How bad is concentrated stop bath for your skin? [Archive]

domenico Foschi

9-Jul-2007, 15:16

I really don't get why people spend so much money on stop bath and use chemicals like glacial acetic acid that can eat through clothes.

Stop bath= a mildly acidic solution, that stops the development and rinses off the leftover developer. Not even really necessary to use it - can go straight to fixer without stop but then you'd get developer into your fixer.

You can mix up 1 part white vinegar to 4 parts water, and voila, you have a stop bath.

And its safe enough to drink (don't sue me!)

Stop bath is not that expensive.
I wouldn't be surprised if it is more expensive to use vinegar, really.

Makes me think...a nice salad in a nice garlic basil olive oil and 28% acetic acid solution served with a prime rib in Pyro reduction,...Yummy!...

Greg Lockrey

9-Jul-2007, 15:17

Stop bath is not that expensive.
I wouldn't be surprised if it is more expensive to use vinegar, really.

Makes me think...a nice salad in a nice garlic basil olive oil and 28% acetic acid solution served with a prime rib in Pyro reduction,...Yummy!...

Spoken like a true lab rat.:) ;) :D

Seriously, the only photo chemical that I can think of you really don't want on your skin for any time or quantity is Selenium Toner. To be safe wear rubber gloves.

Randy H

9-Jul-2007, 16:38

Reminded me. My youngest daughter (third one) was complaining about her sinuses being stopped up a few years ago. I told her I has something to clear it right up. My second daughter has worked in the darkroom enough to know what was going to happen. I unscrewed the lid on the stop bath, and told her to take a real deep whiff. She did. Her eyes crossed, she let out a scream, and went running and told her mom I was trying to kill her. My second laughed so hard she nearly peed her pants. The youngest did come back a few minutes later though, and said that it did indeed clear her sinuses up. :rolleyes: Standing joke around our house now if anybody gets a stuffy nose or sinuses.

Alan Rabe

9-Jul-2007, 17:24

"Stop is 28% acetic acid versus 3 to 5% for vinegar."

The stock solution for acetic acid is 27 - 28% this is mixed in a 1 -31 ratio with water to make a working solution with is a little lower than vinegar. A 28% solution of acetic acid is not good for your film or prints.

Nick_3536

9-Jul-2007, 17:24

Stop bath is not that expensive.
I wouldn't be surprised if it is more expensive to use vinegar, really.
.

Nice thing about vinegar is you can pick it up at the corner store any day of the week. Or just add it to the shopping list :p

Vaughn

9-Jul-2007, 17:44

I spilled some Kodak Stop Bath concentrate on the back of my hand - rinsed off immeadiately. It gave me the equivilent of a mild sunburn. Palms and the underside of fingers are tougher skin.

Randy -- good thing your daughter does not have asthma...acid fumes are real nasty for those with lung conditions (and not good for those with good lungs). You must have a very forgiving wife. If someone did that to one of my children, I would give him a swift kick in the balls and then ask him how his sinuses were doing.

Photo chemicals are pretty safe to use, using proper methods. Developers such as Dektol can cause dermitis, a drying and cracking of the skin, with some people...some people after using it for a couple decades, some people the first time they put their hands into it, and most people never.

No reason to get paranoid about the chemicals -- one just needs to use a little common sense. In my opinion, with your stunt with your daughter, Randy, you suffered a momentary lack of common sense. I suggest you reconsider your actions and refrain from repeating that particular stunt.

Vaughn

cyrus

9-Jul-2007, 19:09

Stop bath is not that expensive.
I wouldn't be surprised if it is more expensive to use vinegar, really.

Makes me think...a nice salad in a nice garlic basil olive oil and 28% acetic acid solution served with a prime rib in Pyro reduction,...Yummy!...

1 gallon jug of no brand name vinegar = $1.25 at my corner bodega, no shipping charges, no glacial anything. Enough for 5 gallons of stop bath. Oh, and for salads.

Randy H

10-Jul-2007, 01:48

No reason to get paranoid about the chemicals -- one just needs to use a little common sense. In my opinion, with your stunt with your daughter, Randy, you suffered a momentary lack of common sense. I suggest you reconsider your actions and refrain from repeating that particular stunt.

I concur. Was not the smartest stunt pulled. "No reason..."

Randy H

10-Jul-2007, 02:26

People do have different reactions to different chemicals. All my young'ns (nine, to date) have been around the darkroom chems forever. None of them have ever had any kind of reaction to any of the chemicals. Whether through direct contact, or from breathing the fumes. Three of them spend as much time as I do developing and printing. My worst problem with them, is using their fingers as tongs.

I have taken a few courses, and have seen others that could not even go in the darkroom lab without a respirator. They would get all wheezy and had difficulty breathing. Itchy eyes and skin reactions were not uncommon. Others, I believe, could have drank the stuff and never flinched. Just different make-up of their bodies, I guess.

So, Vaughn is right. Caution is key factor. Knowing what you are working with, and knowing the limitations your body can tolerate.

Greg Lockrey

10-Jul-2007, 04:19

All my young'ns (nine, to date) ......

Don't you have a TV? :eek: :)

Brian Ellis

10-Jul-2007, 07:17

You might try scanning and editing in Photoshop. I haven't yet gotten any stop bath on my hands when making prints that way. I do keep a tray of fix next to my computer just to remind me of the old days. : - )

Donald Qualls

10-Jul-2007, 11:48

Stop bath is not that expensive.
I wouldn't be surprised if it is more expensive to use vinegar, really.

I calculated a while back that it would cost me about three times as much to dilute white distilled vinegar from the supermarket (even the gallon size sold at Costco) as to make up the same amount from the Kodak Indicator Stop Bath bottle -- and that's not counting being able to reuse the indicator version, but having to one-shot or short-life the vinegar version because I can't visually tell when it's tired.

Darren Kruger

10-Jul-2007, 13:24

I calculated a while back that it would cost me about three times as much to dilute white distilled vinegar from the supermarket (even the gallon size sold at Costco) as to make up the same amount from the Kodak Indicator Stop Bath bottle

How much is your cost coming out to per working batch? I did some rough calculations on Kodak stop bath based on B&H prices and get ~$.23 a batch of stop made from glacial acetic acid vs ~$1.10 a batch of indicator stop bath (both 64oz.) I had an instructor suggest changing stop every time the developer is changed due to the low cost of stop vs the price of the paper you are putting through it.

I would be hesitant to put my prints through vinegar as a stop bath as I don't know what else in the vinegar that might stay with the prints and cause problems later.

-Darren

cyrus

10-Jul-2007, 15:01

Donald Qualls

10-Jul-2007, 18:07

How much is your cost coming out to per working batch? I did some rough calculations on Kodak stop bath based on B&H prices and get ~$.23 a batch of stop made from glacial acetic acid vs ~$1.10 a batch of indicator stop bath (both 64oz.) I had an instructor suggest changing stop every time the developer is changed due to the low cost of stop vs the price of the paper you are putting through it.

That sounds about right for the cost of Indicator Stop -- but that half gallon of stop bath is good for around 60+ rolls of film before it starts to turn purple (doesn't last as long in printing, because the paper carries over more alkali from the developer). By comparison, if I make stop bath from glacial or 28% acetic, or white vinegar, I have no indicator, so I'm guessing whether it's still working or, more likely, discarding it after one session, probalby with 90% of its capacity remaining. Maybe not that big a deal; water makes a fine stop bath, too, except that the Indicator Stop Bath is actually *cheaper than water* -- because I can reuse it so many times, compared to one-shot use of filtered water that costs me about $80 a year for replacement filter cartridges (each set good for, they claim, 80 gallons of water, so about 50 cents a gallon for the filtered water).

There's also something to be said for buying the bottle of indicator stop in 2003, and still having more than half of it left in 2007 (I don't print much, and it lasts a LONG time for film).

Even in printing, the point of the indicator is so you *know* when it's gone. Without indicator, you might be okay changing the stop bath when you change developer -- but how will you know? You could be throwing the stuff away at half its life, or you might be using it for a dozen prints after it's stopped doing its job.

For my money, the real advantage of Indicator Stop Bath is a combination of ready availability, low cost, and the indicator.

cyrus

10-Jul-2007, 19:50

That sounds about right for the cost of Indicator Stop -- but that half gallon of stop bath is good for around 60+ rolls of film before it starts to turn purple (doesn't last as long in printing, because the paper carries over more alkali from the developer). By comparison, if I make stop bath from glacial or 28% acetic, or white vinegar, I have no indicator, so I'm guessing whether it's still working or, more likely, discarding it after one session, probalby with 90% of its capacity remaining. Maybe not that big a deal; water makes a fine stop bath, too, except that the Indicator Stop Bath is actually *cheaper than water* -- because I can reuse it so many times, compared to one-shot use of filtered water that costs me about $80 a year for replacement filter cartridges (each set good for, they claim, 80 gallons of water, so about 50 cents a gallon for the filtered water).

There's also something to be said for buying the bottle of indicator stop in 2003, and still having more than half of it left in 2007 (I don't print much, and it lasts a LONG time for film).

Even in printing, the point of the indicator is so you *know* when it's gone. Without indicator, you might be okay changing the stop bath when you change developer -- but how will you know? You could be throwing the stuff away at half its life, or you might be using it for a dozen prints after it's stopped doing its job.

For my money, the real advantage of Indicator Stop Bath is a combination of ready availability, low cost, and the indicator.

Personally, I don't have a problem dumping vinegar solutions. But I wonder if there is a kitchen solution to making an indicator. Its just a dye that changes color when the Ph changes...like pomegranate juice! Hmmm...I;d be too tempted to drink that...

Vaughn

10-Jul-2007, 20:21

Being in charge of a university teaching darkroom, having the indicator in the Stop Bath makes a lot of sense...the number and size of prints going thru the process would be near impossible to guage. While the student would not know froom looking at their prints afterwards if the a non-indicator stop was dead or not, a dead stop bath would kill the fixer pretty fast. And one could not tell if the fixer killed by dead stop bath was dead by using Hypo-Chek (it measures silver content, not pH).

Randy...sorry for coming down on you so hard about your sinus cure...and thanks for being so understanding about it.

Vaughn

Donald Qualls

11-Jul-2007, 13:32

Personally, I don't have a problem dumping vinegar solutions. But I wonder if there is a kitchen solution to making an indicator. Its just a dye that changes color when the Ph changes...like pomegranate juice! Hmmm...I;d be too tempted to drink that...

Well, litmus indicator (turns pink in acid, blue in alkali) is made from red cabbage, and you can use the extracted juice of the red cabbage skin directly as an indicator, but it doesn't change at a sufficiently acidic pH. That may well be the same substance that changes color in pomegranate (though I wasn't even aware pomegranate juice had an indicator effect). The yellow indicator in stop baths has two very useful features; first, it changed color around pH 5.7, while the bath is still significantly acidic, and second, it goes from yellow (which looks clear under both red and amber safelight) to purple (which looks black under yellow light, and gray under red), making the change mostly independent of color vision (which, even in those without dichromatism, doesn't work as designed when the safelight is on).

My only problem dumping vinegar solutions is that it's dumping money. On my budget, anything I can do that avoids consistent waste is a good thing -- I don't have a problem one-shotting developer, because *that* makes a difference, but stop bath works just as well when it's six months old and has had dozens of films through it; there's nothing gained by dumping it, and money lost.

Donald Qualls

11-Jul-2007, 13:39

And one could not tell if the fixer killed by dead stop bath was dead by using Hypo-Chek (it measures silver content, not pH).

I'm not entirely sure I followed this -- my plain hypo fixer works fine at a near-neutral pH (given the sulfite I add, it's probably very faintly alkaline), and there is at least one commercial fixer, TF-4, that's significantly alkaline. The only reason to want fixer acidic, as I understand it, is to ensure that if developer is carried over it's inactivated, so as to avoid dichroic fog from solution physical development -- and even a completely dead stop bath still serves as a rinse to remove most of the developer (though if it's ignored long enough, the stop bath tray can become a tray of weak developer, which can lead to overdevelopment if prints aren't routinely developed to completion).

I've seen, in a high school darkroom in the mid-1970s, what looked like little tendrils of smoke coming up from the edges of a print in the stop bath, as the indicator changed momentarily at the points the developer was coming out of the paper before changing back as the solution mixed with the rest of the tray contents -- that stop bath was replaced very soon after, when the whole tray started to turn gray (under safelight). That episode convinced me for life on indicator stop bath...

cyrus

11-Jul-2007, 14:42

My only problem dumping vinegar solutions is that it's dumping money.

Each gallon of stop made with vinegar costs around 25 cents.

In any case you don't have to dump it. You can save and reuse stop - it should work as long as it is mildly acidic. You can keep reusing it but you may accumulate developer, which will then get into your fix.

Vaughn

11-Jul-2007, 17:45

I'm not entirely sure I followed this -- my plain hypo fixer works fine at a near-neutral pH (given the sulfite I add, it's probably very faintly alkaline), and there is at least one commercial fixer, TF-4, that's significantly alkaline. The only reason to want fixer acidic, as I understand it, is to ensure that if developer is carried over it's inactivated, so as to avoid dichroic fog from solution physical development -- and even a completely dead stop bath still serves as a rinse to remove most of the developer (though if it's ignored long enough, the stop bath tray can become a tray of weak developer, which can lead to overdevelopment if prints aren't routinely developed to completion).

I don't have the chemical background to know for sure -- but I have always heard, and assumed, that radically changing the pH of the fixer ruins it. Perhaps it is just another case of an old wives tale.

But does TF-4 still work if one adds an acid to it so its pH is <7? Maybe it does. The question is whether or not a slightly acidic to neutral fixer continues to work effectively if its pH is substancially raised over 7. Kodak seems to think so in their warnings, as do many text books.

I do know that chemical reactions can differ if they happen in an acid or an alkaline environment -- just try making a platinum print on a heavily buffered paper, for example.

Vaughn

jnantz

11-Jul-2007, 17:54

You can also use a water rinse instead of a stop bath.

BINGO!

haven't used stop bath in close to 15 years ...

Donald Qualls

11-Jul-2007, 19:10

The question is whether or not a slightly acidic to neutral fixer continues to work effectively if its pH is substancially raised over 7. Kodak seems to think so in their warnings, as do many text books.

The active chemicals in TF-4 are the same as those in Kodak or Ilford Rapid Fixer: ammonium thiosulfate and sodium sulfite (the latter a preservative to prevent oxidation of the thiosulfate). If the same chemical works at pH 5 and at pH 9, simply changing from one extreme to the other won't kill it.

The concern with exhausted stop bath is that *if* you get too much developer in the fixer, and the fixer is alkaline, the developer may become active and try to develop the dissolved silver from solution, which will cause it to deposit on the film surface and produce dichroic fog. The same thing can happen with an overly solvent developer (say, one with a little thiosulfate or thiocyanate added, or one based on PPD, or even a too-active developer with a high sulfite content), and modern films are apparently more prone to it -- developers that worked without problems fifty years ago are useless with modern films because they produce dichroic fog.

As for textbooks -- there were hundreds of titles of biology textbooks that gave an incorrect count of the number of chromosomes in human cells, for decades, until someone went back and recounted, and found that no matter how many cells they stained, there were only 46 chromosomes in human cells, not the 48 found in the apes. I wouldn't consider a textbook an infallible authority...

Greg Lockrey

11-Jul-2007, 19:43

BINGO!

haven't used stop bath in close to 15 years ...

And in all that time you never noticed that your prints continued to "cook" after removal from the developer?

Vaughn

11-Jul-2007, 20:36

And in all that time you never noticed that your prints continued to "cook" after removal from the developer?

I suppose it does not really matter if there is additional "cooking", as long as one precesses in a consistant manner -- the extra 'cooking" just becomes part of his total development time...and his exposure time would take that extra developing into consideration. However, if one does not frequently change the water used as a stop bath, one might be introducing a variable into the mix as the water becomes contaminated with carried-over developer (especially if one does not drain the print well between baths.)

Donald - I agree that one must be careful of depending on sources...many "old wives tales" get retold and retold in print and on forums! I suppose one could test the effectiveness of fresh fixer compared with fixer that one adds some developer to...perhaps by seeing how fast each one clears a bit of film. But I'll leave that up to someone who likes to make tests!

Vaughn

Greg Lockrey

11-Jul-2007, 20:44

I suppose it does not really matter if there is additional "cooking", as long as one precesses in a consistant manner -- the extra 'cooking" just becomes part of his total development time...and his exposure time would take that extra developing into consideration. However, if one does not frequently change the water used as a stop bath, one might be introducing a variable into the mix as the water becomes contaminated with carried-over developer (especially if one does not drain the print well between baths.)

The additional cooking is not even and it varies with the density of the exposure. Stop bath is used to stop all of the the development all at once. If this step wasn't important for consistancy sake, then why not just go from developer to fixer?

jnantz

12-Jul-2007, 04:32

And in all that time you never noticed that your prints continued to "cook" after removal from the developer?

nope, i haven't really noticed ...

Greg Lockrey

12-Jul-2007, 05:35

nope, i haven't really noticed ...

or don't care either. :)

Vaughn

12-Jul-2007, 09:01

The additional cooking is not even and it varies with the density of the exposure. Stop bath is used to stop all of the the development all at once. If this step wasn't important for consistancy sake, then why not just go from developer to fixer?

Doing something the same way each time is consistant. When I develop a print for 2 minutes, I remove the print from the developer at 1 min 45 sec and let it drain into the dev tray for 15 sec before putting into the stop bath. I could just as easily pull it out at the 2 min mark, let it drain for 15 sec then put in the stop bath. It does not really matter -- as long as I do just one or the other...and be consistant about it. The time the prints "cooks" while draining for the 15 seconds is taken into consideration as I test for the proper exposure and contrast control in the printing...just as using a water bath as a stop would be. What's the big deal?

Vaughn

jnantz

12-Jul-2007, 09:03

or don't care either. :)

yep :p

Donald Qualls

12-Jul-2007, 10:04

Stop bath is used to stop all of the the development all at once. If this step wasn't important for consistancy sake, then why not just go from developer to fixer?

Perhaps because you had always been told that doing so would "kill" the fixer? ;)

Greg Lockrey

12-Jul-2007, 11:41

Perhaps because you had always been told that doing so would "kill" the fixer? ;)

Perhaps, but experiment it yourself. Try not using verses using and try going directly to the fix verses none of the above. It shouldn't take too long for you to see the differences if you have any knd of "eye" at all. This very experiment was going to be my Master's Thesis in college but decided on the "Sensiotemetry differences between D-76 and HC-110 on Plus-X" instead.:cool:

FWIW, when my wet lab was still operational, I was a "one day use only" kind of lab rat. Chemisty is cheap compared to wasted paper. I went through a lot of paper.

Labwork needs to be as consistant as possible. How can this be if you have carry over developers into a stop that doesn't really "stop" the developing? After a dozen or so more prints that are run through, there is no way results will remain consistant. Sure some "artistic" accidents may occur, but who among us will recall at what point in the chemistry use that these "artistic' accidents occured? Perusing the websites of some forum members here I do notice that a "muddy look" seams to be pretty common with B&W prints. Maybe it's just the uploads or my monitor or both. Never occured to me that it was bad processing. Now I'm not so sure. I always felt that if a person was going to go into the expense and time involved with large format that his lab controls would be anally consistant or why bother.

Ole Tjugen

12-Jul-2007, 11:52

The resons for stop bath seem to be mostly historical!

A hardening fix, or the even older "toning fix", need to be acidic. Carry-over of developer changes the pH quite quickly in these old poorly buffered fixers, so the hardener (or toner) would soon stop working with unacceptable results.

Alkaline fixers were used very early (before 1900), but were generally not recommended due to the "unsightly brown stain" from some common developers.

jnantz

12-Jul-2007, 16:29

Greg Lockrey

12-Jul-2007, 18:49

don't monobath's incorporate both developer and fixer in the same bath ?

Yes they do. Have you seen the results? Not pretty, in my opinion, but you may like the effect if you are talking about conventional chemical mixes. I talking more about the continuation of development without using a stop prior to fixing it. As you can see from the use of monobaths that fixing does not stop development.

jnantz

12-Jul-2007, 20:21

Yes they do. Have you seen the results? Not pretty, in my opinion, but you may like the effect if you are talking about conventional chemical mixes. I talking more about the continuation of development without using a stop prior to fixing it. As you can see from the use of monobaths that fixing does not stop development.

i've never used a monobath or seen results from them ...

Greg Lockrey

12-Jul-2007, 20:29

i've never used a monobath or seen results from them ...

I never tried it personally either but I have seen some results of some experiments. Google "monobath" and it will take you to some examples done by Don Qualls. Goes to show that fixers don't stop the development process. Kind of made my point about the use of stop baths albeit an extreme example.:)

Ole Tjugen

12-Jul-2007, 22:59

Monobaths are really strong stuff which does all the development and simultaneous fixing in about two minutes. The tend to give really large grain, but there's nothing "uneven" about them! I have tried monobaths out of curiosity, but they simply use too much chemicals to make it worth playing with.

That is a very different situation from what we're discussing here - putting a film/paper sheet with a trace of (almost exhausted) developer into a low alkalinity fixer. Most alkaline fixers have pH's in the 8-9.5 range, which is lower than most developers. So even going directly from developer to fixer any continuing development would be very very little.

BTW - Polariod films use a monobath. Are type 55 negatives ugly?

Greg Lockrey

12-Jul-2007, 23:26

That is a very different situation from what we're discussing here - putting a film/paper sheet with a trace of (almost exhausted) developer into a low alkalinity fixer. Most alkaline fixers have pH's in the 8-9.5 range, which is lower than most developers. So even going directly from developer to fixer any continuing development would be very very little.

BTW - Polariod films use a monobath. Are type 55 negatives ugly?

True, but putting neg/paper into a water stop it will continue to develope to a measurable degree depending on the carry over of developer. Polaroid type 55 are not ugly, but the film was designed for monobath in the first place. :)

Ole Tjugen

13-Jul-2007, 00:11

True, but putting neg/paper into a water stop it will continue to develope to a measurable degree depending on the carry over of developer.

Exactly: Measurable. So all you have to do is compensate for that measurable degree.

Some times I've done "split monobath": At the end of development I don't dump the developer, but add about 50ml of 50% ammonium thiosulfate. Agitate for a further five minutes, then wash. Even with that procedure, the necessary reduction in development time to get the same contrast is less than 30 seconds on a 10 minute normal development time.

Greg Lockrey

13-Jul-2007, 00:30

Exactly: Measurable. So all you have to do is compensate for that measurable degree.

:) Why would you need to if you stopped it in the first place? :) It's just a step that aids in consistancy. That's all. Why not have the 100th print come out to be the same as the first if you are consistant in the method. If you have to compensate with times and other factors for each additional print, how can your results be consistant?

After 30+ years I'm so glad I don't have to breath chemicals anymore.:eek: Now I "just push a couple of buttons" and be called a wizard by my clients.;)

Ole Tjugen

13-Jul-2007, 00:39

Ah - but the compensation necessary does not vary measurably over the usable life of the chemicals. And all my prints are developed close enough to completion that no compensation is necessary - you only need that for film. And with film I get consistent results by using my own times, which is the best way to do it anyway. :)

I use stop when lith-printing, since there the development needs to be stopped exactly at the right moment, which can take anuthing from 3 to 30 minutes.

Greg Lockrey

13-Jul-2007, 00:45

I use stop when lith-printing, since there the development needs to be stopped exactly at the right moment, which can take anuthing from 3 to 30 minutes.

Ok you do it here, why not with prints? I know prints aren't as critical as litho, but why make work for yourself? Maybe I was just a lazy lab rat.:)

Donald Qualls

14-Jul-2007, 12:56

Greg, for some of us (probably not including Ole, considering what he spends on equipment -- just that I hear about!), finding a way to consistently save a nickel here or three cents there in a process can make the difference between being able to continue photography or having to put it aside to await a day of better financial condition (which, life being what it is, is unlikely ever to actually arrive, if you're already an adult and well out of college).

Some of us use water stop. Some use indicator stop and reuse it until it turns color. Some use plain stop bath mixed from citric acid crystals or glacial or 28% acetic acid, and toss it after every work session, or (for those who print a lot in one session) when the developer needs to be replaced. Most do what they do because they're used to doing it that way; a few because they believe they have a scientific basis. And some, because it's as consistent as any other way, and saves a few cents per roll or batch of prints.

I look at your sig, and while I don't completely agree (I rode that way a lot when I was teen, but there are far too many other things I want), I'm with you on money being a tool. I try to avoid using up my tools unnecessarily -- including my money. So, I seek the least costly way to do things -- which takes into account material cost as well as chemical cost and, in the end, the quality of the end product as well. It doesn't take into account what works for you, except as that informs my working methods.

One can make excellent images without all the technical controls, BTW; it's a matter of knowing your own methods, and isn't necessarily founded on following the Zone creed or those of its successors. And all the technical controls in the world won't help someone who lacks the "eye"...

Greg Lockrey

14-Jul-2007, 13:25

One can make excellent images without all the technical controls, BTW; it's a matter of knowing your own methods, and isn't necessarily founded on following the Zone creed or those of its successors. And all the technical controls in the world won't help someone who lacks the "eye"...

And if you get enough monkeys typing on a typewriters long enough you will eventually get the bible. My old man had a very thriving machine shop whose favorite quote was "anybody can make a machine part to specifications once but how many can make a million of them exactly the same?" Being a professional printer vs being a hobbyist is the fact of using those technical controls that you seem to want to dismiss since paying clients want consistant results. It's okay to experiment with processes to find a more economical method. But how expensive is that in the long run? Kind of reminds me of a guy who will drive across town to buy gas because it's a nickel a gallon cheaper than the station across the street. Cost effectiveness manifests itself in many ways.

As for "pedaling +25 mph on a smooth road", I'm nearly 60 and diabetic weigh 260 lbs and the kids on the road call me "Orange Crush" because of my red beard and I crush riders who try to keep up with this old man. That makes me happy.:)

If you really want to reduce your costs, use your skilled "eye" and get other people to pay for it. ;)

Randy H

14-Jul-2007, 14:47

... "anybody can make a machine part to specifications once but how many can make a million of them exactly the same?"...

And buy CNC machines, because they reduce the human error, speed up the process, and will run tirelessly as long as they have a monkey to push the buttons.

But how many of the CNC's will turn custom onsey-twosey parts for the same price as the million?

Different is not always wrong.
Just different.

Nick_3536

14-Jul-2007, 15:09

Are people snatching prints? Or developing to completion? Snatching is fun for lith but other wise?

Greg Lockrey

14-Jul-2007, 15:34

And buy CNC machines, because they reduce the human error, speed up the process, and will run tirelessly as long as they have a monkey to push the buttons.

But how many of the CNC's will turn custom onsey-twosey parts for the same price as the million?

Different is not always wrong.
Just different.

Sure, it depends on how you do it and which machinery you do it with. A Cleveland lathe will make your part one at a time but a Brown & Sharpe will run it for years. If you want to do it fast, then cold head it. :)

Are we now going to discuss the merits of screw machines now?

BTW, monkeys in this part of the woods make about $32.00 per hour plus benifits pushing those buttons.

Randy H

14-Jul-2007, 15:57

...Are we now going to discuss the merits of screw machines now?
BTW, monkeys in this part of the woods make about $32.00 per hour plus benifits pushing those buttons.

Too cool. :) it is absolutely amazing.
How do we (myself included) manage to go from the poetential hazards of stop bath, to individual procedure and preferences,to monkeys, to screw machines, all in one post? Are we good, or what?

Greg Lockrey

14-Jul-2007, 15:58

Too cool. :) it is absolutely amazing.
How do we (myself included) manage to go from the poetential hazards of stop bath, to individual procedure and preferences,to screw machines in one post? Are we good, or what?

Hey, I just asked a guy if he ever noticed that his prints were still cooking since he didn't use stop bath, that's all.:)

Donald Qualls

14-Jul-2007, 17:26

Being a professional printer vs being a hobbyist is the fact of using those technical controls that you seem to want to dismiss since paying clients want consistant results. It's okay to experiment with processes to find a more economical method. But how expensive is that in the long run? Kind of reminds me of a guy who will drive across town to buy gas because it's a nickel a gallon cheaper than the station across the street. Cost effectiveness manifests itself in many ways.

As for "pedaling +25 mph on a smooth road", I'm nearly 60 and diabetic weigh 260 lbs and the kids on the road call me "Orange Crush" because of my red beard and I crush riders who try to keep up with this old man. That makes me happy.:)

If you really want to reduce your costs, use your skilled "eye" and get other people to pay for it. ;)

If by "get other people to pay for it" you mean become a professional printer, no thank you. My eye is for the image, not the print. I print well enough for my own needs, but even if I were interested in doing it professionally, I haven't the qualifications or inclination to become a slave at it. I'd love to be able to sell my prints, mind you -- but I'm only interested in printing my own images, generally. And I'm not very interested in printing even 100 identical copies of exactly the same image (especially not if it requires any dodging or burning). Nor can I, at present; I can't afford the lump sum outlay to buy several hundred sheets of same-emulsion-number paper in order to do that. Most of my effort, in fact, goes into producing a negative that doesn't require a master printer to make a killer print.

The way I print, the level of consistency you're talking about is not only a fantasy, but an idle one -- it'd gain me nothing. I'd still have to make at least one test sheet (crossed strips, one direction with blue filter, the other with yellow) before I can make a reasonably good working print, and then probably one more to have one that really nails exposure and contrast -- and that's before I even attempt any local controls. And I do that to get *one* print. But yes, I do use stop bath when I print; the indicator type, and I use it until it turns color. And to answer another question from this thread -- I develop by timer, but long enough beyond where the print changes visibly that I'm pretty sure a few seconds more or less drain time has no effect (and temperature variations in my cold light, even with a head heater, probably have more effect).

It's been a little over 25 years since I've ridden a bicycle as much as a mile at one time, but Monday morning I'll start riding to my new job, a little over 1.5 miles each way. We'll see how long that lasts... ...but when I was 16, I could ride the length of Walla Walla (about a mile along Whitman) and hit every traffic light on green, syncrhonized at 28 mph. Of course, I weighed 135 then, and had so little body fat I sank in the pool, even with lungs full of air and completely relaxed. Now, I'm about 205, also diabetic (though still diet controlled, five years on from diagnosis), but not a fanatic about fitness of the sort many diabetics seem to become...

Greg Lockrey

14-Jul-2007, 18:02

It's been a little over 25 years since I've ridden a bicycle as much as a mile at one time, but Monday morning I'll start riding to my new job, a little over 1.5 miles each way. We'll see how long that lasts... ...but when I was 16, I could ride the length of Walla Walla (about a mile along Whitman) and hit every traffic light on green, syncrhonized at 28 mph. Of course, I weighed 135 then, and had so little body fat I sank in the pool, even with lungs full of air and completely relaxed. Now, I'm about 205, also diabetic (though still diet controlled, five years on from diagnosis), but not a fanatic about fitness of the sort many diabetics seem to become...

I got into serious riding while I was still in the Navy back in the 70's. It was a way to get away from tthe "Hey Joes" at the fleet landing. I was diagnosed 15 years ago, but with diabetes, it just gets worse with time. I'm starting to think it doesn't matter what you do either. I rode 30 miles per day and 100 each on Saturday and Sunday since I ride with a club. Took max loads of all the pills until the Metaformine started to kill my kidneys, now I shoot Byetta twice a day along with the pills. I wanted to get the insulin and drop the pills, but my quack says it will cause me to gain weight. The day I was diagnosed I weighed 225 and then they put me on drugs and diet and shot up to 260 in about 6 months. Been holding steady since though. Supposedly I'm supposed to be able to drop the weight with the Byetta because it works on the metabolism differently. We'll see. I like to ride to work too, but work is in my house.;)

I was a time kind of developer too with the commercial stuff, but my own I sometimes helped the print by rubbing on it and tricks like that. I liked using two step developers too.

If you did ever want to make 100 dodge and burned prints, you could do it by making a series of masks. ;)

Hey Randy, now we are getting into treatment for 'betes.:eek:

Randy H

14-Jul-2007, 19:52

...Hey Randy, now we are getting into treatment for 'betes.:eek:

What's next? Metamucil? Depends? Prep H? Absorbine Jr? (just don't get the last two confused with one another:eek: )
I really do enjoy reading these threads, just to see where they are going to go next. You never know what kind of useful (?) info you can pick up. My wife peeks over my shoulder occasionally when I am on here, shakes her head, and goes off mumbling something to the effect of "What the hell does that have to do with photography?"

On a side note, speaking of printing. I missed the best part of an estate sale today of a local noted photographer, Jim McClellan. His pictures are absolutely awesome. His camera equipment was gone, but a lot of his prints were still there, as well as "ALL" the negatives. Every one was in an individual envelope, with what the pic was, how shot, settings, etc. Boxes and boxes of negs, from 35mm to 4X5's. Pics from around the world. Bad as I hated to, I walked away. His darkroom was absolutely awesome. Very professionally set up. After looking at his prints, I just did not feel "comfortable" with attempting to re-create from his negatives.

Greg Lockrey

15-Jul-2007, 04:19

On a side note, speaking of printing. I missed the best part of an estate sale today of a local noted photographer, Jim McClellan. His pictures are absolutely awesome. His camera equipment was gone, but a lot of his prints were still there, as well as "ALL" the negatives. Every one was in an individual envelope, with what the pic was, how shot, settings, etc. Boxes and boxes of negs, from 35mm to 4X5's. Pics from around the world. Bad as I hated to, I walked away. His darkroom was absolutely awesome. Very professionally set up. After looking at his prints, I just did not feel "comfortable" with attempting to re-create from his negatives.

As a photographer would be neat to see how his negatives would print straight without manipulation so you can see what magic he may have done to get to his image. As a printer you may already have a good idea.:)

Greg Lockrey

15-Jul-2007, 04:20

On a side note, speaking of printing. I missed the best part of an estate sale today of a local noted photographer, Jim McClellan. His pictures are absolutely awesome. His camera equipment was gone, but a lot of his prints were still there, as well as "ALL" the negatives. Every one was in an individual envelope, with what the pic was, how shot, settings, etc. Boxes and boxes of negs, from 35mm to 4X5's. Pics from around the world. Bad as I hated to, I walked away. His darkroom was absolutely awesome. Very professionally set up. After looking at his prints, I just did not feel "comfortable" with attempting to re-create from his negatives.

As a photographer it would be neat to see how his negatives would print straight without manipulation so you can see what magic he may have done to get to his image. As a printer you may already have a good idea.;)