like2fiddle
Member
I too use the Ilford method for film wash, and have for a couple of years now with good results. I use distilled water only in the final step, a 30 second photo-flo bath.
permawash
film 1min wash, 1 min permawash, 1 min wash they are archival
paper DW 5 min wash, 5 min permawash, 5 min wash achival
permawash
film 1min wash, 1 min permawash, 1 min wash they are archival
paper DW 5 min wash, 5 min Permawash, 5 min wash achival
I've decided to stick with my method; it works for me.
What do you think?
Just contacted Ilford on their website and they recommended their usual 5, 10, 20 sequence if you use nonhardening fixer and to repeat the sequence twice (without wash aid) if you use a hardening fix. Sounds hard to believe but I would suppose they know better than I would. I'm tired of running scores of gallons of water down the drain just to wash one roll like Kodak recommends. Neither I nor the planet can afford that when I must go through dozens of rolls a month.
I've said before, Permawash is a fine product as long as you don't believe their directions. Yes, it is a real wash aid. But, no, it's not magic. You can't get real washing that fast. Permawash is no better, and no worse, than all the various sulfite based wash aid products out there.Why is this so hard. Buy permawash. 3oz per gal and good for some 80 rolls. Nonarchival is 1 min wash 1 min permawash then 1 min wash. Double for achival. All the other stuff is second best to permawash.
I'm not sure I'd trust Permawash's claimed numbers. They are so far off everyone else's results that I suspect they are unadulterated voodoo marketing hype.
OK ... Lets talk prints, since paper based prints are the real test of washing. The numbers might work if you have one single very low key very dark print with little silver to be removed, fixed in pristine absolutely fresh unused rapid fix just mixed in two baths used something like the Ilford method, absolutely fresh unused Permawash just mixed, all for only that first single print being treated, and a deluge of water blasting over the print in an utterly wasteful manner.
Maybe. Maybe for that first single print, if handled perfectly, just one print so all solutions are working at utmost performance. But I wouldn't trust the claims even for just one print. I can't see how any wash aid can so greatly outperform very similar competitors.
I am sure Permawash is a very good product. I have used it. I have some now and use it without worry. Just not for such short process times. I don't believe in magic or miracles.
Not that I am being a negative-nelly just to be mean but... how do you know it works? The best test for proper fixing is to look at a print in say... 5 years to see if it has suffered from insufficient wash after fix. Have you been using the product that long?
Short of testing for retained hypo, I think I'd want to wait considerably longer than five years to have any kind of certainty. If something is visibly failing in just five years, the processing is not just bad, it's awful.... The best test for proper fixing is to look at a print in say... 5 years to see if it has suffered from insufficient wash after fix ...
There are tests for retained fixer (hypo) so you don't have to wait.
And, the retained Silver test is very immediate and obvious. It is a solution of Na2S (Sodium Sulfide) in water. One drop on an improperly fixed print turns black or brown instantly.
PE
dancqu, I would be interested in the details of the Ilford test
if the application differs from Kodak's. Can you post them
here? Is Kodak's acetic pretty much a optional add on?
Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links. To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here. |
PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY: ![]() |