print washes

[Don Niemczyk]

Does anyone use any of the archival print washes that cut down on the time needed to wash a print.Trying to save on water usage.

[Doremus Scudder]

Every serious printer I know of uses a hypo-clearing agent or the equivalent to facilitate thorough washing of their prints (fiber-base paper of course, which is what serious printers use). The water savings is not the primary reason, rather the removal of as much fixer and by-products as possible to achieve maximum permanence. There are discussions of this in practically every authoritative book on printing. Regards,

[John Cook]

I had a big plexiglas 11x14 unit ten years ago which I was fortunate to sell.

Don't believe it was necessarily any faster than a Kodak tray syphon. Perhaps slower.

The big "advantage" was in water savings because the water just barely trickled through the unit. Even with the faucet wide-open. This slow-flow caused a mass of froth and foam. The prints were just swimming in it. Except where they were stuck to the dividers.

I could never get over the feeling that if there wasn't enough fresh water flowing through to rinse away all that foam, the fixer probably wasn't being flushed either. I went back to the tray syphon.

I'm an old duffer with my mind made up. Don't try to confuse me with the facts.

[Robert C. McColloch]

If you want to save water, use Bruce Barnbaum's method, simple tray soaks.

[Richard Urmonas]

A hypo clearing agent wash helps to get rid of fixer from the print. As for saving water, the best way of washing prints is using multiple trays of water. Many sources say 6 trays with at least 5 minutes per tray. The so called "archival washers" are actually quite poor at washing the print, and use more water. Of course they are minimal effort, which is why people use them.

[Gary J. McCutcheon]

Use of hypoclear agent and rinse and one hour vertical print soak has proven to give an archival (no stain with Kodak HT-2 test) wash with use of alkaline fixer and no running water. Check out the Fine Art Photography Supply web site: www.fineartphotosupply.com. Help save the environment! Happy photographing.

Gary

[Witold Grabiec]

I've had great (and very positive) experience with the Zone VI and Kostiner archival print washers (each with somewhat different water flow arrangement). There is many others, used and new, based on same principle and you should be more than happy with the results. They can be hooked up in a completely closed system (from water inlet to drain) and thus do not require a sink (a feature I've always found very useful).

The key to good (and rapid) print washing is a constant flow of clean water on both sides of the print while maintaining a minimum volume (that's how you accomplish a complete exchange with minimum usage) . Archival washers have seperate compartments (even though they're aren't completely tight, they do indeed prevent cross-contamination from other prints) and there should be only ONE (or combination of few) print in each at any time. I say few because with larger washers you can put in 2 or 3 smaller prints in a compartment as long as they do not overlap and go in at the same time.

A hypo agent can also be used which accelerates cleaning by chemical reaction. This combined with an archival washer (used properly) should give superior results. It is also possible to have a hypo agent trickle into the water flow of an archival washer which would make up for an even more convenient system.

All in all, archival washers do indeed do a good washing job while saving water at the same time.

[james mickelson]

My 16x20 enameled tray works great and I use less than 5 gallons of water to wash 10 11x14 prints to archival standards. It just takes a little time and patience. And if it was good enough for Edward Weston, it's good enough for my prints.

[James Venis]

First thing, never overfix. Doing so can create harmful sulfer compounds that are very difficult to wash out.

With double-weight fiber prints, after the second fixing bath and a water rinse, I usually combine Heico PermaWash and Kodak Rapid Selenium toner to tone and clear at the same time. This is the method tested and used by David Vestal, which he describes on page 45 of his "Photo 303: The Pratt Institute Handouts." (This is a worthwhile publication to have; get it from the folks who print PhotoTechniques Magaine.) I use 22.2 ml of PermaWash concentrate plus 14.8 ml of selenium toner concentrate, then add water to make 1 liter of working solution. Ten minutes with agitation is the recommended time.

I then put the prints in my archival cascade washer made by Summitek, which after two years I am still VERY happy with. At 1/2 liter per minute, an hour's wash only consumes 30 liters of water (plus the 60 liters to fill the washer initially). I can wash as many as 10 20x24s at a time. See the great common-sense discussion of washing efficiency at http://www.summitek.com/cascade.html .

Most important, and what I recommend no matter how else you choose to proceed, is to check your wash performance with HT-2. Every few printing sessions, I fully process and wash a spare print or test strip just to spot-check my washes. I rarely see even a trace of stain, which indicates a very low concentration of thiosulfate ion in the print emulsion. Everybody's water is a little different, and this seems to be the best way to know how well your method works for YOU.

--James

[N Gray]

I've very happy with Cachet Eco-Wash Print Washer (I can't find a site for Cachet, but they are fairly easy to find).

It conserves water by passing water from one compartment to the next. By putting the prints in in order you are washing the cleanest prints (those that have been in longest) with the freshest water. If need be the prints can be cycled into the premier spot (note that this is the technique referred to and referenced above regarding the "cascade washer"). It saves water. But time can only be saved by a hypo clearing agent as mentioned above. The chemicals dissipate out of the paper only over time in contact with the water. Very little else matters provided that the water is clean enough. Water quality is controlled by the exchange rate or flow of water through the system. The water exchange doesn't need to be a rushing torrent either. I try to keep about 1.5 litres per minute going through the washer, but others might know better what that really should be. I remember one full exchange per minute from school (but that might have been film).

Good luck,

Nathanael

[Witold Grabiec]

I have just checked out David Vestal's book "The Art of Black and White Enlarging" - published in 1984 (mentioned on above Cascade washer site, speaking of which Cascade claims a US patent on its design and makes one wonder how Cachet produces a basically same thing, not that it matters here).

Anyway, David Vestal wrote something interesting on the Hypo hype.

"... I went to the 1982 conference on photographic permanence at which Ilford, Fuji, and Kodak demolished the long-held belief that eliminating hypo, by itself, makes prints stable. Instead - it's worth repeating - the absence of residual hypo leaves an untoned print extremely vulnerable to attack by oxidizng gases. Therefore, protective toning - preferably with selenium - is now considered a necessity if our prints are to last long under less than ideal keeping conditions..."