Problem with Paterson's FX-50

Discussion in 'Darkroom Developing and Printing' started by Spyros Triantos, Jan 11, 2004.

  1. I recently decided to try Paterson FX-50. I developed roll of Ilford HP5+
    exposed at 250 and it turned out grossly underdeveloped, extremely thin and
    with very low contrast (unprintable with a condenser enlarger). I followed the
    enclosed instructions faithfully and used distilled water. I noticed that
    Solution A had a very slight yellow tint. Is that normal? Should Solution A be
    as clear as B? The instructions indicate that a "yellow tint" indicates that
    solution A has oxidized.
    Both bottles had just been opened and were bought a week before. They were
    stored in a cool basement at around 55-60 degrees.

    Thank you in advance for your help.
    Spyros Triantos, Jan 11, 2004
    1. Advertisements

  2. Spyros Triantos

    Mark A Guest

    Let me get this right.

    1. You say the "instructions indicate that a 'yellow tint' indicates that
    solution A has oxidized."

    2. You are asking if a slight yellow tint in solution A is normal.

    Didn't you answer your own question?

    Just because it was purchased recently does not mean that it manufactured
    Mark A, Jan 11, 2004
    1. Advertisements

  3. Spyros Triantos

    Jorge Omar Guest

    Ascorbate based devs are prone to sudden death. There is some hope in the
    horizon, but not in any commercial product I'm aware of.

    If you puchased it jut a week ago, bring it back to the store.


    (Spyros Triantos) wrote in
    Jorge Omar, Jan 11, 2004
  4. Subject: Problem with Paterson's FX-50

    I also had the same thin negatives with FX-50 and was advised on this newsgroup
    that one should use the times published at 75 degrees instead of 68 degrees. I
    did, and did so until I used it up. My subsequent results were much better. I
    was also using HP5+ @ 250.


    Bob McCarthy
    TheYankeeSnapper, Jan 11, 2004
  5. Spyros Triantos

    Dan Quinn Guest

    I'd start looking for that hope in a bottle; a bottle of distilled
    water that is.
    I believe the too early death of some darkroom solutions is caused by
    extremly minute quantities of some impurities.
    I don't think it is fair to blame the source. They could though state
    that distilled water be used. But we RPD participants already know that
    distilled is the safe choice. Are you going to wait for them to put it
    on the bottle?
    FWIW, I believe ascorbate is the Most easily oxidised agent used
    in the darkroom. Sulfite will save it only in a fairly acid solution.
    I'd recommend that ascorbic acid be used only in type A plus B
    developers. That is it should be made alkaline at time of use.
    "There is some hope" if the ascorbic acid is kept in a bisulfite
    solution. Dan
    Dan Quinn, Jan 11, 2004
  6. Spyros Triantos

    Jorge Omar Guest


    You're right water may be the culprit.
    But impurities in photo grade chemicals are, also.

    My shortest lived dev had lots of boric acid in solution A - and later on
    I've found out iron is deactivated as a poison for ascorbic acid in high
    pH solutions!

    See the updated Ryuji site:


    (Dan Quinn) wrote in
    Jorge Omar, Jan 12, 2004
  7. Spyros Triantos

    John Guest

    Ah ! Reason ! Sweet Reason !


    John S. Douglas, Photographer -
    Please remove the "_" when replying via email
    John, Jan 12, 2004
  8. Spyros Triantos

    John Guest

    While Ryuji is correct with his information but only follows
    one of the possible failure paths. There are others.


    John S. Douglas, Photographer -
    Please remove the "_" when replying via email
    John, Jan 12, 2004
  9. Welcome to the world of FX-50. :) I also found that their times are
    way off. You really need to do your own film testing, but so far I've
    found that EI 400, 18:00 min @ 75F works well for me with HP5+. Also
    try EI50, 7:45 @ 75F for Pan F+ and EI 125, 9:45 @ 75F for FP4+.
    If it's a very light yellow tint, then I wouldn't worry too much.
    Otherwise, have Paterson replace your developer. Have heard from
    someone else that Paterson had some probs with the shelf life for a
    while but supposedly have that issue fixed. I like the developer and
    will stick with it for now. See
    for my work (mostly done with FX-50).
    Philippe Tempel, Jan 16, 2004
  10. Thank you all for your advice. I contacted Paterson and they felt that the
    developer was likely oxidized. They will send me a replacement for Solution A.
    Spyros Triantos, Jan 16, 2004
    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.