[pure-silver] Re: Old Agfa 120 Brown Black Developer {120 (Potassium Version)}
- From: Lloyd Erlick <lloyd@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: pure-silver@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2007 08:47:31 -0500
February 2, 2007, from Lloyd Erlick,
Bergger materials have not satisfied me. I tried their super-expensive
all-rag base material a long time ago, and found the whites took up
selenium toner. Politely called staining, I believe. There was also one
sheet with a surface defect (each sheet cost me thirteen dollars, at the
time, in a pack of ten 16x20s, so defects were not an option). They
refunded my money, of course, but I haven't tried again. Maybe it's time I
did.
regards,
--le
________________________________
Lloyd Erlick Portraits, Toronto.
website: www.heylloyd.com
telephone: 416-686-0326
email: portrait@xxxxxxxxxxxx
________________________________
--
At 08:23 PM 1/31/2007 , Tim wrote:
>Lloyd,
> The Agfa paper did tone brown, but it was darker than I wanted, but
>toned much more than I expected for not being a warm tone paper. As
>far as the Bergger went, the brown was what I expected, but not the
>whites. I tried to find an example of what is in my head, but to no
>avail. I imagine I just need some more practice and tweaking my
>process. My negatives were pretty dense, which may have contributed
>which may be one of the reasons my whites were not what I expected.
>
>
>Tim Eitniear
>Chicago, Il
>
>
>
>On Jan 30, 2007, at 8:49 AM, Lloyd Erlick wrote:
>
>> January 30, 2007, from Lloyd Erlick,
>>
>> This is fascinating.
>>
>> Since the Agfa material is no longer made, I guess it's moot, but
>> did the
>> Agfa paper tone to the chocolate brown you wanted?
>>
>> Also, regarding the Bergger results, were the whites too white for
>> your
>> taste? You say they were not very creamy... (I'm asking because,
>> strangely
>> enough, I like warm-tone blacks and grays, but I like the whites to
>> sparkle
>> whitely. I find Ilford Warmtone FB paper pretty good in this
>> regard; the
>> whites are quite white, but less so than the base of their RC glossy
>> material.)
>>
>> regards,
>> --le
>> ________________________________
>> Lloyd Erlick Portraits, Toronto.
>> website: www.heylloyd.com
>> telephone: 416-686-0326
>> email: portrait@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>> ________________________________
>> --
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> At 06:00 AM 1/30/2007 , Tim wrote:
>>> I was able to do some testing over the weekend using the Agfa 110
>>> recipe. I could not get the potassium sulfite / Carbonate...... that
>>> will be for a future test. I tried two different papers using a 2x2
>>> neg enlarged to 8x10.
>>>
>>> The first paper I used was Agfa MCC-111 glossy. I exposed the print
>>> for 50.8 sec at f8 and toned for 30 min in Selenium for 30 min and
>>> obtained a Dark brown color shift.
>>>
>>> The second paper I used was Bergger Warmtone Paper (cream based).
>>> This was the first time I had ever used this paper and learned
>>> quickly that my safe light was not so safe for this paper. This
>>> paper is also very slow. The same neg took 90 seconds exposure at f4
>>> to produce the same results as the Agfa paper. When toned in
>>> selenium for 30 min, I was able to obtain the chocolate brown I was
>>> after, but the whites were not very creamy. More work to be done
>>> there.
>>>
>>> I also noticed that the developer was very temperature sensitive,
>>> which sent me down the wrong path. I could not understand why the
>>> longer I was exposing the paper, why I was not getting better print.
>>> I measured the developer and the temperature had fallen to ~ 60F.
>>> After warming up the developer, things returned back to normal.
>>>
>>> Tim
>>>
>>>
>>> Tim Eitniear
>>> Chicago, Il
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Jan 26, 2007, at 2:34 PM, Tim Eitniear wrote:
>>>
>>>> Cor,
>>>> To your point, I did some research on the chemical conversions
>>>> I found
>>>> the following two posts. In fact Lloyd's name was associated
>>>> with the
>>>> posts.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I made the remark; it originally came from The Darkroom Cookbook,
>>>> concerning
>>>> potassium carbonate, and I extended it to sulfite. The latter is
>>>> available
>>>> from Photographer's Formulary at $16/lb. It doesn't specify the
>>>> hydration
>>>> status; the ratio of K2SO3 to Na2SO3 is 158/126, or about 1.25. I
>>>> believe
>>>> that the ratio of the carbonates is one of the hundreds or so
>>>> errors still
>>>> in the darkroom cookbook (the "corrected" edition); K2CO3/
>>>> Na2CO3.H2O is
>>>> 138/124, so DIVIDE, not multiply, the amount of sodium carbonate by
>>>> 0.9 to
>>>> substitute the potassium version.
>>>> I recently did a series of tests on Agfa MCC using warm and cold
>>>> developers,
>>>> substituting only the carbonate, not the sulfite; and potassium
>>>> makes a
>>>> final print that is noticeably warmer, especially after sepia
>>>> toning. I
>>>> plan to mix the developer with both potassium salts next time I use
>>>> a warm
>>>> developer; I guess I or someone ought to compare potassium carbonate
>>>> developers with each sulfite salt to see how big the difference is.
>>>> Note that with cold papers, the differences resulting from these
>>>> kind of
>>>> changes is tiny, and often imperceptible.
>>>> I don't know how difficult K2SO3 is to keep in dry form; the jar is
>>>> still
>>>> sitting on my shelf. I don't see why it would be any harder to
>>>> keep than
>>>> the sodium version, which is ubiquitous.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> You should be able to substitute potassium carbonate for sodium
>>>> carbonate
>>>> without concern, however, keep it tightly capped and dry, since it
>>
>>>> absorbs water from the air. The molecular weights are:
>>>> potassium carbonate K2CO3 138.2
>>>> sodium carbonate Na2CO3 106
>>>> sodium carbonate monohydrate Na2CO3*H2O 124
>>>> If potassium carbonate is used rather than anhydrous sodium
>>>> carbonate,
>>>> the factor is 138.2/106 = 1.3X (1.30 g potassium carbonate used for
>>>> each
>>>> gram of anhydrous sodium carbonate required).
>>>> If potassium carbonate is used rather than sodium carbonate
>>>> monohydrate,
>>>> the factor is 138.2/124 = 1.11X (not 0.9X).
>>>> If sodium carbonates are substituted for potassium carbonate, the
>>>> factors
>>>> are the inverses of those given above (anhydrous, 0.77X;
>>>> monohydrate,
>>>> 0.9X).
>>>> Both sodium and potassium carbonates give nearly the same pH, and
>>>> the
>>>> differences in development should not be evident if the correct
>>>> amount is
>>>> substituted. Using much less carbonate than specified may warm
>>>> image
>>>> tone, but generally, developers don't affect tone very much compared
>>>> to other factors (paper, toners, etc.).
>>>> Benzotriazole might cool the image tone; usually, bromide (or
>>>> developer
>>>> reuse) lends a warm or greenish cast, but improves high value
>>>> separation
>>>> due to its restraining action. Both exposure (more) and developing
>>>> time
>>>> (longer) should be adjusted if significant amounts of restrainer
>>>> are used.
>>>> Adding more carbonate to a developer to which bromide has been
>>>> added or
>>>> has accumulated, will cool the tone and decrease developing
>>>> times, but
>>>> retain high value separation. Using the factorial timing approach
>>>> described by Adams is convenient to adjust times after additions
>>>> (10%
>>>> solutions of KBr and Na2CO3 are convenient).
>>>>
>>>> Tim
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 1/25/07 4:06 AM, "C.Breukel@xxxxxxx" <C.Breukel@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> }
>>>>>>
>>>>>> January 24, 2007, from Lloyd Erlick,
>>>>>> regarding Ansco 120 print developer:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thus: 12 g sodium sulfite anhydrous for one liter of *working*
>>>>> solution.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The working solution I use contains 13.5 grams of potassium
>>>>>> sulfite
>>>>>> anhydrous. I've forgotten the arduous calculation that led to
>>>>>> this,
>>>>> but
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> solution works very nicely indeed. Maybe those more chemically
>>>>>> adept
>>>>> than
>>>>>> I
>>>>>> am can correct my numbers ...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ..ok I take the "challenge"..:-)..
>>>>>
>>>>> molecular weight sodium sulfite: 126,04
>>>>> molecular weight potassium sulfite: 158,26
>>>>>
>>>>> So 12 g sodium sulfite equels (158,26/126,04)*12 = 1,26 * 12 =
>>>>> 15,12 g
>>>>> potassium sulfite.
>>>>>
>>>>> A bit more than you use now, bit it ain't rocket scince, it
>>>>> probably
>>>>> won't matter too much..
>>>>>
>>>>> Best,
>>>>>
>>>>> Cor
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ===================================================================
>>>>> ==
>>>>> =========
>>>>> ==============================To unsubscribe from this list, go to
>>>>> www.freelists.org and logon to your account (the same e-mail
>>>>> address and
>>>>> password you set-up when you subscribed,) and unsubscribe from
>>>>> there.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ====================================================================
>>>> ==
>>>> =======================================
>>
>>>> To unsubscribe from this list, go to www.freelists.org and logon to
>>>> your account (the same e-mail address and password you set-up when
>>>> you subscribed,) and unsubscribe from there.
>>>
>>> =====================================================================
>>> ======
>> ==================================
>>> To unsubscribe from this list, go to www.freelists.org and logon
>>> to your
>> account (the same e-mail address and password you set-up when you
>> subscribed,) and unsubscribe from there.
>>>
>>
>> ======================================================================
>> =======================================
>> To unsubscribe from this list, go to www.freelists.org and logon to
>> your account (the same e-mail address and password you set-up when
>> you subscribed,) and unsubscribe from there.
>
>===========================================================================
==================================
>To unsubscribe from this list, go to www.freelists.org and logon to your
account (the same e-mail address and password you set-up when you
subscribed,) and unsubscribe from there.
>
=============================================================================================================
To unsubscribe from this list, go to www.freelists.org and logon to your
account (the same e-mail address and password you set-up when you subscribed,)
and unsubscribe from there.
Other related posts: