Rinsing film, does temperature really matter?

I've actually had reticulation caused by cold water washing - but it was 30 years ago with an old-style fragile emulsion. Today I use water at tap temperature, which is often about 13-14C (dev & fix at 20C), and I don't get any problems.

PS: As an old-timer brought up on "wash in running water for an hour", the Ilford method makes me twitchy (especially when I see other people's Tri-X negatives that are still very purple while mine are near colourless). But I've accepted a compromise - I now do it the Ilford way, but with a 5-minute soak in clean water between each step, and one extra cycle.
 
lshofstra said:
So you're supposed to rinse film at approximately the developing temperature to prevent the emulsion cracking up

Modern emulsions are very forgiving, I have never seen reticulation happening because of a small difference in temperature. In fact I once was playing around and wanted to cause reticulation in purpose and I had to try several times until I really washed the film with the hottest water my bathroom can produce and got it (I "wasted" four sheets of 4x5)...

As for the time you need to wash I believe it depends a lot on teh kind of fixer you use. For non-hardening fixer I think you don't need more than what IlFord recommends.

GLF
 
May I pose a related question?
Given washing is less effective at low temperatures:

(a) wouldn't the beneficial effects of a stop bath (in washing off the developer) be enhanced by increasing its temperature a few degrees? or
(b) would this tend to speed up the chemical effects of the residual developer on the flim, thereby enhancing the development and so producing the opposite effect?

Or--as I suspect--would (a) and (b) tend to cancel each other out, resulting in no or no significant difference? Or have I missed something (as is likely...)?

Thanks,
D.O'K.
 
I think for modern films, the exact temperature is only important for developer, where it controls developing time.

I try to keep my developer at 20 C, but my stop and fix are at room temperature, which is probably around 23 - 26 C. My wash water is about 15 - 20 C. Never had any problems.

As for film washing, I just fill the tank, agitate, dump. I do this about 15 - 20 times.
 
D.O'K. said:
May I pose a related question?
Given washing is less effective at low temperatures:

(a) wouldn't the beneficial effects of a stop bath (in washing off the developer) be enhanced by increasing its temperature a few degrees? or
(b) would this tend to speed up the chemical effects of the residual developer on the flim, thereby enhancing the development and so producing the opposite effect?

Or--as I suspect--would (a) and (b) tend to cancel each other out, resulting in no or no significant difference? Or have I missed something (as is likely...)?

Thanks,
D.O'K.

I guess you do wash better and faster if you use slightly warmer water and if you use a stop bath (I know some people don't) I don't think this should cause any "late development" as all the developer should be already killed by the acid bath.

In fact I read somewhere in a HC-110 article (which I cannot find right now) a chap recomending 24C/75F for all films claiming that keeping the film less time in the water makes less demage to teh emulsion. Honestly I tried to run some test and could see no difference either way (which if true would still make 24C a better temperature if you use low dilutions as I normally do, being at least a bit faster).

GLF
 
Generally, you will achieve the highest quality and lowest apparent grain (prior to experimentation) by simply making sure all the solutions are at the same temperature (developer working temp, usually).

This includes the pre-wet, developer, post-developer wash in lieu of stop bath (Ilford no longer recommends stop for film), fix, hypo clear and a constant temp final wash.

BTW: Orbit Bath has been discontinued. Sub is Edwal Hypo Eliminator, or Heico Permawash, all liquids.

Variations in temperature can cause reticulation, a result of grain clumping due to these temperature inconsistencies.
 
My question to Ron Mowery:

Do you have any insight as to how the length of
processing time might affect grain and acutance with
respect to b&w films? What I am referring to is an
opinion by at least one pro I know who believes
that emulsion swelling due to more extended wet time
can affect grain characteristics. I know of no
research in this regard, but perhaps it has been done.​

Ron's reply:

I can say that swell affects development rate more
than it does grain. Hardness affects grain and swell
more than development time.

Basically, as you incrsase development time you get
higher contrast and higher mid tone speed (density)
and that contributes to the grain, but it is probably
about the same if you normalized it for density.

In that latter sense then, you can say development can
appear to increase grain by increasing image contrast.
Remember though that grain measurements start low,
increase with density and then decrease again as you
pack the developed silver closer together. This is
normal because the closer the silver image is, the
less apparent grain.

I know of no experimental data that shows that
development related swell changes grain, but all of
the above are observations on speed, grain and
contrast that we made at equivalent swell. And, as
you decrease swell, you decrease development. If you
increase the development back to the same density,
then grain goes up again.

Bottom line is that you get normal grain from normal
development, and get worse grain from overdevelopment,
but it is unrelated to swell, instead it is an effect
of overdevelopment.​

My follow-up:

Can I also conclude that swell as a result of extended
wash time wouldalso not materially affect grain
characteristics?​

Ron's reply:

Read the article by Dick Dickerson and Sylvia Zawadski
in the latest Photo Techniques.​

I may do an experiment (with sheet film) to see if I can detect any difference with extended washing vs. the Ilford regimen. I don't doubt Ron's conclusion, but sacrificing two sheets of film might make a fun little experiment.
 
Ok, thanks for all the anwers so far. I have enjoyed reading them. However, I would conclude that reticulation is simply not a problem with modern emulsions unless you're prepared to go to extremes in order to get it - and even then it's pretty elusive. So I'll just use cold tap water if there are other things I have to see to, but I will use the Ilford method whenever I have time, might as well save water....
 
I use a two reel stainless steel tank. I find that I can take a gallon of water ( I refill an empty poland spring bottle) and use it for pre-wash, hc-110 dil b, stop, fix, the ilford wash method and still have enough for photo flow.

The temp stays the same through out. I'll turn on the tap to wash the sink down. That's it..
 
A couple of comments on some thing presented in this thread:

1) Ilford no longer recommends a stop bath for film. Wash with processing temp water.

2) Ilford also no longer recommends a hardening fixer with film, their thought is that the emulsion is hardened enough in manufacture.

3) I like the idea of a short, developer temp prewet for film, I feel it helps get the developer in contact with the emulsion more evenly and may reduce or eliminate bubbles.

4) Many years ago, there was a film called H & W Control film, as I remember and understood it, a high-contrast fine grained film which when processed in H&W control developer produced extremely fine-grained results. One of their mantras was 'minimum wet time processing', with a fairly short process time, etc., helped reduce emulsion swelling due to moisture abosorption. It was distributed by Honeywell (Pentax camera distributor for years) I think.

And has been noted above, it's all a personal thing anyway, if it works for you swing with it.

A note: there is some testing going on with Diafine developer, and apparently even Kodak is singing Diafine's praises these days. More due out on this later, I understand.
 
Roger, or anyone else: about that bit saying Ilford doesn't recommend stop bath anymore - then what do you do? I mean, ok, you rinse with water, but for how long? Or do you just use one tank full and invert a couple of times? I thought the idea of stopbath was to provide more exact developing times (by ending them abruptly)? Just asking, stopping stopbath feels, dunno, kind of unnatural to me....But I'll try if anyone can be more specific...
 
Revisited this thread after coming across the Ilford method of rinsing in The Film Developing Cookbook (Steve Anchell and Bill Troop, it's great). They advocate leaving the tank to sit for 5 minutes after 5, 10 and 20 inversions before draining it. Stands to reason in light of what others haver remarked on this thread.
In case anyone should want to look it up: page 107-108 (only one edition in print I think).
 
Back
Top Bottom