RC print washing problem

[henry_a]

Hi, I posted this over at the Printing and Finishing Forum and have not gotten much response. Maybe someone here will have a solution.

 

I have a problem getting a thorough wash of Ilford RC MG IV paper. I noticed when shuffling through a stack of prints that the prints have an odor similar to fix and kind of sweet smelling. I've tested with HT-2 silver nitrate and it indicates a level slightly less than the number 1 patch sample. I think it should show no stain at all for RC paper. My fiber prints show no stain. When printing I use the Ilford fast fix method, only 30-45 seconds timed in the film strength fix then on to a tray washer with running water for at least 5 minutes (sometimes longer). As an experiment I rewashed several prints from a batch that gave the slight stain, giving 10 minutes in a sodium sulfite bath as hypo clear, then 30 minutes in my archival print washer, they still smell and the HT-2 test shows the same slight stain. If RC paper won't wash using this method what will do the job? Hypo Eliminator - which many caution against? Any suggestions?

[ryuji_suzuki]

Do you rinse print in one tray and final wash in another tray?

Or at least do you dump water immediately after initial rinse?

(This is not a requirement depending on your washer design but it is a good idea if you are using a simple tray with a siphon as an RC washing system)

 

Do you agitate continually or semi-continually during wash?

(if there is some water flow on the emulsion side, it will do this part.)

 

Is your washing water warm enough? (15-20C)

 

Does the same happen with other RC papers?

 

What fixer do you use?

 

 

 

 

Either way, unnecessarily long washing time is undesirable for RC prints. I don't recommend to use peroxide-ammonia (like Kodak HE-1) with film or paper. It doesn't work as efficiently in gelatin (though it works in test tubes) and you risk gelatin damage.

[henry_a]

Hi Ryuji,

 

I use a tray washer that has water in-flow through a series of holes at one end, out through another set of holes at the other. Water is flowing all the time. I do not dump the tray between each print, but by the time I get the next print to the wash tray its had at least 5 minutes wash in flowing water. Wash water temperature is usually around 70-72 F. I'm using Ilford Universal Fixer at 1:4 dilution and also TF4. Whats really stumped me is that even with the extra, extended wash I describe the result is no better. A 2 minute wash is what Ilford calls for, I'm giving it 5 minutes normally and not getting prints that are as clean as I want. Surely when I cleared and re-washed as I described the prints should be clean? (10 minutes in a sodium sulfite bath, then 30 minutes in my archival print washer) I'm beginning to wonder if I have a bad box of paper. I did buy this box on sale.

[introp]

Perhaps check the water content? I did some on-site proofs (in trays in the host's bathtub!) for a dog shoot, and something about the water (from a well) kept the fixer from rinsing completely. Alas, I didn't discover this until a week or so later, so I dunno if I final rinse of good water would have done it. Just a lark...

[ryuji_suzuki]

Just to make sure - is that print fixed completely? (did you try using 2 min fixing in a fresh fixer just to make sure the print is fixed really well?)

 

If so, I would do a quick sanity check by cutting the washing time dramatically (like 1/2 of Ilford procedure) and see if the residual fixer increases based on the test. If shortening and extending washing time don't affect residual fixer level appreciably, I'd strongly suspect "something else." Maybe you've already tried...

[dk_thompson]

I don't what the exact problem is, but I think you're washing your prints enough--maybe even too much. I don't think long washing is good for RC papers, because the paper can delaminate....You don't need to use hypo clearing, etc. with RC prints, and although the HT-2 stains according to the Kodak Dataguide--are meant to be interpeted for Kodak papers--a stain at level 1 or just below it should be okay for certain RC papers. I remember using the HT-2 to establish wash rates for the old Kodak Ektmatic SC papers--which were single weight, fiber based developer incorporated papers. These papers had a higher stain level than other fiber papers because of the developer incorporation. It was just the way they were....so I don't know if Ilford products need to be interpeted differently or what...but from what you've described, sounds like you're washing them enough.

 

FWIW, I have been using an Ilford 2150 RC processor almost daily since 1994. I also RC print in a smaller tabletop processor and tray process as well....I use both the Kodak and Ilford sequences. My experience--with the automatic processors & malfunctions--with prints that were not washed properly is much different than a sweet smell, or a stain patch being misleading...my experince is with prints crapping out on display before my eyes or patrons complaining about prints that have silvered out or yellowed in a couple of weeks....the culprit has been an internal solenoid in the processor that failed--no exchanges of wash water in the tanks--aarrrggghh.....

 

But the way the 2150 works is to use chemistry very similar to the tray process stuff, but just at a higher temp. It runs at 95 degrees and the prints move through the tanks in about 15-20 seconds. With the flow rate set for the wash tank (it has a sprayer bar as well) so that the tank changes out in 4 minutes or so, the machine will actually process RC prints at the standard ...they get a good fix & wash if the chemistry isn't being overused or as long as the machine is working (hahaha...). If you consult Ilford's dataguide, they recommend 30 seconds in film strength fix--no hardener--at 68 degrees or higher for tray processing RC. They recommend a 2 minute final wash...

 

I can think of a couple of problems with longer washing...one would be that you would risk washing out the optical brighteners in the emulsion...then you'd have a problem with the water penetrating the edges of the paper base..and finally the current theories about print longevity hinge around leaving just a little bit of residual fix in the paper to begin with...this is why Hypo Eliminators have fallen out of favor in recent years....my suggestion would be to contact Ilford and ask them what stain level is appropriate for their papers....hope this helps, Opinions expressed in this message may not represent the policy of my agency

[ryuji_suzuki]

About DK Thompson's comment on residual fixer etc. It is true that the role of residual fixer has received more attention recently, but I would still wash out fixer without thinking about this possible benefit. This is because thiosulfate is only one of several harmful ions present in the gelatin, thick paper cells and baryta layer after fixation of the material. Ones that are just as harmful are silver complex ions and salts. I definitely want to wash them out. Rapid fixers with pH above 5 used within recommended capacity effectively make them easy to escape from the gelatin as well as supporting materials.

 

I would use the term "why" more carefully with Crabtree, Eaton and Muehler's hypo eliminator formula. One reason it is out of favor has a lot to do with that it doesn't work. Sure the peroxide works favorably at pH of 9.5, but does it decompose thiosulfate and silver complex ions to harmless ions in gelatin layer and paper layer within practical time span? There are reports saying that hypo eliminator converts them into other harmful compounds, and there are some other papers reporting what kinds of fix is needed to make it work as desired. While these reports have not agreed to a simple workable solution, Henn, King and Crabtree's suggestion of 2% sodium sulfite solution adjusted to pH of 7.0 as a washing aid agent acquired popularity because it is more stable, and displaces harmful ions with harmless, washable ions inside gelatin layer.

 

For protecting image, I have little doubt that AGFA SISTAN is a better way to go, bringing back all known benefit of trace residual thiosulfate and more.

 

Finally, I too definitely want to minimize wet time of prints to prevent washing out brightening agents.

[dk_thompson]

My comments about residual fixer came from the research being done on microfilm storage--forgive me, I work in an agency attached to an archive. I just don't see why you can't get a good wash for RC papers in 5 minutes or less. I think the problem is, that Henry assumes he's not getting a good wash based off the HT2 stain, which in my understanding is not as conclusive a test for residual fix as can be done by researchers or conservators. And is also not frequently done for RC papers. If he had a problem with his prints browning out or silvering out at a later date, then yeah, that would be a possibility....but I don't see why you can't get the wash you need on RC...the emulsion is on top of the plastic base, there should be no chemistry in the base itself, unless it's been in the chemistry long enough to get in there....btw, although I am not a chemist, or a conservator--so I won't attempt to amke a technical explanation--it's my understanding from these IPI papers, and the ones off Abbey Journal, and Consdistlist, that a little residual fix is beneficial to protecting the image from atmospheric pollutants....one of the researchers at the IPI has written quite thoroughly on this topic...they recommend to wash enough, but not to overwash the prints.(even for fiber) Apparently it's a delicate balance....based on my experince production printing RC papers and displaying them in a variety of real-world conditions, and institutional ones--I don't have a problem churning out untoned RC work prints and everyday prints....but for longterm usage, I would tone everything in either strong selenium, or a sulfide toner. MY opinions as always.

[henry_a]

This is getting good!

 

I never thought I had a problem until I noticed the smell. I'd never tested RC prints but did so based on the thought that something must be wrong with them if they smell. I suspect that most people never test RC - if they want long lasting prints they're using fiber papers. It may be that the 5 minute wash gets the same result as a 30 minute wash and the stain test result and odor is a characteristic of the paper and there's nothing wrong with my prints. I have not heard from Ilford yet but I am interested in any explanation they might have. I'm still open to any thoughts or suggestions. Thank you.

[dk_thompson]

Henry...I think you jinxed me man! A big water line broke out on the street in front of our building and they shut off the water--heaven forbid they tell anyone inside......not only will I have to redo a whole stack o'prints, but now I hafta clean out the dryer....otoh, I could just send these out & see how long it takes for them crap out....if it's not one thing it's another, thank god I wasn't running the E6 machine....

[ryuji_suzuki]

To: DK Thompson. As I said before, I acknowledge the role of trace residual thiosulfate. However, as I said before, thiosulfate is only one of many things in film/paper after fixation that you must wash out. Other things also can do the damage, and one should make sure all bad stuff are removed. You cannot make sure to wash out silver complex ions and salts thereof without washing out thiosulfate unless you come up with a way to do such. Again, as I said, AGFA SISTAN can give the same and even more protecting effects than trace residual thiosulfate without running the risk of residual silver complex ions.

 

Also, there's no big deal if you wash out all the thiosulfate. There are more serious issues associated with over-washing: damage to supporting material, gelatin layer, removal of brightening agents, etc. There are many ways to protect prints from environmental pollutants though there are few ways to fix physical damages from mishandling during wet processing. Again, I too don't see why the Ilford RC paper cannot be washed adequately in 5 minutes and I don't recommend unnecessary long washing.

 

I process all my final prints in protective toner(s) and in AGFA SISTAN before drying.

[henry_a]

I've received an answer from Ilford about this problem. What I am smelling in these prints is the wetting agent that is incorporated into the emulsion. Apparently some batches of paper have more of this agent and as a result have a slight odor. Ilford has tested one of my prints and they tell me that the print is safely washed.

[Bill Bowes]

Hello everyone. I was experiencing multi stain problems with both Mitsubishi and Ilford RC papers after washing. Several changes in my methods have zapped the stains.

#1. During printing, all prints go into a non hardening fixer for 2 minutes max. and transfered into a water bath with movement for about 2 minutes to dilute the fixer. Replace the water every 4 or 5 prints (8x10).

#2. Out of the lab, all the above prints are washed for about a minute and fixed again in a new, full strength non hardening fixer for 4 minutes. Washed for 5 minutes in running water, the prints are treated to a fresh hypo-clear bath for 3 minutes (I mix the hypo-clear for a one shot usage. Just determine the total surface area of your clearing agent and mix the desired liquid/powder for the prints you are working on). Wash for 10-20 minutes and air dry.

 

Here is another point I have not seen mentioned. Your water supply. About 18 months ago our water supply started clorination and this was the time the stains began. My solution was to adapt a Brita filter pitcher with a hose at the bottom to drain into a new 5 gal plastic fuel can (get a blue one). I now dump 1/2 gal of tap water into the pitcher at a time for filtration of the clorine and heavy metals. It is not DI, but seems to work OK (for prints) and it's about 1/10 the cost of buying the plastic 1 gal jugs at the store.. Even ice tea tastes better!! Enjoy, Bill