If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
nose/eye fume irritation and cheap ventilation
Dan Quinn wrote: Currently I'm working with Photographer's Formulary 60% ammonium thiosulfate. I would class the concentrate as oderless, fumeless. At a 1:31 dilution and in a tray, I can detect no oder. I have to wonder if at 1:31 anyone would notice much of an oder even from F-5 . At this time, as with the sodium, no additives are used. I use fix one-shot. I've not yet measured the ph of the ammonium. I'd guess it's close to neutral, ph7. As I've stated I'm not affected by the fumes but am glad to be done with the oder. You'd think Kodak, Ilford, or Agfa would have made somthing of fumless, oderless processing decades ago. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
nose/eye fume irritation and cheap ventilation
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
nose/eye fume irritation and cheap ventilation
On Sun, 25 Jan 2004 06:11:06 +0000, Tom Phillips
wrote: .... I have to wonder if at 1:31 anyone would notice much of an oder even from F-5 . .... jan2504 from Lloyd Erlick, I doubt it. Only while mixing it, and diluting it. In a practical vein, F-6 is entirely odorless. It's a conventional acid fixer, it's cheap and pretty easy to mix. The ingredient mixing order in the usual instructions for F6 advise adding the acid before the alkali; if this is reversed, no odor (sulfur dioxide) is released at all. I've done it both ways many times; changing the order of mixing does not change the fixer. F6 is great because if you omit the hardener (haven't used it in decades; modern materials don't seem to need it, at least for hand processing) then the acid is unnecessary (it's there to give the hardener an acid environment). F6 turns into 'plain' fix pretty easily. regards, --le _______________________________________ Lloyd Erlick Portraits, 2219 Gerrard Street East, unit #1, Toronto M4E 2C8 Canada. --- voice 416-686-0326 http://www.heylloyd.com _______________________________________ |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
nose/eye fume irritation and cheap ventilation
Tom Phillips wrote
Dan Quinn wrote: Currently I'm working with Photographer's Formulary 60% ammonium thiosulfate. I would class the concentrate as oderless, fumeless. At a 1:31 dilution and in a tray, I can detect no oder. I have to wonder if at 1:31 anyone would notice much of an oder even from F-5 . And that's single bath; 1:63 two bath. Per/liter of concentrate, 8x10s; 208, 160, 128, Kodak, Ilford, My usage. The ratio for F-5 would be 1:7 or 1:15 two-bath; a 60% concentrate vs a 15% working strength. A fluid volumn of 250ml at one or the other of those ratios and fixers will fix one 8x10. I'm quite sure of that but do have more testing to do. Dan |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
nose/eye fume irritation and cheap ventilation
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
nose/eye fume irritation and cheap ventilation
On Sun, 25 Jan 2004 19:33:09 +0000, Tom Phillips
wrote: .... I don't disagree. But hardener or not Rapid Fix is by far the "easiest" to mix and use, especially for film where I want as fast a clearing time as possible. jan2604 from Lloyd Erlick, Yes, there's no doubt a ready made liquid concentrate is quick and easy. I hate the attack-scent of rapid fixer, but there are non-acid versions (low smell) on the market, too. I have other issues with ready-made rapid fix. I don't have a car (weirdo, I know...) (I live downtown in a city...) so lugging the jugs of fixer is a bore (but I do borrow or rent a vehicle to buy hundred pound sacks of sodium thiosulfate, so call me inconsistent). And I really hate the rock-hard deposits that result from dribbles of rapid fix. That's a small issue, though, because I try to clean up as I go along in the darkroom. I should keep the rest of my life as well. I guess it comes down to being in full control of what I do. Maybe I'm a control freak (everyone in the darkroom talks about controlling their processes...). But I like to have the ingredients at hand, to vary what I make up to see what happens, to not have to go to the photo store very often, and to have no substances in my face for any reason at all. I've been sulfur dioxide free for about five years now! I also make up my own developers, for prints at least, and I rarely visit the photo store. I didn't start out from a desire to go to the store less often, but found I really liked it! I do have to pay them a visit to get film... good thing it doesn't smell, at least not powerfully. (A friend of mine was showing me his quickly dwindling stock of Brovira grade two 16x20s. As he slid one out of the pack, he bent over and sniffed deeply. He delivered a long dissertation on how grade two smelled wonderful, much better than the other grades... I must admit the smell of film takes me back to childhood, or at least early teenagehood.) regards, --le _______________________________________ Lloyd Erlick Portraits, 2219 Gerrard Street East, unit #1, Toronto M4E 2C8 Canada. --- voice 416-686-0326 http://www.heylloyd.com _______________________________________ |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
nose/eye fume irritation and cheap ventilation
On 25 Jan 2004 15:51:59 -0800, (Dan Quinn) wrote:
.... The ratio for F-5 would be 1:7 or 1:15 two-bath; a 60% concentrate vs a 15% working strength. A fluid volumn of 250ml at one or the other of those ratios and fixers will fix one 8x10. I'm quite sure of that but do have more testing to do. Dan jan2604 from Lloyd Erlick, Do you actually use F5, Dan? Why not F6 instead? F5 is more of a historical footnote, since F6 is so similar but minus the strong odor. Attack odor, I'd call it. F5 is a mucous membrane shredder, in my opinion. F5 would make me buy a digital camera. For me, the whole discussion of the various fixers quickly devolved to sodium thiosulfate, sodium sulfite and water. F5 stinks, F6 is a great alternative, but it does not need (I don't need, my materials don't need...) hardener, so also doesn't need acid, etc, etc, so finally I couldn't see why I would make up a fixer with any other components, especially since I'm definitely a low-volume processor! High capacity fixers like rapid-fixers are wasted on me, I never come close to using them up. I'd rather have a low capacity fixer and replace it frequently. I suppose it could be said I went through a similar thought process over FB print developer. Eventually I settled on what amounts to the D23 of printing: the old Ansco 120 formula. I now just weigh out the amount of dry ingredients necessary for a working solution of the requisite volume for my purposes. It dissolves in seconds, and I no longer store bottles of liquids I've prepared (Xtol, however, still sits in those bottles ...). I like the way my paper works without hardener. The selenium toner step goes better that way. regards, --le _______________________________________ Lloyd Erlick Portraits, 2219 Gerrard Street East, unit #1, Toronto M4E 2C8 Canada. --- voice 416-686-0326 http://www.heylloyd.com _______________________________________ |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
nose/eye fume irritation and cheap ventilation
wrote
Dan Quinn wrote: The ratio for F-5 would be 1:7 or 1:15 two-bath; a 60% concentrate vs a 15% working strength. A fluid volumn of 250ml at one or the other of those ratios and fixers will fix one 8x10. I'm quite sure of that but do have more testing to do. Dan jan2604 from Lloyd Erlick, Do you actually use F5, Dan? I don't use F5. The above info is in response to Mr. Phillips post. I'm too much a minimalist to mix that. Because of my one-shot usage of all chemistry I feel free to use the very least complex of chemistries. I've put the very plain sodium thiosulfate on the shelf. Bottled and dry it will likely, if still on the shelf, be in good shape years from now. I won't last that long. I've some hypo-alum, nelson gold toner, and another place or two where it can be used. It could once again be my fix of choice. The 60% ammonium thiosulfate is used diluted. Nothing is added. I will though be adding an alkali and compare results. Dan NO PRESERVATIVES ADDED Why not F6 instead? F5 is more of a historical footnote, since F6 is so similar but minus the strong odor. Attack odor, I'd call it. F5 is a mucous membrane shredder, in my opinion. F5 would make me buy a digital camera. For me, the whole discussion of the various fixers quickly devolved to sodium thiosulfate, sodium sulfite and water. F5 stinks, F6 is a great alternative, but it does not need (I don't need, my materials don't need...) hardener, so also doesn't need acid, etc, etc, so finally I couldn't see why I would make up a fixer with any other components, especially since I'm definitely a low-volume processor! High capacity fixers like rapid-fixers are wasted on me, I never come close to using them up. I'd rather have a low capacity fixer and replace it frequently. I suppose it could be said I went through a similar thought process over FB print developer. Eventually I settled on what amounts to the D23 of printing: the old Ansco 120 formula. I now just weigh out the amount of dry ingredients necessary for a working solution of the requisite volume for my purposes. It dissolves in seconds, and I no longer store bottles of liquids I've prepared (Xtol, however, still sits in those bottles ...). I like the way my paper works without hardener. The selenium toner step goes better that way. _______________________________________ Lloyd Erlick Portraits, 2219 Gerrard Street East, unit #1, Toronto M4E 2C8 Canada. --- voice 416-686-0326 http://www.heylloyd.com _______________________________________ |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|