tf4 fixer rocks like a hurricane!

[Peter Gomena]

Ditto Jan's experience. I returned to TF4 after trying TF5 for the same reasons.

Peter Gomena

[Roger Cole]

I've never used it, but the listing at PF says it doesn't need a hypo clearing agent. True?

[Mark Sampson]

The alkaline nature of TF-4 means that a hypo-clearing agent is redundant.

[Roger Cole]

Just wash prints as if they've been conventionally fixed and hypo cleared?

I'm having a problem believing all this. Costs about the same as acid rapid fix, more capacity, no hypo-clear needed, why does anyone still use acid fixers then? Particularly with fiber based prints it would seem this would be a no-brainer.

[Tom Keenan]

PF says that the TF-5 does a better job of clearing the magenta from T-Max films. Any comments on that? No experience myself but I've ordered some TF-5.
Thanks
Tom Keenan

[Robert Hall]

The alkaline nature of TF-4 means that a hypo-clearing agent is redundant.

Could you explain to me how the alkalinity makes HCA redundant?

thx

[Sal Santamaura]

Another advantage of TF-4 over TF-5, for those of us whose trays are not near plumbing, is its great buffering capacity. It's easily capable of dealing with prints that go from developer to a still water rinse, then into the fixer, without becoming quickly exhausted. This despite the instructions requiring a running water rinse for that intermediate step.

[ROL]

– 1 TF5, I went back to TF4 for precisely the reasons already mentioned.

BTW, one of the oft overlooked attributes of a fast fixer like TF4 is that, particularly with fiber papers, washing times are significantly reduced. Classic two fix strategies are unnecessary as long as exhaustion capacities are observed. Once the unexposed silver is fixed, it is fixed, without excessive absorption which only needs to be washed out for print longevity. This can be critical with some papers like the no longer available fiber Kentmere bromides, which began to lose emulsion if washed for much longer than 45 minutes – a true Catch-22 scenario. Necessary sink space is also reduced when only one tray becomes necessary for full fixation.

I use TF4 for both film and paper, easy peasy.

[ROL]

Another advantage of TF-4 over TF-5, for those of us whose trays are not near plumbing, is its great buffering capacity. It's easily capable of dealing with prints that go from developer to a still water rinse, then into the fixer, without becoming quickly exhausted. This despite the instructions requiring a running water rinse for that intermediate step.

FYI, the "running water" rinse was addressed by Photo Engineer (who helped develop TF5) over at APUG. He insists upon it so as not to exhaust the alkaline fix. The question then became exactly what is a "running water" rinse? Moving water, as in normal sloshing agitation, is adequate if replaced often. I typically dump and replace the 3 or so gallons in my large ~28x34 trays every 4 or 5 prints or when it changes color significantly (from the developer).

[jp]

PF says that the TF-5 does a better job of clearing the magenta from T-Max films. Any comments on that? No experience myself but I've ordered some TF-5.
Thanks
Tom Keenan

Tf4 does a normal job at removing the magenta. I haven't tried tf5, but don't have a problem with what tf4 does. Some magenta is removed in fixing, the remainder comes out while washing. I think some magenta comes out in developing too. I like to see magenta come out during washing. It's sort of progress indicator of the washing in an otherwise boring process. No magenta doesn't mean perfectly washed, but magenta does mean not well washed.