TF-4 User For Years...Want To Try TF-5

[John Layton]

....but its been difficult for me to suss out the pluses and minuses of each - aside from noting opinions about TF-4 being more odiferous than TF-5.

Another thing...what about working dilution capacity - in terms of square inches of film? The only literature I can find says that one gallon of working solution can fix 20 rolls of film...huh? I've been using TF-4 to way less than its stated capacity just to be on the safe side - and I still can do way more square inches of LF film than a 20 roll equivalent! Perhaps PF is assuming a "one-shot" method?

At any rate...I'd be using TF-5 just as I had TF-4 - to fix LF films souped in either Pyrocat or PMK developers - and if anyone here could comment on their own experiences with TF-5 so utilized, as well as any notable differences compared to TF-4...that would be great!

[Drew Wiley]

I can't answer your question, but would myself be a candidate for the answer. I use TF4 for both film and paper. But so far, I see no reason to switch. Its alkalinity seems to help residual dye stains wash out from the film base much better than conventional fixers. That fact is not either evident or particularly important when a pyro stain is present, and ordinary black and white printing is in mind. But I often make contrast masks for color printing, internegs, etc, from both TMax and FP4, using conventional developers, where any remaining tint (pinkish is these cases) can cause a real problem. I always use TF4 1:3 one-shot. The only advantage I hypothetically see to TF5 is that the jug of concentrated solution might not settle as bad, and not need as much initial agitation. I don't have any problem with the modest odor because I have a good fume hood.

[Michael R]

They will fix the same and wash the same. Neither will have any affect on imagewise stain (nor will any other non-hardening rapid fixer). TF-5 is neutral rather than alkaline so less odour than TF-4. TF-5 doesn’t have the sludge to mix. I would use TF-5 if I were inclined to bother with any TFs.

....but its been difficult for me to suss out the pluses and minuses of each - aside from noting opinions about TF-4 being more odiferous than TF-5.

Another thing...what about working dilution capacity - in terms of square inches of film? The only literature I can find says that one gallon of working solution can fix 20 rolls of film...huh? I've been using TF-4 to way less than its stated capacity just to be on the safe side - and I still can do way more square inches of LF film than a 20 roll equivalent! Perhaps PF is assuming a "one-shot" method?

At any rate...I'd be using TF-5 just as I had TF-4 - to fix LF films souped in either Pyrocat or PMK developers - and if anyone here could comment on their own experiences with TF-5 so utilized, as well as any notable differences compared to TF-4...that would be great!

[Tin Can]

I don't ONE Shot TF5

Must use Distilled

Very economical

I buy a 4 gallon case, as shipping is cheaper

I store in a floating lid tank

It has a spigot, any crap goes to bottom

Looks like Arkay may not have them

[Drew Wiley]

Michael - Please clarify your statement. Don't tell me NEITHER will have an effect on residual image stain (referring to remaining anti-halation DYE rather than pyro stain, if that is in fact what you meant - perhaps not - "imagewise stain" would seem to mean the proportional pyro stain instead). I've been working with TF4 as long as its been around, and it is unquestionably superior at facilitating TOTAL rapid removal during the wash step of any residual ANTIHALATION DYE on TMax films, somewhat less in the case of FP4, but still an improvement. Traditional fixers tend to make those stains even more stubborn.

[Michael R]

I was referring to imagewise stain from pyrogallol or catechol developers, which OP referred to. Regarding anti-halation dyes/TMax and fixers, bogus. But use whatever you want. They all do the job.

Michael - Clarify your point. Don't tell me NEITHER will have an effect on residual image stain (referring to remaining anti-halation DYE rather than pyro stain, if that is in fact what you meant). I've been working with TF4 as long as its been around, and it is unquestionably superior at facilitating TOTAL rapid removal during the wash step of any residual dye on TMax films, somewhat less in the case of FP4, but still an improvement. Traditional fixers tend to make those stains even more stubborn.

[Drew Wiley]

Thanks Michael, that's what I thought you meant. But your added "Bogus" ain't a bonus at all. It's what I'm specifically interested in finding out; and you're clearly not one who has the answer. Here's just one of the reasons: yes, a bit of magenta cast can easily be filtered out when color printing; but that stain fades over time with UV exposure, so will affect color balance differentially with reapplication. For example, TF4 typically has about 4cc M out of the wash. TMax films have essentially zero after TF4 and a 10 min wash (net fbf only around .05 with TMY, and it doesn't change over time). So when those masks get used for not only color printing, but perhaps in relation to critical color separations etc, removing all the remaining dye first is important. Ordinary silver printing of pyro negs is a whole different issue. If that's all was involved, I would even be curious. As the saying goes, If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

[John Layton]

...although I suppose that for those who just use tap water for everything, and who's water supply is acidic - the higher alkalinity of TF-4 may help to ensure that Pyro-based developers can still develop a good image stain. Make sense?

At any rate, while I use distilled water to mix chemicals, I do use three successive trays of tap water as a stop bath - but then again, our tap water is already slightly alkaline...and I'm filtering down to 5 microns.

[Michael R]

...although I suppose that for those who just use tap water for everything, and who's water supply is acidic - the higher alkalinity of TF-4 may help to ensure that Pyro-based developers can still develop a good image stain. Make sense?

The pH of your water is irrelevant. Water has essentially no buffering capacity so its pH is totally overwhelmed by the chemicals you add to it. Furthermore imagewise stain from pyrogallol or catechol developers will not depend on whether or not the fixer is alkaline. You can use virtually any commercially available non-hardening rapid fixer including Ilford (mildly acidic), TF5, Sprint, Flexicolor/C-41 etc. (all neutral), TF4 etc. (alkaline)…

The only caveat with alkaline fixers is it is good practice to do a thorough rinse or stop bath between development and fixation to avoid the possibility of development re-starting in the fixing bath.

[Tin Can]

If I had an ocean

I would try sea water