Do you use a stop bath for film?

Hello to all,

 

I decided to start processing B&W myself. A few years back I took a

class at a local community college that taught a basic B&W course. It

seems to me that we used a stop bath when developing our T MAX 100.

 

The other day I bought everything needed to develop my own film at

home and was told by the sales person not to use a stop bath when

processing film. He said he only recommended using it for processing

the print.

 

Perhaps that�s where we used it at in class and I�m getting it mixed

up somewhere along the line.

 

I�ve read the instructions at the KODAX web site and they listed it

as a step in processing film. Do you use it?

 

One more question please.

 

I�ve read through the archives here looking for specific directions

on how to do all of this from beginning to end as a re- fresher and

most of what I�ve found is dated back in �96-�98� I know film has

changed since then at least the TMAX 100 I plan on using has so can

anyone point me towards a detailed list of instructions that someone

has written here recently perhaps?

 

I�m looking forward to getting back into this side off photography.

I�m not sure why I stopped.

Answer #2 - http://www.ilford.com/html/us_english/bw.html Click on the link for processing your first black and white film.

 

With regards, to a stop bath, I use one for thirty seconds and a slow continuous agitation. I'll do a couple of inversions, stop to tap the bottom of the tank, then continue onward. It's probably overkill when developing times reach 11 to 12 minutes, but that's my style.

 

One thing I found to be helpful is to buy a notebook and to keep meticulous records. Since I'm only able to process about 50 films a year, it's handy to have my own reference guide.

 

Enjoy your return to B&W.

I used to use stop bath, but now I use plain water. I don't notice any difference and the fixer capacity seems the same. I think whatever you do, just be consistent and you'll get good results every time.

Thanks Andrew,

 

I wonder why he told me not use a stop bath? I know he said to make sure and rinse well in - between developer and fixer.

 

While I�m thinking about it, I bought Orbit Bath as the hypo clearing agent. It says to mix 4 ounces per one gallon of water. If that�s the right mixture, this big jug should last me a life time. What�s the shelf life on this stuff?

Thank you Salty,

 

You got in while I was typing.

I use a stop. I likely don't need it since I'm using a dilute one shot developer that's basically done at the end of the process but it makes me feel better. Stop brings the process to a quick end. If you're using a strong developer with quick times then it'll matter more then with a dilute developer and longer times. It's already been mentioned just do things the same every time and you'll get the same results. Make changes only if those changes aren't up to what you want.

Water bath vs stop bath bet dev and fix:acid stop bath will end dev immediately making the timing of short dev times(under 10 min) more precise. Downside-some liken the harsh transition from the alkaline dev to the acid stop to running a car into a concrete abutment. That is, damage is possible. In contrast the water bath stop with a running water rinse (say 5 cycles of fill agitate and dump) over 1 min offers a much more gentle transition which many prefer. While I don't know the capacity of Orbit Bath, personally I prefer to mix only what I need for a dev or printing session and then dump it.

Suddenly putting developer soaked film into acid can form minute gas bubbles to form in the emulsion. These show up as minute "pinholes" of clear film and print as tiny black spots.

I am a law-abiding citizen to whom it would never occur to park in a no-parking zone. I also was an enlisted member of the military, so I'm used to being told what to do by some authority.

 

When the manufacturer of a film or developer calls for a short stop, I assume since they made the stuff they know what they're talking about so I use it.

 

Some (very few) compensating developers like Ethol T.E.C. and some staining developers recommend using water instead. I follow their recommendation.

 

Never heard of a paper or paper developer poop sheet that didn't call for stop bath. But I still read them all.

True, if one uses a developer that contains carbonate compounds, then there is a definite risk of gassing. You can probably observe this by mixing a drop of each of your working solutions on a slide.

 

This should not be a problem with common developers such as ID-11, D76 or Rodinal, as they do not contain carbonate compounds.

 

To be safe, check the MSDS sheet of your developer to see if it contains any CO3 compounds.

Yes, most of the time, unless the developer's instructions specifically call for NOT using it. One example is Diafine, which has become my speed developer of choice for Tri-X. I've found that I get more life from my fixing bath by using an acid stop as opposed to a water stop. I know this is probably overkill, but I do give the film a quick rinse with tempered water after the stop. I don't like to get any of the indicator dye mixed in with the fixer. Sometimes, I'll have a bottle of partially used fix go bad, and when it does, it turns a yellowish color. Dye carried over from the stop bath can mask this.

I haven't used stop bath for film since I was a teenager, and have worked with several commercial labs and veteran newspaper staffs that don't use it either regardless of film used.

 

I am convinced that acid stop baths are irrelevant and pointless for film. A good, agitated water bath between Dev and Fix accomplishes the same thing.

I don't know if there is any factual basis for my assuming this, but I use a stop bath because I imagine that a water stop may not put as sudden a stop to the development, thereby making the actual developing time less precise. I also use a stop bath for the reason stated by John Cook: I believe the film manufacturer knows what he's talking about regarding getting the best results from his product.

Lots of opinions on this one. Like prewetting film lots of this is tied up with old practices, outright mythology and plain personal preferences. FWIW, here's mine...

 

Use stop bath with short developing times. For example, sheet film in HC-110 at dilutions necessitating development times of around 5 minutes. In such cases you want to stop development immediately. The few seconds longer it takes for plain water to slow development before fixer hits the film can mean the difference between N and N+1 development.

 

This is especially critical with rollfilm tank development since the fastest I can manage to pour out the developer, pour in and agitate a plain water or stop bath is 20-30 seconds. With a short development time that can make the difference between perfect negs and those that are a mite too contrasty.

 

But since I usually aim for rollfilm tank development times of 10 minutes or so - simply because I want to make these time related factors less critical - I don't bother with stop baths. The few seconds longer it takes for plain water to slow development before pouring in the fixer doesn't matter. I've compared my negs both ways - no difference.

 

I'm persuaded that agitation in plain water slows development to a crawl, virtually stopping it anyway. I don't want crappy, overdeveloped negatives and if I really believed a stop bath was critical to my usual methods I'd use it.

 

In those rare cases where I'm unavoidably faced with rollfilm tank development times closer to 5 minutes - typical with Rodinal in 1:25 or 1:50 dilutions - then, yes, I'll use a homebrewed stop bath of distilled white vinegar in water. I use the same stop bath for my prints.

 

Some folks claim store boughten stop bath is cheaper than white vinegar. We country bumpkins allus have lotsa white vinegar around fer cannin' and sech, so it's moot.

<a>Ok, the new TMAX 100 has a development time of 6.25 minutes at 75 deg. If I decrease the water temp too 68 deg, this should increase the developing time too nine minutes according to the conversion chart at Ilford�s web site.<p>

 

I suppose I could use the cooler water temp to get a longer development time and see what I get and then try the warmer temp and shorter development time and compare the two.<p>

 

I know experimenting is part of the game and you always learn something from it, but it doesn�t hurt to find out what you can from those who already know.<p>

 

This is what I bought for my first soup,<p>

 

T MAX 100 film,<br>

T-MAX developer,<br>

Kodak fixer (powder formula)<br>

Orbit bath� hypo clear<br>

LFN� photo flow<br><a/>

Roger, personally, I hate wrestling with trying to temper chemistry. Right now, for example, it's 85 friggin' degrees in this end of the house 'cause the air conditioner isn't working right. I have a rolled of Tri-X exposed at EI 1250 to develop later. Danged if I'm gonna struggle with trying to keep the temperature down to 70 degrees F or anything close to it. Instead I'll just use Diafine which doesn't much care what the temperature is.

 

In other cases - different films or exposures and different developers - I'd just use the times associated with higher temps and, if the times were closer to 5 minutes than 10, use a stop bath.

 

No point being dogmatic about our preferences.

Good advice Lex,

 

At lease that way I�ll get used to something and be able to recognize a difference if I do change anything.

 

Have you used the new T-MAX 100?

Not yet, Roger. I'm trying to avoid the inevitability of having to confront redetermining the correct exposure index and development times. Took me long enough to figure that out with the original emulsion. I'm just hoping "new and improved" doesn't just mean "cheaper for Kodak to produce."

 

OTOH, most folks seem to agree that Ilford's Pan F+ is better than the original Pan F, so change may not always be bad.

Roger: well, there your have it. 8^)

 

I use a stop bath most of the time with film - in my case I notice a distinct improvement in how long my fixer lasts if I've killed every last bit of alkali in the developer with dilute acetic acid.

 

BUT - with highly alkali developers (Rodinal, Diafine) - and not just carbonate developers - the acid and alkali can react to form hydrogen gas and create pinholes. Diafine specifically recommends AGAINST using a stop bath, since it develops to exhaustion anyway.

 

With Rodinal I've even had acid-stop cause reticulation (wrinkling) in the alkali-softened gelatin film emulsion - so I use a water rinse followed by a very dilute stop bath (and calculate Rodinal development times accordingly).

 

The basic steps to developing film (develop/rinse-or-stop/fix/wash/dry) haven't changed since film replaced wet plates c. 100 years ago. The only difference for 'new' Tmax 100 may be a change in developing time, and since that varies with temperature anyway, you just have to look it up at the moment you're ready to go and know the temp.

I use Rodinal (1:50) and I've allways used a 30 sec stop bath with no problems. I use Kodak Max Stop Bath (22% acetic acid diluted to 1:15). Don't know if it matters, but I have very clean tap water so no need to use distilled water at all.

Roger:

 

I have used the New TMAX 100 in Diafine. I actualy exposed at 320 or 400 and got nice, punchy negatives that printed on Grade 2. I really like the sharpness of TMAX 100 in Diafine. Try a roll. Remember that you can develop ALL of your b&w film (except TP) in Diafine in the same tank. Take some different rolls of film and shoot the same scene and see what you like. Personally, I think that 100TMX (at 320), 125PX (at 400), 400TX (at 1250) and APX100 (at 200) are some of the best in Diafine. I don't get the same look in Diafine with the Ilford emulsions although some do. I just haven't spent the time on Ilford as Kodak stuff. The Ilford emulsions don't get the same increase in speed. Try some, it cheap and fun.

Ditto the recommendations for Diafine. So far I've used it only on Tri-X at EI 1250 - great stuff. It's like Diafine and Tri-X were made for each other if there's a need for speed. Great tonality, moderate contrast yet a certain sparkle to the prints. A bit grainy, sure, but that's Tri-X.

 

And, as Andy wrote, no need for stop bath at all with Diafine since it's a self-regulating developer; 3 minutes, 4, 5...it doesn't seem to care. No rinse at all between Part A and Part B, and just a good plain water rinse after Part B before fixing.

 

I'm waiting for the recent overcast skies to clear up so I can try it on TMX.

I appreciate everyone�s time. This is by far one of the most helpful responses I received to anything I�ve posted in the past three years. This is my first post over here on the B&W side. Thanks again.

"This is by far one of the most helpful responses I received to anything I�ve posted in the past three years. This is my first post over here on the B&W side."

 

That explains it. Those people using colour are kind of funny-)))

I recently ran into the same problem -- only I was halfway through agitating my developer at a new lab . . . that aside. I like a stop bath as it makes development time replication that much easier from roll to roll.