Hal Faulkner (email@example.com)
Tue, 01 Jun 1999 13:57:22 -0700
A word of caution here. An earlier "thread " concerned optical brighteners.
The optical brighteners in some papers wash out with long wet times. That
is why one manufacturer of premium papers developed the so called archival
system of strong fast fix followed by reduced wash times. It turned out that
their paper was getting yellowish highlights after long wet times. Thus,
the overnight soak MAY cause you to end up with less than optimal image
quality. But the concept is valid, a series of five minute rinses (constant
agitation, -- by hand?) with complete change of water will use MUCH less
water and give a more thorough wash than running water without the agitation
and cosntant separation of prints.
From: Michael Keller [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
Sent: Tuesday, June 01, 1999 1:23 PM
Subject: Re: darkrooms & water
Kathryn Garrison wrote:
> It is apparently the volume of water that's a bigger deal. She
> for the time I'd be using a septic system I'd probably want to avoid FB
> paper because of the length of time/volume of water needed to wash. It's
> an old septic tank in need of an overhaul anyway and using that much water
> could likely cause me problems!
If time is not an issue (or perhaps especially if it is), you can really get
with a lower water flow using FB paper by going with a short Rapid Fix at
strength (as recommended by Ilford), and then using long soaks as opposed to
lengthy washes with a high flow of water. I've experimented with this, and
was successful on all the papers I've used _except_ Kodak's Polyfiber (which
trash anyway<g>). Other multi and graded papers tested clean for residual
and residual silver. The short fix minimizes your darkroom time, but the
overnight soaks add a day to your print production time. Of course, it's
especially advantageous if you're doing a number of prints at once.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu Oct 28 1999 - 21:39:36