Advice on monochrome process

Dan

Hold them in the stop. What do you mean by "... the room
lights would come on."?

I meant if (when) I space out and turn the room lights on, the unfixed
prints might fog!

I process single tray using minimal volumes of
one-shot developer and very dilute one-shot fixer. The
very dilute fixer has sufficient volume to yield archival results
with one fix. I may or may not include a rinse twixt the developer and fixer.

This single tray method makes a lot of sense.

If I were to hold I'd likely do it after the developer and
use a very dilute sulfite-bisulfite blend. The blend would be
a little acidic and good for up to four prints which would
go on to be batch fixed. Dan

If you tone what do you first use to neutralize the dilute acid in
your fixer, if anything?

I built a 4x5" processing panel for tray development. It works great and
I no longer have scratches.

Here are plans:

http://philbard.com/panel.html

--Mike

Pre-soaks are somtimes necessary. JOBO recommends them
when using their developing system and Kodak suggests it for
tray processing of sheet film to prevent sticking.
I certainly agree about using tanks for sheet film but
sometimes tray processing is unavoidable. I find it very
difficult to do tray processing without getting some
scratches or gouges on the film no matter what technique I
use. I use this process when I have a single sheet to do and
am in a rush. Otherwise I use drums for film larger than 4x5
and an ancient Nikor sheet film tank for 4x5. The problem
with conventional tanks and hangers is that they take up a
lot of room and are best suited to permanent darkrooms. This
system has its own set of vices such as a tendency toward
uneven development and streaking if the agitation is not
done right. Ideally (if one has lots of space and money) a
Nitrogen burst agiatation system is the way to go.

On Mon, 06 Feb 2006 16:49:06 -0500, Mark
wrote:

Does the PH of the fixer have bearing on the selenium?


February 7, 2006, from Lloyd Erlick,

It certainly seems that way to me.

I've had a non-acid darkroom for several
years. No acid stop (I use water), and
non-acid fix.

When I stopped using acid, my selenium toner
stopped forming the dark precipitate that
causes it to become so murky. It remains
clear long-term.

regards,
--le
________________________________
Lloyd Erlick Portraits, Toronto.
voice: 416-686-0326
email:
net: www.heylloyd.com
________________________________
--

There is no reason to avoid acid stops and fixers. NONE.


Lloyd Erlick wrote:
On Mon, 06 Feb 2006 16:49:06 -0500, Mark
wrote:

Does the PH of the fixer have bearing on the selenium?


February 7, 2006, from Lloyd Erlick,

It certainly seems that way to me.

I've had a non-acid darkroom for several
years. No acid stop (I use water), and
non-acid fix.

When I stopped using acid, my selenium toner
stopped forming the dark precipitate that
causes it to become so murky. It remains
clear long-term.

regards,
--le
________________________________
Lloyd Erlick Portraits, Toronto.
voice: 416-686-0326
email:
net: www.heylloyd.com
________________________________
--

On Mon, 06 Feb 2006 17:51:48 -0500, G- Blank
wrote:

I have seen emulsions come off in extreme soaking.


February 7, 2006, from Lloyd Erlick,

I once left some sheets soaking in my washer
for too long. I think I was fooled by the
temperature. Usually my place was quite
chilly, and the wash water was too. But it
was summer, and the water was significantly
warmer than I was used to. I left the prints
for about the maximum time I had established
for myself, but when I got there the sheets
were clean and white. They were so clean I
had to think - did I actually have pictures
there? But there, on the bottom of the
washer, that little skimpy pile of -- black
dust. The silver had fallen to the bottom.
The gelatin had dissolved and dispersed. I
wish I had filmed the whole process.

regards,
--le
________________________________
Lloyd Erlick Portraits, Toronto.
voice: 416-686-0326
email:
net: www.heylloyd.com
________________________________
--

On Mon, 06 Feb 2006 22:29:22 -0500, Mark
wrote:



TF-4 is a fine fixer and, to my knowledge, allows you to go directly from
fix to KSRT. See the technical articles at www.heylloyd.com

Thanks for the Lloyd link - he's an interesting guy. Lots of detail
and things to think about there. He's definitely not into any acid in
his process.

He has a point about processing prints to completion (instead of
holding a bunch for later toning) so he can keep adjusting exposure
for the final result.

*
But once you have it down and you want to
make
some stock duplicates you may want to save the toning for later. So
you would need cold storage.
*


February 7, 2006, from Lloyd Erlick,

Well, I'm sure it's a common practice. But I
find the whole thing a very delicate balance
at best, and if I wait for some future time,
the result of the toning will depend on a
different balance from the one I arranged
when I made the print.

Also, I think it's very easy for a wet print
to have its face very finely scratched by the
back of the print floating above it in the
toner, if one decides to do batch toning.
I've often noticed a faint, oval pattern of
tiny scratches on prints in galleries. Get in
close, observe the surface by very, very
oblique, skimming light. They hate it when
you touch the glass with your nose. Anyway, I
blame batch tray processing for these
occasional scratches. Maybe I'm wrong, but in
any case I just stick with a print until it
is finished. Then I put it in the washer. No
doubt it's a personality thing; I just hate
to have chores waiting for me, especially
ones that pile up while waiting. The more
prints, the less likely it is I'd ever get to
it at all ...

regards,
--le
________________________________
Lloyd Erlick Portraits, Toronto.
voice: 416-686-0326
email:
net: www.heylloyd.com
________________________________
--

February 7, 2006, from Lloyd Erlick,

I think it's only fair to let the original
poster know he's fallen in with a nest of old
curmudgeons who all insist on doing their
work in their own weird and idiosyncratic
ways. Many of the posters here do not do
darkroom work in ways that resemble the way
it is shown in most darkroom technique books.

However, the techniques developed by this
band of misfits might be easier, cheaper and
less work than the usual way.

Just to point out that everyone has to
exercise their own intelligence and powers of
analysis and judgment.

My advice to a new darkroom worker would be
to use single-tray processing, and work
non-acid. Briefly, my reasons are that it is
easier and cheaper than the usual way with
multiple trays and acetic or citric acid.

On Mon, 06 Feb 2006 23:39:48 GMT, "Richard
Knoppow" wrote:

I am also not convinced about so called alkaline
processing. An acid stop bath will stop development
instantly. If you want to use a water rinse it should
consist of two or three changes of water with vigorous
agitation. About three minutes are needed to remove the bulk
of the developer from the emulsion.


February 7, 2006, from Lloyd Erlick,

I don't view it as anything that involves
'convincing'. I prefer it because certain
aspects of darkroom work that always used to
irritate me no longer exist for me. I'm
referring to the smells one often finds in a
darkroom, and the way selenium toner behaves
when there is any acid in the process. Anyone
who does not have concerns similar to mine
might make different choices.

For my plain tap-water 'stop' I use four
changes of water. I agitate thoroughly in
each rinse, and I think I take longer than
three minutes. I use this regimen for both
film and prints.

This is such a small price to pay I'd hardly
call it a price. And the payoff is huge, at
least for me. I long ago got to the point
where the first, tiniest, least whiff of
sulfur dioxide stops me in my tracks. There
is no work after that, only dealing with it
until it's done. So I have found a way to be
sure there will be no noxious gases where I
live, and it turns out to be simple. No acid
in the darkroom.

I don't want to convince anyone, but anyone
who happens to agree with me can have what
they want very easily.

(Part of my thing - is this getting to be a
fetish yet?? - is that nothing should touch
the face of the print while it is wet.
Anyway, my website has lengthy dissertations
on all these fascinating subjects.
heylloyd.com)

regards,
--le
________________________________
Lloyd Erlick Portraits, Toronto.
voice: 416-686-0326
email:
net: www.heylloyd.com
________________________________
--

In article ,
Lloyd Erlick Lloyd at @the-wire. dot com wrote:

On Mon, 06 Feb 2006 17:51:48 -0500, G- Blank
wrote:

I have seen emulsions come off in extreme soaking.


February 7, 2006, from Lloyd Erlick,

I once left some sheets soaking in my washer
for too long. I think I was fooled by the
temperature. Usually my place was quite
chilly, and the wash water was too. But it
was summer, and the water was significantly
warmer than I was used to. I left the prints
for about the maximum time I had established
for myself, but when I got there the sheets
were clean and white. They were so clean I
had to think - did I actually have pictures
there? But there, on the bottom of the
washer, that little skimpy pile of -- black
dust. The silver had fallen to the bottom.
The gelatin had dissolved and dispersed. I
wish I had filmed the whole process.

regards,
--le
________________________________
Lloyd Erlick Portraits, Toronto.
voice: 416-686-0326
email:
net: www.heylloyd.com
________________________________

I am glad someone else has experienced this, awhile back
perhaps in a NG far far away I was derided for claiming emulsion comes
off with too much soaking. Thanks!


--
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President,
or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong,
is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable
to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918

greg_____photo(dot)com

On Tue, 07 Feb 2006 14:24:23 -0500, G- Blank
wrote:


I am glad someone else has experienced this, awhile back
perhaps in a NG far far away I was derided for claiming emulsion comes
off with too much soaking. Thanks!



February 7, 2006, from Lloyd Erlick,

Well, who am I to say? I conducted no
scientific test. But I can't see any other
explanation. It was around the forty-eight
hour mark, if I recall. I actually put some
prints in the washer in the winter time to
compare, and they did not fall apart at
forty-eight hours. So I did test the
temperature factor, and I believe it is
crucial.

The black powder on the bottom was weird. All
my hard work...

regards,
--le
________________________________
Lloyd Erlick Portraits, Toronto.
voice: 416-686-0326
email:
net: www.heylloyd.com
________________________________
--