MTC Photography Posted January 9, 1999 Share Posted January 9, 1999 What do you prefer for Minox B&W negative films, hardening fixer or not ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MTC Photography Posted January 27, 2000 Author Share Posted January 27, 2000 I found a paragraph is Kasermeier's book "SMALL MINXO-BIG PICTURES"<P> The Minox processing king contains, in addition to the Hypo crystal, a 'hardener' that goes with the fixing bath solution. This chemical hardens the emulsion and protects your negatives to some extends from scratches,etc. This hardenr also protects your film against insect and baeria damage. For flies and many types of bacteria, the gelatin layer of a film is particularly tasty-- a real lobster mayonnaise for insects." <p> I always use Kodak hardening fixer for Minox film. I find this reduces scratches on Minox negatives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fragulas hyperdark page Posted August 10, 2001 Share Posted August 10, 2001 Hi! <p> Currently I am using Ilford Hypam without hardener, and have been considering adding a hardener, or using a hardening fixer. However collegues have advised against this, on the grounds that hardened negatives are more prone to thermal reticulation. <p> Currently I process at 20C, but wash in cooler (16 to 18C) water, then wetting agent at 20C. No reticulation is evident without hardener. Anyone used hardener with a cold wash that can advise? <p> Also I am experimenting with fine filtration of chemicals, to cut down the likelyhood of dust entering during processing.. My local photographic shops no longer sell filters. :-( So I am about to try using coffee filters, petrol filters etc. I'll post on the results. <p> Cheers! <p> Mark. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fragulas hyperdark page Posted May 29, 2002 Share Posted May 29, 2002 Update on the filtration. <p> Funnel shaped paper coffee filters: I have to declare these unsuccessfull, while this removes existing particulates, it adds in the fibres from the filter itself. <p> It's never bothered me before, but I find myself using a lot more magnification with the little 8x11 negs.. <p> Cheers! <p> Mark. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now