Fixer -- Please Help

OK, I'm trying to get into the habit of developing my own B&W film with my own

chemicals; not surprisingly, I've run into something that's stumped me: From

what I've read, it seems that there are two types of fixers sold: "regular"

fixer, made of hyposulphite of soda/of sodium thisulfate; and "rapid fixer," of

ammonium thisulfate. Now, my question is this: As "wash aids" are also referred

to as "hypo-clearing agents," are they required/recommended only for "regular"

fixers? After all, it seems that "rapid fixers" contain to "hypo" to be

removed. Am I even thinking the right way? Of course, I'd appreciate any help

with this matter; thanks very much.

Rapid fixers was out faster, no need for wash aid. It doesn't really make sense to use hypo, as rapid fixers have better capacity, are faster, smell less, and wash out faster.

Washaid is useful and reccomended with "regular" fixer and with rapid fixer also.

 

The only fixers that don't need washaid are the alkaline fixers as, for example TF4 sold by Photographers formulary.

I always use an HCA with my Kodak Rapid Fixer. Without it, a "rapid" fixer will still take about 15min to wash out. With the hypo, it only takes five. I like to conserve water. When using a hypo, always make sure it's fresh. If it isn't, you'll be under washing and leaving fixer in the film so it won't archive. Kodak's HCA goes stale in roughly 3 months.

Rahul:

 

Let's start off by clearing up some confusion about fixers. There are the somewhat old-fashioned "standard" fixers are made with sodium thiosulfate and the somewhat newer "rapid" fixers made with ammonium thiosulfate. Standard or rapid fixers can be acidic, neutral, or alkaline in nature. Many fixers on the market today are acidic and allow for hardeners to be added or already have these hardening agents incorporated into the mix. Neutral or alkaline fixers cannot have hardening agents incorporated because the hardener needs an acidic environment to work.

 

The common consensus is that acidic hardening fixers are the most difficult to wash out. Acidic, non-hardening fixers are a little easier to clear. Alkaline or neutral fixers are the easiest. None of this matters very much with film or resin coated papers. Fixer only penetrates the gelatin emulsion, and washes out very easily. I've been using the Ilford wash method regularly without hypo clearing agent for about two years now with all my film and none of it shows any signs of deteriorating. Resin coated papers get about a 5 minute wash in a tray with an old Kodak tray siphon doing the water exchange. Again, no hypo clearing agent is used. The prints still look fine as well, so I must be doing something right.

 

Hypo clearing agents are very useful when it comes to washing fiber based prints. Unlike film and resin coated papers, the fixer penetrates completely through the fibers of the paper and can be notoriously difficult to remove. Wash times of 45 minutes to an hour are common to insure complete removal of any residual fixer. Hypo clearing agents speed up the wash times considerably and help insure that your prints are clean.

 

In short, you don't need a wash aid for film and RC papers, though you'll do no harm by using one. Wash aids are almost a necessity for fiber based papers, no matter which type of fixer you choose.

I have a fixer question...

 

Up until now, I have always used fixer as a one-shot, processing medium format negatives in a small tank. Now, I am starting tray development of 4x5 negatives. It seems like such a massive waste to throw out 750ml - 1 liter of fixer solution after fixing just 4-8 negatives when that solution can presumably fix approx 94 of them. So I am planning on recovering my fixer for future use.

 

Can I keep track of the fixer capacity by marking the sq inches of film the solution has fixed with any reasonable accuracy? Or is a clearing test the only way to do this properly?

Sorry, I should have been more clear. I do use TF-4, which is alkaline, and the Ilford wash method.

 

"Can I keep track of the fixer capacity by marking the sq inches of film the solution has fixed with any reasonable accuracy?"

 

Of course. Or you can keep track of rolls you've put throgh it. Or you can just judge by fixer speed. With TF-4, when I notice it stops taking the antihalation dye out I know it's soon time to replace it as it also becomes slow working. You're wasting money by throwing perfectly good fixer out.

A few drops of Hypo Check from Edwal will instantly tell you when your fixer is has reached its silver saturation limit.

"Wash aids are almost a necessity for fiber based papers, no matter which type of fixer you choose"

 

I don't agree with this statement. Hypo clearing agents are ineffective and unnecessary with alkaline fixers (TF-3, TF4, ...)

Thanks very much, everyone. From what I've gathered here, then, fixer-remover is not necessary when using rapid fixer, but it couldn't really hurt either. See, what had confused me was the term, "hypo-remover," as I learned that "hypo" was simply not an ingredient in rapid fixers. It seems it's just an old name that's stuck around, though... and that really helps clarify things. Thanks again.

I also use TF-4 rapid archival fix.

For the wash, I read in a book devoted to archival photographic processes to use the difusion method. In short it was described as follows:

With the film on the reel and in the tank simply soak for five minutes. No need to agitate. Dump and refill and soak for another five minutes. Continue like this every five minutes for an hour.

Then I soak the reel in a photo flo solution (3ml flo to 800ml water)

for 30 seconds and hang dry overnight in my shower. So far no problems.

Also when using some types of film you may want a hardening fixer.... Some East european and Chinese films are very soft when wet.

 

Larry

I'll give my two thumbs up for an alkaline fix like the Formulary's TF-4. Very durable long lasting fix that needs no Hypo clearing agent and will wash out faster than a rapid acid fix that has been used with HCA. No major manufaturer makes alkli fixer so you have to use either the Formulary's product or another photo chemical distributor. Other benefits of an Alkali fix include: little or no danger of overfixing and removing image-bearing silver and better image stain when used with pyro based developers. Some sources also say that there are benefits in keeping the process alkali or as neutral as possible and that standard acid fixes may not adequately fix today's modern films and papers.

Marc, thanks for the advice, but, honestly, an hour seems like an unbearably long while to wash film, especially when it involves chaging the water every five minutes (meaning, twelve fills total). I think I'd prefer just using some fixer-remover, or keeping the film-loaded tank under continuously running water for an overall shorter period.

 

Daniel, is it true that fixer can remove parts of the film that it SHOULDN'T remove? I ask because I have noticed that some of my negatives seem to have a few small "blank" (clear) portions, where there ought to be picture information. For instance, one of my negatives just have a very small clear patch right in the center of an otherwise-dark (very exposed) solid pattern. Also, does Kodak or Ilford not make alkaline-based fixers? If not, are they somehow considered "inferior," and thus not deemed worthy of manufacture by these two "giants" in the industry? Thanks very much.

"Daniel, is it true that fixer can remove parts of the film that it SHOULDN'T remove? I ask because I have noticed that some of my negatives seem to have a few small "blank" (clear) portions, where there ought to be picture information. For instance, one of my negatives just have a very small clear patch right in the center of an otherwise-dark (very exposed) solid pattern. Also, does Kodak or Ilford not make alkaline-based fixers? If not, are they somehow considered "inferior," and thus not deemed worthy of manufacture by these two "giants" in the industry? Thanks very much."

 

 

Rahul, severe overfixing can dissolve image bearing silver and will usually have somewhat of a bleaching effect over the entire image area and not a specific local spot. What you are describing seems like either pinholes in the emulsion or possibly dust/debris that was on the film during exposure. Both could cause the phenomenon you are describing. No major manufacturer makes alkali fixes not due to any inferiority issues but rather because acid fixes have been the time proven product since the early days of photography and it is what most people use. Interestingly enough however, Kodak was engaged in research during the 1980's which suggested that the commonly used acid fixes were not ideal for modern films and papers possibly due to the increased use of iodine in modern emulsions. Apparently Kodak ceased any major laboratory testing of B+W products shortly thereafter and never investigated the issue further. This is all described in Anchell and Troop's "Film Developer's Cookbook" if you are interested. Furthermore, they mention the tendency of acid fixes to mordant fixer particles into the emulsion which become nearly impossible to wash out. This doesn't mean the archaivability of modern films processed in acid fixers are seriously compromised but it would be interesting to see a side by side test that goes 50 years or more into the future. Personally I've seen enough good evidence that suggests an alkali process is best for image quality and archivability and that's why I use an alkali fix with a plain water stop bath.

"Interestingly enough however, Kodak was engaged in research during the 1980's which suggested that the commonly used acid fixes were not ideal for modern films and papers possibly due to the increased use of iodine in modern emulsions..."

 

I've read the same thing, though I've come to a different conclusion. First, there is no doubt that the T-grain films like TMax series are harder to fix out than are more conventional films and that they do consume fixer at a higher rate. If I use a conventional sodium thiosulfate fixer, I can usually expect to get about 10 rolls of film through it before the action starts to slow down considerably. At that point, I consider the fixer to be close to exhaustion and the bath is discarded. Running TMax films through the same type of fixer exhausts the bath after about 6 or 7 rolls. Additionally, the fixing time for T-grain films typically runs twice what it does for more conventional emulsions. The same approximately equal ratios apply to ammonium thiosulfate fixers. They just work much more quickly and have a much higher capacity. When I first starting using TMax films about 10 years ago, my fixer of choice had been Kodak's powdered fixer which is a conventional sodium thiosulfate formula. These negatives are still good. So my conclusion about Kodak's statement regarding the efficacy of sodium thiosulfate fixers and T-grain films is simply this. Kodak is playing it safe by assuming that their users will unintentionally under fix their films by not allowing the full 7 to 10 minutes required by T-grain films in conventional fixers to insure complete fixing.

Frank, I think the issue of T-grain films supposedly needing more time in the fixer is a diferent issue all together. The concept of extended fix times for these films seems to have more to do with attempts to remove the dyes and color casts of these films and such recommendations seem to be suspect at best. When saying "modern" films, Anchell and troop didn't point to T-grain films in particular, but rather modern emulsions as a whole (films and papers.) They say the increased use of iodide in modern films and papers (T-grain or otherwise) renders them unable to be adequately fixed in a traditional sodium thiosulfate fixer. They also go on to say that archaival permanence is best achieved by keeping the process either neutral or alkaline which means omitting acid stop baths and acid fixers. Doing so prevents the thiosulfate from mordanting into the emulsion. To me its a no brainer. Alkaline fixers have better stability, capacity, allow for the shortest wash times and very possible provide better archaivability.

Hello,

 

Is it possible to use hypo check with an alkaline fixer such as TF4 or TF3?

 

In such case, would it work the same as with an acid fixed? Is it recommended?

 

Thank you all

The job of the fixer is to render the film and print permanent. The word “fix” in photo jargon is assigned to the “fixing bath”. What is needed is a solution that dissolves silver compounds (silver salts) without assaulting the metallic silver that comprises the image.

 

Two fixers are in common use, sodium thiosulfate and its cousin, ammonium thiosulfate. Both do the same job, however ammonium thiosulfate does its work twice as fast -- thus the nickname “rapid fix”.

 

Different emulsions are fixed over different time spans. Film emulsions 2 to 7 minutes, and paper emulsions 45 to 70 seconds. Truism: Paper emulsions contain about ½ of the silver as compared to film. This is because a print is viewed by reflective light. The light from a nearby lamp is incident (French for about to happen) on the print. This light traverses the print emulsion, hits the underlying white base called a “baryta” (Latin heavy white clay). The baryta reflects the light, thus the viewing illumination makes two transits through the print emulsion -- thus only ½ as much silver is required compared to a negative film. Ammonium thiosulfate became available in the middle of the 20th century as a liquid concentrate. It has since become the fixer of choice.

 

During World War II, the Navy commenced using seawater as a washing agent for prints and film. To everyone’s surprise, seawater washes out residual photo chemicals in just minutes. The usual procedure is to use a fresh water final rinse. This scheme resulted in the marketing of rinses comprised of various salts and sometimes peroxide. These mixtures greatly speed washing time. The normal for film is 20 minutes and single weight papers, 30 minutes, while double weight papers need 60 minutes. Fixer clearing agents cut this time down considerably. If residual fixer remains, it breaks down sulfur. Sulfur attacks silver converting it to a reddish brown compound, silver sulfide. Silver sulfide is more stable than metallic silver, however the natural process produced blotchy brown spots. Sulfur containing toners gives a uniform sepia tone. The sepia print is archival, likely lasting longer than the paper base.