White borders graying

[Photo Engineer]

+1. Why people wouldn't use an acid stop bath in printing is beyond me. Of course it depends on the fixer. A poorly buffered alkaline fix will get ruined pretty fast. Then again you could use a water rinse after the acid stop. Or if one is bent on using a non-acidic fix, use one that will work with an acid stop. TF-4 should be ok. Better yet, TF-5 (essentially neutral in pH and also compatible with an acid stop).

You can use an acid stop with an alkaline fix or a neutral fix. That is what the buffer in them is for, to prevent pH changes (rise).

As for the recommendations for using a water rinse, as noted by ROL, it says "RUNNING WATER RINSE" and it also suggests the use of an acid stop bath. I have used a running water rinse and a static rinse. With a static rinse, the rinse becomes more and more alkaline and contaminated with use, and finally I got prints that had gray highlights.

Yes, I ran all of those tests including time of fixing and washing and a 5 year keeping test. This was to verify the capability of TF-5 vs TF-4 and KRLF.

PE

 

[ROL]

Thanks for the clarification, although I would note that I have not until now seen the manufacturer's recommendation of an acid stop bath. I was probably misled by the Tech Info sheet, in which it says, partially in bold, "Do not use a stop-bath". Absent any other information, I guess I can assume that means only, and that followed by a water rinse, would then be no problem.

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

Thanks for the clarification, although I would note that I have not until now seen the manufacturer's recommendation of an acid stop bath. I was probably misled by the Tech Info sheet, in which it says, partially in bold, "Do not use a stop-bath". Absent any other information, I guess I can assume that means only, and that followed by a water rinse, would then be no problem.

Do as you please, and good luck to your prints in the future. I hope they hold up.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Try here, and look under using TF-5 on prints. The same applies to TF-4 as we now know. (Because I just told you. )

http://stores.photoformulary.com/images/store_version1/03-0200.pdf

PE

 

[Bruce Osgood]

OKAY, 24 HOURS LATER (+/-), NO SIGN OF GRAY.

Lesson learned: 1 minute running water wash may not be enough if TF-4 is not fresh. Use fresh, or closely monitored TF-4, there is no room for sloppy habits.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Guys;

Please notify the Formulary. TF-4 is a Bill Troop formula. I have no control over the sheet. I have notified them of this myself the last time it came up. Sorry for the problems, but it does say running water rinse after development and I have tested this and it does work.

So, the instructions for TF-4 are correct as far as they go.

PE

 

[Bruce Osgood]

So what is the "proper" way to rinse developer off a print to use TF-4? I was using a 20x24 tray for a 16x20 print with running water and very active sloshing movements for 1 minute. My purpose in using TF-4 was to avoid the acid stop bath. Perhaps my TF-4 was partially depleted.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Bruce, your technique is good, but as size goes up, the amount of running water goes up, and it varies with water supply. For example, hard water is not as good as soft water.

In any event, that sounds good, but then just increase the fixing time and final wash time.

If you do not use a retained hypo test and a retained silver test, then this is a missed opportunity for your quality assurance. This would have told you right off that there was a problem. Use it to test your process work flow. It will do wonders for your work. Do it one time, every time you change process conditions and you are set until the next change.

PE

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

An alternative is to use Ilford Hypam. Great price and it's neutral pH, so it can be used with pyro developers without deteriorating stain, and there is no argument whether an acid stop bath could be used or not.

Just throwing an alternative out there.

Edit: Just saw Bruce's explanation that he's avoiding an acid stop bath. I will leave the discussion since I have nothing more to add.

 

[jvo]

why not

DEVELOPER TO STOP

My reasoning for not using a stop bath is that I want fiber based papers to develop to conclusion and not interfere or stop that development. I think the water bath allows this to happen where a stop bath doesn't. Perhaps I will find allowing for the water bath to do its' thing and follow that with a stop bath and rinse prior to fix will work also. The two bath fix will also be considered and HCA. I just gotta find more trays now.

why not let the print stay in the developer for full 3 min. then use stop 1min., and then fix?

 

[Bruce Osgood]

why not let the print stay in the developer for full 3 min. then use stop 1min., and then fix?

3 minutes is generally over development for my work.

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

3 minutes is generally over development for my work.

Interesting. I guess it depends on the developer, but I do two minutes for 8x10, 2m30s for 11x14, and three minutes for 16x20.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2

 

[Bruce Osgood]

Interesting. I guess it depends on the developer, but I do two minutes for 8x10, 2m30s for 11x14, and three minutes for 16x20.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2

Thomas,
We're traveling right now and I would like to expand this conversation but I don't have the time just now.

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

Thomas,
We're traveling right now and I would like to expand this conversation but I don't have the time just now.

Bruce, send me a note when you got time.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2

 

[markbarendt]

Interesting. I guess it depends on the developer, but I do two minutes for 8x10, 2m30s for 11x14, and three minutes for 16x20.

Interesting, I haven't played with adding time because of a paper size change.

What's the logic?

 

[clayne]

Shouldn't be necessary.

 

[Ian Grant]

I've used longer dvelopment times when processing large prints that need see-sawing through a large dish, but at higher developer dilutions to slow development. I do the same when sponge processing even larger prints, in both cases the print sizes are too large for normal dish processing the extra dilution helps with more even development.

I only print with warm tone papers and altering the development times causes colour shifts (at the same dilution) so I keep my times the same.

Ian

 

[markbarendt]

Shouldn't be necessary.

True of a lot of things, but it does have a real effect and there is more than one way to skin a cat in this craft.

I'm just trying to figure out Thomas's logic of "this" instead of "that"?

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

True of a lot of things, but it does have a real effect and there is more than one way to skin a cat in this craft.

I'm just trying to figure out Thomas's logic of "this" instead of "that"?

It's about perception. On bigger prints it's easier to 'pick apart' the content. To me the same picture, on different size paper, are different viewing experiences. On a smaller print I need clearer separations of tonal breaks, just to be able to see them. The shorter dev time helps with that. In a bigger print I go for slightly more 'weight' just because I feel that it tones down the tonal breaks to a level where they are less distracting.

Call it fine tuning of the viewing experience if you will, or perception of viewing the print.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2

 

[Photo Engineer]

OTOH, I was taught to go up one grade of contrast with every size increse when enlarging. And the reasons given were the same as what Tom stated.

PE

 

[clayne]

Sorry, I agree with all 3 of you guys about increasing time due to contrast/presentation differences with larger sizes. For some reason I had assumed the issue being discussed was underdevelopment if time wasn't increased with larger prints.

 

[markbarendt]

It's about perception. On bigger prints it's easier to 'pick apart' the content. To me the same picture, on different size paper, are different viewing experiences. On a smaller print I need clearer separations of tonal breaks, just to be able to see them. The shorter dev time helps with that. In a bigger print I go for slightly more 'weight' just because I feel that it tones down the tonal breaks to a level where they are less distracting.

Call it fine tuning of the viewing experience if you will, or perception of viewing the print.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2

Thanks Thomas