Using Kodak Rapid Fix

Discussion in 'Kodak' started by Alan Smithee, Oct 20, 2004.

  1. Alan Smithee

    Dan Quinn Guest

    One correction: I doubt that ammonium chloride, by itself, will
    work as well as a fix for Azo as the sulfate. Silver sulfate
    is slightly soluble. Dan
     
    Dan Quinn, Oct 22, 2004
    #21
    1. Advertisements

  2. Alan Smithee

    Fountainhead Guest

    Sorry to dredge this thread up again, but why is everyone saying NOT to
    use the hardener for paper? Kodak's instructions call for the hardener
    for both film and paper, and I've always used it this way. It it merely
    unnecessary, or actually detrimental in some way?

    BTW, my method of mixing/using Rapid Fix was simply to mix the gallon at
    film strength, then move 1/2 gallon to one jug (for film) and mix the
    other 1/2 gallon with an additional 1/2 gallon of water (for paper). So
    I'd end up with 1/2 gallon of film fixer, and 1 gallon of paper fixer.
    Seems easy to me, but then maybe I don't know what I'm doing.
     
    Fountainhead, Oct 26, 2004
    #22
    1. Advertisements

  3. It fixes the paper faster, and then washes out more quickly.

    Ilford promotes their non-hardening fixer because of this advantage. But
    Kodak Rapid Fix is just the same if you don't add the hardener.

    Note that Kodak paper fixes more slowly than Ilford paper even in the same
    fixer, because Kodak's emulsion is also harder. I was bitten by this a few
    years ago... was turning on the lights too early, before the paper finished
    fixing, even though my technique had been fine with Ilford paper.

    --
    Clear skies,

    Michael A. Covington
    Author, Astrophotography for the Amateur
    www.covingtoninnovations.com/astromenu.html
     
    Michael A. Covington, Oct 26, 2004
    #23
  4. Alan Smithee

    Tom Phillips Guest

    The major reason I say no hardener is a print fixed in a
    hardening bath will likely stain when toned. And hardener
    does require more washing.

    When I print I go right to the toner after fixing. No need
    to wash first and a print hardener simply isn't necessary.
     
    Tom Phillips, Oct 26, 2004
    #24
  5. The selling point for hardener was that it guarded the emulsion of the
    film/paper against scratches. But in many years of leaving the hardener
    out, I've never had damaged emulsions, even with fairly vigorous
    handling. And hardener does cause the emulsion to retain the fixer,
    thus necessitating much longer washes, even with pre-wash treatment in
    hypo-clearing agents. Hardener also makes spotting prints much more
    difficult. The spotting fluid doesn't penetrate the emulsion as quickly
    or as evenly as it does on a non-hardened print. Your method of mixing
    seems fine. Just leave out the hardener.
     
    LR Kalajainen, Oct 27, 2004
    #25
  6. Alan Smithee

    Dan Quinn Guest

    Why a film strength AND a paper strength? Have you ever
    puzzled over that?
    I know that fixer at almost any dilution will fix as long
    as there is enough of the A. or S. Thiosulfate in whatever
    volume of water to do the job.
    In a nut shell film will tolerate a much more silvered
    fix than paper. Ilford says 8 to 10 grams/liter while paper's
    max is 2 grams/liter.
    Do you think I'm correct? Dan
     
    Dan Quinn, Oct 28, 2004
    #26
  7. Alan Smithee

    Dan Quinn Guest

    RE: (Dan Quinn) wrote
    Another thing I've puzzled over is that per liter mentioned
    above. A liter of what? They never say. Two sources, Haist and
    Ilford give no clue.
    I've concluded it is just that; per liter of fixer. It can be
    sodium or ammonium, 1:3, 4, 7, 9, 24, or even my print strength
    1:31 with the ammonium.
    Safe levels of silver in all but very dilute fixers are less
    than either S. or A. Thiosulfate's capacity.
    In practice that explains why A. Thio. has no more capacity
    than S. Thio.; because of those safe levels. Dan
     
    Dan Quinn, Oct 29, 2004
    #27
  8. Alan Smithee

    Tom Phillips Guest

    paper fixes faster than film...
    I never thought of it as a matter of capacity, but of rapidity.
    A. thio fixes faster than S. thio, and film strength fixes
    faster than paper strength. This is also why when you use
    film strength for paper fixes faster...
     
    Tom Phillips, Oct 29, 2004
    #28
  9. I'd never thought about film strength vs. paper strength. I'd always
    assumed, perhaps wrongly, that it had something to do with fixing time,
    but as I think about it, that doesn't make much sense. Is there more
    undissolved silver in a film emulsion than in paper?

    If I were to mix a much weaker film strength solution what would be the
    results on both time and capacity? For film, I could see a one-shot
    working well, but it would be rather inconvenient for paper processing
    to have to dump the tray and refill it after each print.
     
    LR Kalajainen, Oct 29, 2004
    #29
  10. Alan Smithee

    Tom Phillips Guest

    LR Kalajainen wrote:

    snip..
    Which is what Dan does, if I understand. Inconvenience is
    perhaps a state of mind if one is minimalist :)
     
    Tom Phillips, Oct 29, 2004
    #30
  11. Alan Smithee

    C. Falise Guest

    hardener makes spotting of prints more difficult (spottone will just sit on
    surface rather than penetrate) and increases wash time for adequate removal
    of fixer (not so much of a problem if hypoclear is used). it also tends to
    make fiber-based paper curl up more which can make it difficult to handle.
    i use fixer w hardener on work prints on rc. finals get no hardener and
    extra washing just to be safe.
    film always gets hardener.
    good luck and happy printing!
    -c.
     
    C. Falise, Nov 2, 2004
    #31
    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.