film rinse/paper rinse

[Torquemada]

Does anyone use a chemical rinse after they do their develop - stop - fix - rinse on PAPER?

[Pieter]

Does anyone use a chemical rinse after they do their develop - stop - fix - rinse on PAPER?

Hypo clear.

[Louie Powell]

water is a chemical

[Tin Can]

I use only Iiford PQ aka Uninversal developer by the gallon, easily reused

Powder Food Grade Citric Acid Water Stop, it dies quickly

TF5 Fix for Paper and Film, long lasting, so I count, no cost

I wash in verticle slots

Filtered Hass temp control

I use KODAK ONLY Hangers for Diy Gas Burst

I try real hard to make things simple, repeatable and extremely safe

No stink, no poisen, no dust, no spotting

[Kevin Crisp]

Lots of people do. Water rinse, treatment in hypo clearing agent (I use Permawash, but easy to mix something that works) then water rinse, then dry. The need for a long wash can be cut down even more if you use a rapid fix.

[Torquemada]

if you use the ilford method of rinsing film and paper,,, how much advantage do you get? sure the theory it pulls extra chemical out of the paper is nice, but is there a measurable increase in PAPER print longevity or in how the dried print looks

[Drew Wiley]

Since I use an archival fixer (TF5), there is no need for a secondary clearing treatment - the negative or print paper goes straight to the water wash.

[Pmlpoma]

There are no differences in the aspect of the prints, but a good washing is key for conservation.
If you want prints that last for centuries use toning (sepia, selenium, etc. ), knowing that the toning must be complete.
If you don’t like toned prints use ADOSTAB (was Agfa Sistan). It transforms the silver grain to avoid its combining with the sulfur, the main cause of print degradation.
On my side I don’t think that none of my descendants in three or more generations will be interested on my pictures.

[Doremus Scudder]

Does anyone use a chemical rinse after they do their develop - stop - fix - rinse on PAPER?

Fiber-base prints are the ones that need the most care in washing (rinsing, if you prefer :) ). RC papers and film do not really need the extra steps that fiber-base papers do.

Typically, a wash aid, like Hypo Clearing Agent is used before the wash to accelerate the washing of the print. Sometimes, a stabilizer, like Sistan/Adostab is used post-wash as well.

The Ilford sequence makes use of a rather long treatment in wash aid (10 minutes) after an initial short wash and then followed by another. This last wash is longer if toning is employed. The traditional Kodak method was a short rinse after fixing followed by a few minutes in the wash aid and then a longer wash.

Some, who use alkaline fixers, feel that a wash aid is not necessary at all, since the pH of the fixer makes the residual thiosulfates easier to wash out.

In all of the above cases, adequate time in the wash is needed to ensure optimum permanence. How long is adequate depends on a number of factors and should be determined by testing for your particular situation.

The risk of not adequately washing your prints is image degradation after a while, usually caused by the retained fixer residues being attacked by sulfur in the atmosphere. The effect is yellowing and staining and is irreversible.

If you don't want your fiber-base prints to degrade over time, then process them adequately, whichever regime/strategy you choose. There are tests for both residual silver (adequate fixation) and residual hypo/fixer (adequate washing) that you can easily do to determine if your chosen regime does the job. The ST-1 or selenium toner tests are for residual silver, the HT-2 test is for residual hypo. Components and directions for these tests are easily found with a little Internet/forum searching. I recommend both of them.

Best,

Doremus

[Michael R]

if you use the ilford method of rinsing film and paper,,, how much advantage do you get? sure the theory it pulls extra chemical out of the paper is nice, but is there a measurable increase in PAPER print longevity or in how the dried print looks

The use of a hypo clearing agent (sulfite ion) with fiber prints simply shortens the total wash time and/or reduces the amount of water used. That’s all. A hypo clearing agent helps remove thiosulfate/silver thiosulfate faster by a process called ion exchange. But water will ultimately do the same job. It just takes longer.

With fiber papers the fixing process has a lot to do with washing efficiency. So, if you use the Ilford archival print wash sequence for fiber papers (including washaid/hypo clear) do not neglect the instructions with respect to fixing.

[Drew Wiley]

Sistan was only tentatively recommended for RC prints to begin with, and might not be relevant for even those anymore. It had nothing to do with fixer residue, but underlying base instability. RC silver prints aren't conventionally long-term collected anyway.

Sulfur dioxide was a major air pollutant in coal-burning industrial cities back in the 19th C, badly affecting silver prints. That is less a risk today except in certain areas. Here in the US, sulfur dioxide releases are tightly monitored.

[Oren Grad]

Sistan was only tentatively recommended for RC prints to begin with, and might not be relevant for even those anymore. It had nothing to do with fixer residue, but underlying base instability.

Other than the effect not being related to fixer residue, the rest of this is false. The protective effect of the potassium thiocyanate in Sistan is on the image silver, applies to both RC and FB prints, and remains relevant. Agfa's instructions for Sistan use were not limited to RC nor did they emphasize RC, and the same is true of Adox's instructions for Adostab today.

[Tin Can]

water is a chemical

AKA the Universal Solvent

[Drew Wiley]

There is something snake-oil-like in the description of Adostab, Oren. It is not so much silver that needs protection from UV "fading"- (perhaps a poor choice of words), as this claims, but the optically brighteners in the base, the breakdown of which was the Achilles heel in early RC papers, which some hoped Sistan would cure. It apparently didn't work all that well. Of course, some interaction of the silver image with UV allegedly induced the brightener issue. Let just say, I've read enough to understand this is a controversial topic without consensus.

[Oren Grad]

There is something snake-oil-like in the description of Adostab, Oren. It is not so much silver that needs protection from UV "fading"- (perhaps a poor choice of words), as this claims, but the optically brighteners in the base, the breakdown of which was the Achilles heel in early RC papers, which some hoped Sistan would cure. It apparently didn't work all that well. Of course, some interaction of the silver image with UV allegedly induced the brightener issue. Let just say, I've read enough to understand this is a controversial topic without consensus.

Everything in this statement is incorrect.

[phdgent]

I apply the ILFORD method (but not particularly their chemicals):

[Torquemada]

i was thinking of using a chemical remover wash aid in my RC paper washing as a stabilised rinse bath as mentioned about in that ilford document.

But i have never actually gotten any sort of "this is what the process actually is"

[phdgent]

Sistan was only tentatively recommended for RC prints to begin with, and might not be relevant for even those anymore. It had nothing to do with fixer residue, but underlying base instability. RC silver prints aren't conventionally long-term collected anyway.

Sulfur dioxide was a major air pollutant in coal-burning industrial cities back in the 19th C, badly affecting silver prints. That is less a risk today except in certain areas. Here in the US, sulfur dioxide releases are tightly monitored.

Not only coal-burning, as it should been stopped by now, I hoped so, but I fear it is coming back by the reintroduction of lignite for power plants in Germany, but still, sulfur dioxide exhaust is going by Diesel-burning which is even worse, not to mention the 'traditional' industrie's emissions...
And believe, here in the EEC, emissions have become an obsession, but I am afraid they are here to stay, sadly enough, regardless the Euronorm criteria regulations and International Climate Conferences...

I always use Sistan (Adostab), for film and Baryta paper, for more than 35 years now, and never thought about it as being "snake oil", on the contrary, I think that the AGFA-Gevaert's chemists ware a to serious people for this kind of "remedies"...

Anyway, Sistan is only efficient when an emulsion is washed as it should be.

But you are right about RC prints.

[jnantz]

i was thinking of using a chemical remover wash aid in my RC paper washing as a stabilised rinse bath as mentioned about in that ilford document.

But i have never actually gotten any sort of "this is what the process actually is"

https://unblinkingeye.com/Articles/Archival/archival.html
... info on how sistan and ado stab work.

[Michael R]

i was thinking of using a chemical remover wash aid in my RC paper washing as a stabilised rinse bath as mentioned about in that ilford document.

But i have never actually gotten any sort of "this is what the process actually is"

You really don’t need a wash-aid (hypo clearing agent) with RC papers as a full wash in plain water is complete in only a few minutes.

Adostab/Sistan is a different thing. I’m not sure why anyone would bother with it, but if you do, be sure to follow the instructions to the letter or else it seems it can destroy prints rather than protecting them (there was a long thread about this on APUG years ago).

[Torquemada]

then can anyone explian how to do the ilford stabilised replenished wash bash set up for me?

[Drew Wiley]

If there's an ubiquitous air pollutant worse on prints than sulphur dioxide, it's the residual formaldehyde outgassing in plywood glues and so forth in new construction.

[Doremus Scudder]

i was thinking of using a chemical remover wash aid in my RC paper washing as a stabilised rinse bath as mentioned about in that ilford document.

But i have never actually gotten any sort of "this is what the process actually is"


then can anyone explian how to do the ilford stabilised replenished wash bash set up for me?

Ilford gives quite clear instructions for proper processing of both its RC and FB papers. Follow them. Be aware that Ilford does not make nor recommend a stabilizer like Adostab. For that, you read the instructions that come with the product. The reference to stabilizers in the Ilford document likely refer to short-term stabilizing of prints for commercial purposes like newspaper/graphic arts applications, for which speed is important and not the lifespan of the print. Maybe someone here with more experience in those areas will add to our knowledge.

So to find your individual process with stabilizer, if you decide to use it, 1: use Ilford's recommendations for processing paper, 2: use Adostab's directions for using the stabilizer.

Another quick note about the document linked to above. It is not complete, only listing some of the possibilities. The more extensive discussion of Ilford's sequence for optimum permanence on their website has longer wash times for fiber-base papers when they are toned, etc.,

Doremus

[Drew Wiley]

"Stabilization processors" work on a whole different premise than standard darkroom workflow involving thorough fixing and washing. They were used in relation to short-term RC prints intended for offset printing lines. I remember those devices from High School yearbook days. NO RELATION to toning for sake of permanence, or Sistan usage, etc. Similarly, RA4 color print processing via rapid, replenished automated transport machines requires an extra stabilizer step, whereas fresh chem and well washed color darkroom prints don't.

[LabRat]

Using HCA on low key prints can leave a visible haze on print surface after washing in mineral rich water supplies areas...

Film dosen't need wash aids... The film base does not absorb chems, and emulsion is thin and easily washes out...

Just wash well...

Steve K

[Doremus Scudder]

... Just wash well...

Steve K

... and your film and papers too! :)