A lot of photographers are concerned with the archival quality of their prints. Several techniques exist using selenium, sulphides, goldchloride, and sistan to tone and make an achival print. However little is said about the archiving techniques for negatives: prints can remade from an existing negative, but negatives are however unique. So would it be wise to use the print conserving techniques (eg. direct polysulfide toning) to preserve negatives ? Any reflections would be welcome. Thx, Marc.

-- Marc Leest (mmm@n2photography.com), October 26, 2000

Answers

In his Film Developing Cookbook, Steve Anchell comes to the conclusion that it is not necessary to do anything like that to your negatives provided you especially fix and wash and store them carefully. For a detailed discussion I suggest you read the book. It's interesting for a couple of other reasons, too.

-- Thomas Wollstein (thomas_wollstein@web.de), October 26, 2000.

I second Thomas' ideas: It is not necessary to tone negs for permanance if they are properly processed. One can, however use selenium toner as an intensifier. Kodak RST 1:2 for about 5 min with constant agitation will give a proportional intensification roughly equivalent to a one Zone expansion. (N+1). I use this technique routinely with good results. It is also possible to selectively tone certain areas to strengthen highlights. Reards, ;^D)

-- Doremus Scudder (ScudderLandreth@compuserve.com), October 26, 2000.

You may want to use Agfa Sistan. This is a silver protectant as well as an effective wetting agent. I use this on all film 'just in case.'

-- Michael D Fraser (mdfraser@earthlink.net), October 29, 2000.