Great to see you posting, Ralph.
Washing Film - Best Environmentally Friendly Way to Do It?
-
A
- Thread starter ozphoto
- Start date
Recent Classifieds
-
For Sale FS: Toyo Sliding Back for 4x5 Graflok
- Started by B.S.Kumar
-
For Sale FS: Mamiya ProSD 6x7 120 Roll Film Holder
- Started by B.S.Kumar
-
For Sale FS: Mamiya RB K/L 250mm f/4.5 L-A Lens
- Started by B.S.Kumar
-
For Sale BOOK SALE! Weston, Karsh, Kenna, Worth, Sexton
- Started by AnselMortensen
Forum statistics
Great to see you posting, Ralph.
i've got 32 more days before i can return to florida and start building the next darkroom. This will be a closet design,but i'll have hot and cold running water.
Ralph;
In FL they have only hot and warm running water!
PE
In FL they have only hot and warm running water!
PE
Ralph;
In FL they have only hot and warm running water!
PE
good point!why do i have to pay for the pool to be heated? ,but complaining about that means not having any problems, right?
And up here, I do not heat the pool. Why is that?
PE
PE
becauseit would kill the goldfish.
So that madness of letting water into arid areas for farming is a global malaise. Wonder if I should be thrilled to know or apprehensive!!
Bwahaha. That just made my day!(out here, fights between state govt over water have been quite timely and about as routine as the monsoons)
Hmm. I think it's something to do with a more modern way of living where we don't really pay the full costs and most of it is hidden.
- via tapatalk.
Very true. Recent and interesting read for me was "The Ripple Affect." An eye opener.
Anyone have the Cliff Notes on this thread?
More film washing
In the days of hardening hypo fixers and before HCA Kodak literature for its Brownie and other rollfilms stated that if running water is not available, five changes of water five minutes each with agitation is sufficient. A 1930 Ilford manual stated 7 to 8 changes, 5 mimutes each with agitation, if water is short. Leica manual 1930s suggested 8 changes, 2 minutes each, vigorous agitation, if water is short. ( if you own Niagara Falls, all give the usual 20-30 minute running water spiel). Water is always short these days, and if not don't try to make it that way. Anyway, do these archaic methods hold true today if hardening fix is used? With nonhardening fixers would these be more surefire than the surprisingly fast Ilford method of today of only three changes?
In the days of hardening hypo fixers and before HCA Kodak literature for its Brownie and other rollfilms stated that if running water is not available, five changes of water five minutes each with agitation is sufficient. A 1930 Ilford manual stated 7 to 8 changes, 5 mimutes each with agitation, if water is short. Leica manual 1930s suggested 8 changes, 2 minutes each, vigorous agitation, if water is short. ( if you own Niagara Falls, all give the usual 20-30 minute running water spiel). Water is always short these days, and if not don't try to make it that way. Anyway, do these archaic methods hold true today if hardening fix is used? With nonhardening fixers would these be more surefire than the surprisingly fast Ilford method of today of only three changes?
Sigh. When that running water goes down the drain, it doesn't leave the planet, it goes back into the rivers/ocean after being treated. Just let it run. If you think you're saving something or other by emptying and refilling, and that makes you feel good, by all means do that. I'm not sure I would follow 1930's literature for 2014 films though. Depends on which films you're using of course. You will be washing Tri-X a while to get that purple out.
Oh, well I've heard of a gravity crisis. Because of what I've heard on this, I've moved all my belongings to the lowest shelves or on the floor, so as to use less of it.
If your not on a public sewer system then where the residuals go down stream toward (Evansvlle, New Orleans and in between.) or other down stream intake collections... Then you might just be on a septic system which needs it bacteria to remain healthy long term. Processing chemistry is long erm fatal to the needed bacteria, therefore a grand cost avoidance in replacing a drain field (and all the needed dirt around it). I have the local chemical pumping and hauling fellow collect my drum full as needed. The Aussies have mentioned needing seriously limited water consumption.
(Sigh: I did love my big Pako drum washer of years gone by...)
(Sigh: I did love my big Pako drum washer of years gone by...)
While this is true on a geologic time scale it is not so on shorter time scales...like those that matter to biological life forms (eg, humans). Wasting water by "letting it run" is is simply wasting water....and wasting fresh water is foolish, selfish and inconsiderate of others. Please do not waste water or any other resources.
- Joined
- Mar 18, 2012
- Messages
- 2,651
- Format
- Multi Format
This is beginning to remind me of a Sam Kinison routine. The one about helping people in other countries, where one of the punchlines was about NOT living in a desert 
Of course I'm spoiled, living about 10 miles from Lake Erie. For us, it's not about lack of water, it's about not polluting it.
Of course I'm spoiled, living about 10 miles from Lake Erie. For us, it's not about lack of water, it's about not polluting it.
I'll assume that you're *not* from Australia?
Situation here was so bad a few years ago in some places that you were only allowed a few minutes in the shower a day, they'd disconnect (or at least severely limit) your supply for watering your garden with a hose.
I read a story from Bendigo that at one point they had 60 days' water supply left for the town on emergency rations, and a new pipeline to refill the supplies was more than 80 days left to completion.
I've got myself set up with rainwater tanks and a booster pump, so I don't mind shoving a bit down the drain, but now that i've got the Jobo I'm planning on doing all my washing in that, give it 5 mins and change the water, doing that a few times should be enough and use 1/5th of the water I do now in the Paterson...
This is beginning to remind me of a Sam Kinison routine. The one about helping people in other countries, where one of the punchlines was about NOT living in a desert
Of course I'm spoiled, living about 10 miles from Lake Erie. For us, it's not about lack of water, it's about not polluting it.
One can always question the wisdom of setting up human housing in areas that are/were deserts.
... flood plains, tidal estuaries, land that would be better farmed than covered with asphalt, etc.
I don't hold out much hope...
Doremus
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
- Messages
- 29,832
- Format
- Hybrid
the more roads and tar the better.
we need places to drive and park our vehicles
i dont bother with city water or wells, i only use run off
for all my water ( food, drink, bathing &c )
tastes better than bottled or stuff out of a spigot / sill-cock
besides when i get bored i can look at the rainbows
... my film and paper dont mind either...
I have lived both in Texas and in Appalacia. It's difficult for residents of both regions to understand how different the water situation is between the two places.
The Texans would recoil in horror to hear that back home, I cooled my homebrew beer by leaving the tap running full-blast for an hour and just letting the overflow water run across the driveway instead of collecting it. They can't imagine that in certain places in the country, water falls from the sky and collects underwater in large quantities, and you can just pump it out of the ground. There is lots of water. Tons of water. It is not "wasting water" when you HAVE water.
On the other hand, the folks up north can't understand the logic behind water conservation. They can't imagine that in certain places of the country, water is scarce, so yes, it is discouraged to drill out all your water-conserving fixtures and to run your lawn sprinklers an hour a day. The politics of water conservation are a rant for another day (certain entities, often the ones that use the most water, seem to be exempt from the rules).
There is no optimum practice for every region. In Ohio, killing a rattlesnake can be a crime, because rattlesnakes are scarce. In Texas, they have "rattlesnake roundups" where prizes are awarded to those who kill the most rattlesnakes in a day, because rattlesnakes are common and considered pests. Neither policy is "wrong". Environmentalism requires responding to the environment you are in.
The Texans would recoil in horror to hear that back home, I cooled my homebrew beer by leaving the tap running full-blast for an hour and just letting the overflow water run across the driveway instead of collecting it. They can't imagine that in certain places in the country, water falls from the sky and collects underwater in large quantities, and you can just pump it out of the ground. There is lots of water. Tons of water. It is not "wasting water" when you HAVE water.
On the other hand, the folks up north can't understand the logic behind water conservation. They can't imagine that in certain places of the country, water is scarce, so yes, it is discouraged to drill out all your water-conserving fixtures and to run your lawn sprinklers an hour a day. The politics of water conservation are a rant for another day (certain entities, often the ones that use the most water, seem to be exempt from the rules).
There is no optimum practice for every region. In Ohio, killing a rattlesnake can be a crime, because rattlesnakes are scarce. In Texas, they have "rattlesnake roundups" where prizes are awarded to those who kill the most rattlesnakes in a day, because rattlesnakes are common and considered pests. Neither policy is "wrong". Environmentalism requires responding to the environment you are in.
Running water
I have been to places around the world where half the time the taps are dry, not a drop, literally. One wealthy town in New York let their overdevelopment get so bad that the hydrants in zillion dollar locations were barely working in the summer. Nothing was done until the fire authorities made it clear this was a fire hazard (not to mention the loss of all that real estate). So, you need not live in the desert or the middle of nowhere to not have running water.
I am lucky enough to find water gushing from my tap every time I turn the handle. I'd like to keep it that way. Wasting water won't help. So if I can safely wash film with less water, I'd like to know how. Just because I can afford to let my darkroom tap run all day does not mean I should. And from a photographic standpoint, you cannot maintain a constant temperature with a running tap. Isn't reticulation a concern?
I have been to places around the world where half the time the taps are dry, not a drop, literally. One wealthy town in New York let their overdevelopment get so bad that the hydrants in zillion dollar locations were barely working in the summer. Nothing was done until the fire authorities made it clear this was a fire hazard (not to mention the loss of all that real estate). So, you need not live in the desert or the middle of nowhere to not have running water.
I am lucky enough to find water gushing from my tap every time I turn the handle. I'd like to keep it that way. Wasting water won't help. So if I can safely wash film with less water, I'd like to know how. Just because I can afford to let my darkroom tap run all day does not mean I should. And from a photographic standpoint, you cannot maintain a constant temperature with a running tap. Isn't reticulation a concern?
We had this discussion on another very similar thread, but again i must say the above statement is only true in such places in the world with an abundance of fresh water, and even there the environmental cost of pumping, treating and transporting said water is HUGE, and every drop that comes out of your tap matters.
In places where fresh water is not commonly found (about 80% of the world) wasting water is a crime (literally, and where it isent, it should be).
Even though MA has the second cleanest and plentiful water source in the world - any of my students how left a tap running and left the lab failed that assignment on the spot, those who rigged the water timers failed the class.
Having lots of something does not mean you should not care about wasting it.
Washing film with a little bit of water is easy:
1. Use a hyproclearing agent which can reduce wash time by 80-90%
2. Use a forced cascade washer (Jobo makes a fancy one which guarantees an archival wash in 5 minutes, but a simple hose pushed down the tank will do in a pinch, just watch the flow rate)
3. Close the tap when you brush your teeth etc,...
A note about purple kodak stuff - it is US sensitive. Wash as indicated, and disregard the purple haze - leave negs in a sleeve for an hour in some light/indirect sunlight and see it disappear if you really are not a big purple fan (or use ilford films).
I've generally disregarded the pink/purple staining on my negs, on most of them it just seems to go away even without the UV, just in a sleeve in a folder in a mostly-darkened room.
Except a roll of XP2 that I shot once a few years ago, got it processed by a regular lab in regular C41, and it came out nicely clear as XP2 should do.
Went to try printing it again last week, after 2 years in a folder, and it seems to have gone purple when it definitely wasn't when I got it.
As it's C41, re-fixing probably isn't going to do much (and I don't know if RapidFixer is a good idea on C41 negs anyway, even the clearbase ones), is it worth just washing the hell out of it?
| 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:  |