course.

Photo Engineer · Apr 2, 2009

The hardener in Kodak fix is optional and comes in a separate bottle with mixing instructions for use either way. The only way to determine proper fix and wash is by testing with test solutions after using your normal work flow. As to whether you need the hardener or not, that again is up to you to determine, based on the films and papers you use.

I never use any hypo eliminator or wash aid and I always test just fine. I think they are only useful when the water type or amount are the limiting factors- in other words they are extreme remedies for limited water or bad (hard) water.

PE

JustDave · Apr 2, 2009

Photo Engineer said:
The hardener in Kodak fix is optional and comes in a separate bottle with mixing instructions for use either way.
PE

I am very confused right now.:confused:

I'm am looking at a bottle of Kodafix solution and right below the name it says "A Fast-Acting Hardening Fixer for Films, Plates, and Papers."

And this product http://www.freestylephoto.biz/1971746-Kodak-Fixer-Powder-To-Make-1-Gallon?cat_id=303 shows that it's a hardening fixer and I don't have the envelope anymore, but it did say that it is a hardening fixer on the package.

And the Kodak Rapid Fixer also says it's hardening.

These are the only Kodak fixers I see, at least marketed to B&W folks, and all of them are hardening. Now the Kodak Flexicolor Fixer / Replenisher doesn't have anything that says it's hardening from the descriptions that I've seen. Is that the product you're referring to? ( I have seen posts from folks who use this to fix their B&W film and paper.)

Is there another Kodak product that I'm not seeing?

trexx · Apr 2, 2009

Both
http://www.freestylephoto.biz/14641142-Kodak-Rapid-Fixer-to-Make-2-x-5-Gallon?cat_id=303
http://www.freestylephoto.biz/1464106-Kodak-Rapid-Fixer-to-Make-1-Gallon?cat_id=303
Have the hardener in a separate container and is optional. So optional I do not think I have ever seen it used.

Photo Engineer · Apr 2, 2009

I think that I have to agree with Trexx! However, I do use the hardener for my own hand coatings as I know that my home made coatings are softer than production runs.

My Kodak fixer is packed like the second reference in a cardboard box with a jug and a bottle. It says use of the bottle of hardener/acid is optional and gives 2 sets of mixing instructions. The jug has a neat inset in the handle where the bottle of hardener is held during shipping.

PE

michael9793 · Apr 11, 2009

lets make it easy
Perma wash
1 min wash 1 min perma wash and one min wash. Prints 5min wash 5 min perma wash then 5 min wash.
save on water

IloveTLRs · May 7, 2009

When I wash my negatives for the last step (dev > stop > fix > 1 min wash > Fuji QuickWash > 5 min wash) I rinse them on the reel under running water quickly, then let them sit in a tank of water for 5 minutes (no running water.) So far I've had no problems

Washing Film - Best Environmentally Friendly Way to Do It?

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency