printing fibre using TF-4 fix

greenspun.com : LUSENET : B&W Photo - Printing & Finishing : One Thread

Wanted to know if there is a difference in the finished print (archival qualities included) when using stop bath , Kodak rapid fix, and hypo as opposed to water bath, TF-4, and no hypo. Are there other differences as well? Appreciate all comments and information regarding this both with film and printing. thanks in advance carol

-- carol maurin (cbmaurin@earthlink.net), August 23, 2000

Answers

I can detect no difference in appearance of finished prints on New Seagull G, Brilliant Bromide II, Multigrade IV FB or Polymax Fine Art fiber based papers, having processed each using all the sequences you describe. As for archival qualities, I've not yet performed testing to confirm them. Instead I have simply relied on published reports that say TF-4 does the job, and use a 1 1/2 hour running wash in our local (moderately hard, and therefore efficient) tap water.

-- Sal Santamaura (bc_hill@qwestinternet.net), August 23, 2000.

A number of people are lately stating than an all-alkaline process is "better" but as yet no one I've come across has cited any supporting references or documentation.

I believe this originated with Anchell & Troop; they make several claims of benefits of alkaline fixers but again no support is given. Perhaps it's obvious chemistry but it certainly isn't obvious to me.

So...since I've seen no published evidence of any sort that an all-alkaline process or an alkaline fixer is preferable to the traditional process of an acid stop, acid fixer and HCA I'll continue to use that process. It has a known track record.

An all-alkaline process may be just fine (and probably is).

The only reasons I can think of to avoid an acid stop are if it causes pinholes and if a staining developer is used. An alkaline fixer is preferred for use with a staining developer but may not be necessary.

-- John Hicks (jbh@magicnet.net), August 23, 2000.


Moderation questions? read the FAQ