Do you Pre-wash your film?

Do you Pre-wash your film?

  • Yes

    Votes: 233 42.5%

  • No

    Votes: 261 47.6%

  • What's a pre-wash?

    Votes: 54 9.9%
  • Total voters
    548
So I never pre-washed until recently when a photographer friend of mine with 20+ years of experience told me to pre-wash at +2*F over the temp that you develop at. He said it helps the developer reach all the emulsion immediately when you pour it in.
 
Has anyone found that a pre-wash helps reduce the Tri-X purple negative problem?
I'm interested only in reports of real world experience here, not armchair speculation.
And yes, I have read discussions of the effects of fixer strength, fix and wash times...

Chris
 
I presoaked tri-x 120 yesterday and got rid of some, but not all, of the magenta stuff. I also used Permawash after the first wash, and even that did not get rid of it all. I haven't printed yet, but it's a drag, I don't like it, and I was trying to like tri-x. Back to HP5....

Dave
 
It's the anti-halation layer. A lot of it comes out in the prewash, but not all. I haven't printed these negs, so I'm not sure if there will be any impact on the contrast of a wet print. Some people have noticed it in scanning. There has been a lot of discussion of this on the RFF.
Dave
 
I noticed it more in other films, have you tried just fixing some scraps and seeing if it is inherent in the base?

You might try two hardening fix baths and a good wash.

If you are scanning B&W , why would the scan pick it up any more than the antihalation in 35mm films? I recall seeing the pink or magenta more in 120 -- which should have less antihalation necessary?

I probably imagined for a long time that the gray color of 35mm film bases rendered a bit different range of gray scale than MF films-- sort of like a fogged or flashed MF film, but I seem to be the only one so inclined to think so.

Regards, John
 
I do it most of the time, especially with colour. I'm not convinced that it makes a huge difference especially with long development times, I like to do it with the more fragile emulsions with non hardened gelatin–they seem to be better although this is subjective.

I doubt it will help or hinder the up take of actual developer, initial agitation followed by a tap will be fine, anyhow developer doesn't start working soon as it hits the film, there is a natural inertia period that varies depending on the developing agent and the sulphite concentration.

Also just a note, the colour that comes out isn't just anti halation dye. Other dyes are acutance dyes trimmers and spectral response modifiers–lots of organic dyes in films...
 
I don't pre-wash black and white - see Kodak: How to Develop and Print Black and White Film, AJ-3, 2005, which does not include pre-wash. I do bring the tank/reel/film up to the developing temperature before developing and this has provides excellent, consistent results. Pre-washing will leave residual water in the tank which will dilute the developer.

I do pre-wash in color developing because the C-41 chemical manufacturer's include this in their instructions (Unicolor, Rollei Digibase). Each film turns the pre-wash water a different color which represents dyes that will get into the developer if not removed during pre-wash. But I am aware that others claim pre-washing results in less density and less vivid colors. I have been hapy with the results including pre-wash (negative density looks fine and colors are true).
 
A lot of interesting replies. I have presoaks since the 1970s. When I was using Plux-X as my main film. I now use HP5, and to tell you the truth, I haven't really thought about not prewashing. There seems to be an opinion that prewashing can effect developing time. I don't know, but I shall do a roll or 2 without prewashing. but keep everything else constant as before.

I also process in Rodinal 1:25. But it seems like I have to give a 400 film and exposure of ISO 100 with standard agitation 10 seconds every minute, to get negatives that have a good contrast. I do scan, so even a slightly soft negative is okay.
 
I generally pre-wash before stand developing and when using film with a whopper of an anti-halation layer (like ADOX 25). Does it really make a difference...good question. It works for me so I leave well enough alone 🙂
 
Generally I dont pre-wash, certainly not with 2 bath developers or extremely dilute developers (Rodinal 1:100/1:200) and in most cases it does not make a difference.
With certain developers it does make a difference, PMK and Pyrocat HD are two. I tested the Pyrocat HD with and without prewash (5 min cont. agitation) and the density change was significant.
Most modern films, as stated, probably does not need it with stock developers (D76 etc), but when you get into the extreme dilutions you need to compensate for the additional water from the pre-washed film (anything from 4-6 ml/roll). The anti-halation layer should not affect the developing process (it is on the "back" of the film) and with stand and semi-stand developing you leave the film in it long enough anyway.
It is a way of getting rid of some dust though - cameras tend to accumulate it and it then, of course, it migrates to the film (and with unswerving accuracy ends of in the areas that are difficult to spot!).
The trick is to be consistent, either do it all the time or not at all. At least then you have removed one variable in the process.
 
I've processed Tri-X with and without pre-washes... I didn't see any differences, but I guess the quality of the water and the developers used may influence your own decision to pre-wash.
 
ChrisPlatt said:
Has anyone found that a pre-wash helps reduce the Tri-X purple negative problem?
I'm interested only in reports of real world experience here, not armchair speculation.
And yes, I have read discussions of the effects of fixer strength, fix and wash times...

Chris
Click to expand...

I thought this would have something to do with a pre-wash, but I just compared a bunch of different rolls of film that I shot, including my first roll of Tri-X which I didn't pre-wash, to all the ones later which I did. I started pre-washing about five rolls in when I read in a book from the library that it helps your development come out more consistently, though I'm not sure if it's the pre-wash or just my experience that has made things come out better.

I think the purple has more to do with Kodak's celluloid than something to do with the emulsion or dye, because TMax is equally as purple, as is P3200. It also explains why all Kodak film is equally curly. I love the emulsion for Tri-X, but I much prefer the actual celluloid of all Ilford and Foma films as they dry much flatter, especially Ilford.

I generally put a pre-wash in my film when I get my water to 68 so I can make fresh Photo-flo, stop bath, and for mixing up a developer like Rodinal and just leave it in there without agitation until I get everything else up to temp.
 
I prewash my film for 30ish seconds using distilled water.

I mix my chemicals using only distilled water. A friend once asked me if I had any ideas why the grain in his Tri-X negatives was larger than it used to be. Turns out he was mixing his chemicals with (city) tap water.

I do wash with tap water once the developing process os complete - once the fiplm is developed the grain size is locked in and won't be affected by the water qualiry or composition.
 
What some people should understand is that the color disappears the more one washes the film... After fixing.

But yeah, there's a satisfaction to prewash the dye and see it go into the drain.

That being said, I never prewash. It's mainly bad practice.
 
As stated by Roger and others above, for a large majority of development regimes, a pre-wash accomplishes two things: (1) it wastes time; (2) it wastes water.
 
I live in the tropics so a pre-wash brings my film down to the right temperature: 20 deg C is 10 degrees below room temp around here.

As to the above, I often find categorical statements with regards black and white development to be unhelpful.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom