Ilford Rapid fix Q

Discussion in 'Darkroom Developing and Printing' started by MJL Photo, Mar 1, 2006.

  1. MJL Photo

    MJL Photo Guest

    Is Ilford Rapid Fix at 1+4 with Fuji Acros for 6 mins not enough?
    Fresh mix came out pink and film appears to be re-fixed...

    Any help?
    MJL Photo, Mar 1, 2006
    1. Advertisements

  2. MJL Photo

    Gareth Guest

    Using a water stop?
    Gareth, Mar 1, 2006
    1. Advertisements

  3. MJL Photo

    Dave the Guy Guest

    I use 1+4 for 5 mins on acros 100 and agitate thoroughly for almost the
    entire time. Don't seem to have a problem after rinsing 4 times (first
    rinse comes out relatively clear, second rinse comes out purple, third
    rinse almost clear, fourth is crystal).

    I'm using 1+19 ilford stop.

    (I'm still new to developing so take this FWIW)
    Dave the Guy, Mar 1, 2006
  4. MJL Photo

    Rob Novak Guest

    35mm or 120? The 120's very heavily dyed, and will chew up fixing
    capacity like crazy. Are you reusing your fixer, or is this fresh?

    I've not had any problems fixing 135/36 Acros in Ilford Rapidfix with
    normal time/agitation.
    Rob Novak, Mar 1, 2006
  5. MJL Photo

    Andrew Price Guest

    Andrew Price, Mar 1, 2006
  6. MJL Photo

    bjw Guest

    I haven't used that film, but the pink coloring in T-max film
    comes out a lot easier if you use a wash aid, like Perma Wash.
    It mostly comes out in the perma wash, before the final
    water wash.
    bjw, Mar 1, 2006
  7. MJL Photo

    MJL Photo Guest

    Yes, it was 120. I reuse fixer but this batch was a fresh one.
    The fixer changed back from pink to original colout a short while after.
    Should I only use the fixer in this situation once - even though it's back
    to the original colour? How many cycles should I reuse fixer in this

    MJL Photo, Mar 2, 2006
  8. MJL Photo

    Dave the Guy Guest

    120. Everything is nice and fresh right off the tree. I only develop
    a roll once or twice a week at most so I'm not looking to save much
    money by reusing chemicals.

    How is 135 acros compared to 120?
    Dave the Guy, Mar 2, 2006
  9. MJL Photo

    Dave the Guy Guest

    I don't mind water rinsing a couple of times and keeping the chemical
    mixing to a minimum. It's different film, but I've been following
    Ilford's hp5+ recommendations by agitating a tank of water 5
    times/dumping, agitating second tank 10 times/dumping, agitating last
    tank 20 times/dumping, and if needed (my own rules) agitating one last
    tank 10 times.
    Dave the Guy, Mar 2, 2006
  10. MJL Photo

    Rob Novak Guest

    By way of setting the parameters here, I develop in Jobo rotary tanks
    with 300ml of chemicals per load. Two 120 rolls or one 220 roll of
    Acros will exhaust 300ml of RapidFix 4+1 to the point where I wouldn't
    want to fix any futher 120-format Acros in it. The first time I tried
    this, the reused fixer wouldn't completely remove the dye from a
    subsequent set of 2 rolls of 135/36 PanF+. Normally, I'll use 300ml
    of RapidFix on up to 8 rolls of 135/36 PanF+ or HP5+, and 6 rolls of

    I'd recommend using it single-shot only. Fixer's cheap.
    Rob Novak, Mar 2, 2006
  11. MJL Photo

    Rob Novak Guest

    In what aspect?

    They're both excellent performers. Acros in 35mm is vastly superior
    to Delta100 or TMX in resolution, grain, and tonality, at least how I
    process them (Acros in Perceptol, Delta and TMX in DD-X). I love the
    stuff. It and PanF+ in Ilfosol-S 1+14 are becoming my go-to
    combinations for tight grain and tonal response.
    Rob Novak, Mar 2, 2006
  12. MJL Photo

    Dave the Guy Guest

    Have you tried acros in dd-x and compared it to working with perceptol?
    I'm using dd-x for convenience (it seems to work pretty well at around
    9:30-45 @ 68deg), but open to trying out some new combinations.

    I started out using hp5+ for MF and and sacrificed the extra 2 stops
    because acros was just so so good. Anything slower and I wouldn't be
    able to do handheld street shots though.
    Dave the Guy, Mar 2, 2006
  13. It should be enough. Test the film for residual silver
    using the sulfide test.
    Kodak Residual Silver Test ST-1
    Water 100.0 ml
    Sodium Sulfide, anhydrous 2.0 grams

    Place a drop or two of this solution on a clear area of the
    film and allow to remain for 2 minutes. Rinse off and blot.
    There should be no visible stain. The film should be wet but
    blotted when making the test.
    The solution lasts about 6 months in a filled, closed
    You can make this test on a clip of unexposed film. Soak
    the film in water for about 2 minutes and fix it as usual,
    then wash and test. Wetted film fixes at a different rate
    than dry film so the wetting step is important.

    To establish fixing time test as above using a clip of
    undeveloped but wetted film. Fix in dim light and see how
    long it takes to clear. Fix for twice this time. Make a test
    with fresh fixer and test it this way periodically, it is a
    pretty direct test of the amount of dissolved silver in the
    fixer. The old rule for single fixing baths is to discard
    them when the clearing time doubles. This is probably too
    long for paper but not for film.
    Fuji Acros is a tabular grain film similar to T-Max and
    Delta films. These films have an unusual amount of Silver
    Iodide in them. Sodium fixer is retarded by the accumulation
    of Iodide but Ammonium fixers are much less so. When using
    Sodium fixer a two bath system is really necessary. While
    the capacity of rapid fixer will be greater using a two bath
    system its ability to complete the fixing process despite
    the accumulation of silver ions is greater and two baths are
    not always necessary. I would not be concerned with a
    temporary stain in the used fixing bath.

    The stain on these films is caused by the sensitizing
    dyes used in the emulsions. It tends to be persistent. While
    it may bind to residual silver halide in the emulsion there
    appear to be other factors beside this. The use of a sulfite
    wash aid, or even a simple alkaline bath (2% Sodium
    carbonate, Sodium Metaborate, or even Borax) will remove it.
    If Kodak Hypo Clearing Agent is used follow the wash time
    I use 100T-Max and 400T-Max routinely. If treated with
    wash aid it comes out perfectly clear.
    BTW, tabular grain films fix out more easily than is
    sometimes stated. I tested with the use of a two bath Sodium
    Thiosulfate (conventional) fixing system and found that the
    Sulfide test shows no indication of residual silver after a
    total of around 12 minutes in the fixer (6 min in each
    bath). However, I did us wash aid which can make some
    residual silver complexes soluble which would otherwise
    remain in the emulsion.
    Richard Knoppow, Mar 3, 2006
  14. You are comparing apples with oranges. It is the
    difference in the developer you are seeing, not differences
    in the film. Perceptol or Kodak Microdol-X (virtually
    identical) are extra-fine-grain developers. When used on a
    film like those above the grain will be nearly as fine as
    the late, lamented, Technical Pan in Technidol but with
    considerably greater speed (EI 25 to 50) and much less
    trouble with getting proper contrast.
    Both T-Max and DDX are excellent for obtaining the
    highest speed from a film but are grainier than D-76.
    Perceptol and Microdol-X lose a little speed (less than a
    stop) but deliver much finer grain.
    In general, developers have little effect on film
    resolution. Of course fine grain tends to allow higher
    resolution, but the main factor is image spread caused by
    "irradiation" or the diffusion of light in the emulsion.
    Thin emulsion films, such as the Tabular grain ones, tend to
    diffuse the image forming light less than older thick
    emulsion or multiple coated films, so their resolution is
    higher. Because the covering power of tabular grains is
    greater than cubic grains the range of density of such film
    is greater than the old thin emulsion films using
    conventional grain types. So, one can have good tonal
    rendition along with high resolution without short exposure
    latitude or fussy development.
    Richard Knoppow, Mar 3, 2006
  15. MJL Photo

    Rob Novak Guest

    I realize that. However, I've also done rolls of Acros and Delta 100
    in the same chemistry (Kodak TMax in that case - it wasn't my setup) -
    the Acros grain was still tighter, with greater detail.

    I prefer DD-X to D-76/ID-11 for HP5+ - I've got consistently better
    results. I don't normally shoot much Delta 100, but I push Delta 400
    in DD-X to 800 and 1600 because I actually like the resultant grain,
    and because DD-X is more convenient for me to deal with.

    For Acros, I process in Perceptol because I feel that Acros' already
    fine grain benefits from an extra-fine grain developer. And, I like
    the results. PanF+ in DD-X tends to get hard to control the density,
    and I've found that Ilfosol at 1+14 still gives good grain and
    tonality while avoiding the tendency to block in the highlights.
    Rob Novak, Mar 3, 2006
  16. If you are pushing DDX, T-Max or Microphen will definitely
    be better than D-76.
    I haven't tried Acros yet but its specs look very good and
    it seems to have a good reputation.
    Richard Knoppow, Mar 4, 2006
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.