Formaldehyde or phtalat in photo chemicals??

[fred_obturateur]

Hello

I'd like to know if these 2 are to be found in photo stuff we use since

they are cancer-inducing...

Thanks

[titrisol]

Please check the MSDS of the products you use/plan to use in their respectives maker webstes (Kodak, AGFA, Ilford, etc) so you can find for yourself.

 

I don;t think Formaldehyde is in any photo products.

 

Phtalates? which of them? I sincerely doubt those are present as well.

[lex_jenkins]

You can research online or request via mail or toll-free phone numbers the MSDS (Material Safety Data Sheet) for any product made or distributed in the U.S. Manufacturers are not required to divulge corporate secrets or recipes but they are required to list the hazardous materials, including formaldehyde, along with basic information about the health and safety hazards.

 

Whether manufacturers are actually required to release MSDSs to consumers is another matter and may vary from state to state. Originally the purpose of requiring MSDSs was for the protection of employees who might be exposed on the job and emergency responders such as fire fighters, paramedics, etc. But MSDSs have been around for long enough now that manufacturers may not object to providing them to consumers regardless of federal, state or local obligations.

[dai_hunter]

Access to chemical hazard data made simple...

 

AFAIK in the US an MSDS is required to be supplied (on request) to the "end user" (even if they are individuals) and also to anyone in the intermediate chain (cradle to grave) from manufacturer; transporters; distributors; and retailers; and on to end user. In the US, also, for any business use a centrally compiled MSDS book/folder/file must be available to employees. These MSDSs should be available from the manufacturer or any principle distributor but may NOT be available from a retailer. Specific hazard/risk/protective information must be applied to labels of all products or as a package insert. Some special rules apply to particular products e.g. pesticides; drugs; ect. Only a few manufacturers can avoid detailed labelling, some cosmetics amongst them, because there are secondary checks on hazard content (pre-approved components and/or concentrations of such pre-approved components)

 

In the UK/EU there is an underlying requirement on EVERY business to make available MSDS data to employees under the H&S at Work Act - but there is also an implied requirement on EVERY business to furnish such data to end users (cradle to grave) as is sufficient that a risk does not arise in the normal use of a product [formulated in the H&S at Work Act as a "duty to protect ANY persons not in their employ" vis "the general public" if they are likely to encounter the product]. Labelling of retail quantities of hazardous components is not as strict as the US and may, in the UK/EU, only contain "hazard phrases" and "risk phrases" in coded form along with symbols (e.g. flammable; poison; ect... diamonds) - however, if the same retail package is supplied by a UK business (manufacturer; distributor; retailer) for use by another UK business in the course of that business... it is the end user business owner/manager obtaining the product who must track down the MSDS but which MUST then be furnished to them by the manufacturer/distributor. If the MSDS is not supplied then the product usually should not be used or even present on a UK workplace.

 

Other UK/EU regulations also apply e.g. COSHH and the Management of H&S at Work Regulations - as well as others. Again, some special rules apply to particular products e.g. pesticides; drugs; ect. Again, only a few manufacturers can avoid detailed labelling, some cosmetics amongst them, because there are secondary checks on hazard content (pre-approved components and/or concentrations of such pre-approved components)

 

In both cases, US and EU [including the UK] safe (spent product and packaging) disposal information MUST be supplied ON THE PACKAGE. Specific environmental hazard (disposal) labelling is required on many products - including photographic chemicals.

 

Hunter

[r_hofland]

Formaldehyde was at one time used as a film hardener but I doubt very much that it is still used. Phtalates (spelling?) are used in plastics as "softeners" tgo make them flexible, and most often become an issue when those plastics are heated as in a microwave or boiling water (as in some food containers). Probably not a major issue for photographers since you ought not be ingesting those chemicals, but I suppose they might become volatilized under some situtations.

[richard_cochran]

<cite>

I don't think Formaldehyde is in any photo products.</cite>

<p>

Actually, it's fairly commonly used as a stabilizer for the final

step of C-41 processing. <a href="http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=formaldehyde+c-41&btnG=Google+Search">Google</a>

shows a number of hits on C-41 and Formaldehyde, though a number

of those hits are talking about how their stabilizer

is formadehyde-free.

<p>

Of course, this being a B&W forum, C-41 processing may not be

of interest to many. I don't know of any common use of formaldehyde

in traditional B&W processing.

[rowland_mowrey]

Guys;

 

Some brands of film, but not from the major mfgrs, may contain formaldehyde as hardener.

 

All C41 stabilizers contain formaldehyde even those labeled 'formaldehyde free', as they use trioxymethylene which turns into formaldehyde when dissolved in water. (Neat cop-out, isn't it?)

 

X-Ray processes and some others use glutaraldehyde and succinaldehyde which are about equal to formaldehyde in hazard. Alternate names for formaldehyde are: formalin, trioxymethylene and formalin bisulfite adduct. These all can produce formaldehyde under the right conditions, if not just outright.

 

Formaldehyde is not as bad as made out, but I wouldn't want to bathe in it. It is not as toxic as many other chemicals we use regularly in photography.

 

Formaldehyde is also used in glue, furniture finishes, and as sizing material in clothing. New clothing or new furniture contain a considerable amount of formaldehyde in them. It is used at high concentration in the embalming process, in the preservation of biological samples and in other areas requiring hardening or preservation of protein samples.

 

Phthalates are sometimes used in film support.

 

Do you wear rubber gloves when processing? Do you use tongs when processing? Do you use either a mask or respirator when mixing powdered chemicals? Do you refuse to eat or drink in your darkroom?

 

If your answer is "no" to any of the above questions, you run the risk of adverse exposure to photochemicals. I might add that several authors have stated that Pyrogallol is probably the most toxic chemical in common darkroom use. I believe that Selenium is not far behind. That said, I believe that the risk from Pyro is yet to be absolutely proven, and the danger of selenium is overstated.

 

You see, the list of dangers can go on and on. Where do you want to stop, step back, and take a rational view? If you do that, you find that for 100 years, photographers have used all of the above chemicals and they have not dropped dead of exposure. Many of us live to ripe old age and die naturally.

 

Don't worry. Follow the mfgrs instructions, and enjoy our hobby.

 

Ron Mowrey

[rustys pics]

"Formaldehyde is not as bad as made out, but I wouldn't want to bathe in it."....

The old color print process EP-2 used a Formaldehyde stabilizer. I used to mix vats of this stuff when I worked in a pro lab back in the late '80s. We kept our chemical vats about 7 feel off the floor. One day when I was pumping the stabilizer into it, the hose came loose and I got a nice Formaldehyde shower....

No health effects so far, but people tell me I look young for 43....

Remembering that makes me love digital!

[rowland_mowrey]

Russ;

 

AFAIK, the EP2 (actually EP3) stabilizer did not use formalin. It was citric acid, benzoic acid, and in the type II stabilzer it contained a special stabilizing agent that wasn't formalin.

 

There was formalin in the old formalin fix of P122, but not in the stabilizer, and this was the same general stabilzer carried over to EP3 used for Ektacolor 30/37 papers.

 

Then, EP3 became EP2 and eliminated the stabilzer completely, I believe when the Plus papers came out.

 

I'll check to see if I have more information on this.

 

Ron Mowrey

[Rob F.]

"phtalat" ?? Is that the right spelling? There's no way to pronounce it! Fiddle-it maybe? No. Fit-a-lat? Foot-a-lot? I didn't hear about it in chemistry class.

[discpad]

Actually, I use a homebrew 2% formaldehyde + Photoflo solution as my C-41 and E-6 stabilizer, even though I use pre-bleach, not conditioner, as the 4th step. FWIW, K-14 (Kodachrome) also uses a formaldehyde stabilizer.

 

Ron: Does RA-4 stabilizer use formaldehyde, too?

[rowland_mowrey]

Dan;

 

Standard RA4 does not use a stabilzer.

 

Minilabs that don't fully wash paper use a special stabilzer, but it does not contain formalin according to the MSDS. It uses a proprietary organic compound.

 

Also, early P122 stabilzers did contain formalin as well.

 

The correct spelling of 'phtalat' is 'phthalate' pronounced 'fthalate'.

 

It is an organic acid, phthalic acid' that can be found listed with information in the Merck Index.

 

Ron Mowrey

[fred_obturateur]

Thanks a lot for the detailed replies.

Well I was wondering about the presence of these 2 in stuff we use daily because they have been detected by the eco-sentinel Greenpeace in stuff some people use daily : perfumes. Both the ones you put in your house and the expensive ones you put on your body.

[al_kaplan1]

Back when 400 speed film was fast and grainy, before Acufine and Diafine came along, we used to treat our underexposed negatives to some Victor's Mercury Intensifier. Sure, it had a warning in the directions. This was an era when your science teacher would let each kid have a turn rolling a little ball of mercury around in the palm of their hand. A wonder we're all still alive today.