Trius
Waiting on Maitani
No wonder I don't like Bud. 😛
The best Water for mixing your Developer?
- Thread starter Pirate
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 56
- Views 9K
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
Is that for all film processing or for colour only?
venchka
Veteran
Which water? I find that the wet variety gives me good results.
YMMV.
Wayne
YMMV.
Wayne
x-ray
Veteran
Chlorine in water forms an acid which is a lower PH and allowing it to go out of solution over a couple of days may raise the ph not lower it. It would return more to neutral not alkaline.
x-ray
Veteran
You should avoid deionized for all processes. It is ok for photoflo, acid stop bath and acid based fixers and not the alkaline fixers like TF4 or 5 from photographers formulary.
x-ray
Veteran
Chris,
What gain would there be for Kodak to lie? If they tell people to use tap water and the results were inferior it would hurt kodaks business because photographers would think their products were inferior. Most of the Kodak reps of old were ex professional photographers with extensive experience and training by Kodak. In my experience with Kodak tech reps and Fujis for that matter over my career Have never lied to my knowledge. Ever rep either knew the answer or contacted Kodak in Rochester and had the answer from the people that developed or worked on the particular product in question.
As to medications in the water, yes they're in there not just from dumping pills in the toilet it happens if you take medication and go to the bathroom. Your body doesn't filter everything out and it goes into the water system. You eat foods with hormones, insecticides and such plus put fertilizers, insecticides and other chemicals on vegetables, fruits and the lawn. All of this eventually winds up in the water.
In the mid 70s I worked for a major nuclear corporation and the US government. While I was at the facility very dangerous quantities of cesium 137, strontium 90 and cobalt 60 were released into the nearby river which went down stream to the lake where it's estimated more than 700 curies of cesium 137 wound up for the bottom feeding fish to ingest.
Despite all of this Kodak says to use ordinary old tap water. After running a hundred thousand or so rolls and sheets of film plus prints in different cities I don't think I have seen any variation due to inconsistent water. Human error plays a much greater role in my opinion.
What gain would there be for Kodak to lie? If they tell people to use tap water and the results were inferior it would hurt kodaks business because photographers would think their products were inferior. Most of the Kodak reps of old were ex professional photographers with extensive experience and training by Kodak. In my experience with Kodak tech reps and Fujis for that matter over my career Have never lied to my knowledge. Ever rep either knew the answer or contacted Kodak in Rochester and had the answer from the people that developed or worked on the particular product in question.
As to medications in the water, yes they're in there not just from dumping pills in the toilet it happens if you take medication and go to the bathroom. Your body doesn't filter everything out and it goes into the water system. You eat foods with hormones, insecticides and such plus put fertilizers, insecticides and other chemicals on vegetables, fruits and the lawn. All of this eventually winds up in the water.
In the mid 70s I worked for a major nuclear corporation and the US government. While I was at the facility very dangerous quantities of cesium 137, strontium 90 and cobalt 60 were released into the nearby river which went down stream to the lake where it's estimated more than 700 curies of cesium 137 wound up for the bottom feeding fish to ingest.
Despite all of this Kodak says to use ordinary old tap water. After running a hundred thousand or so rolls and sheets of film plus prints in different cities I don't think I have seen any variation due to inconsistent water. Human error plays a much greater role in my opinion.
x-ray
Veteran
I did a little research from official sources not opinions expressed on the web.
Photographers formulary says use distilled water. I found the Acufine mixing instructions and they said only use distilled water if you have a high PH (alkaline) water supply. In reading several Kodak data sheets on the web Kodak never references distilled water. They only say mix in water. If distilled was important they would say so.
I found references from non official sources even recommending mixing in deionized water which is an absolute no no due to a measurably lower PH.
Realistically it probably doesn't make much if any difference, distilled or tap.
Photographers formulary says use distilled water. I found the Acufine mixing instructions and they said only use distilled water if you have a high PH (alkaline) water supply. In reading several Kodak data sheets on the web Kodak never references distilled water. They only say mix in water. If distilled was important they would say so.
I found references from non official sources even recommending mixing in deionized water which is an absolute no no due to a measurably lower PH.
Realistically it probably doesn't make much if any difference, distilled or tap.
Chuck Albertson
Well-known
Except that the Formulary's instructions for TF-4 recommends using distilled water for mix-up. They say it reduces the smell.
I use distilled water for mixing Xtol, because I've found it collapses a lot less often than when using tap water. Kodak's instructions But I use tap water for all other developers.
jtm6
Well-known
Ah yes. I knew it would return to neutral whether it was originally alkaline or acidic but thanks for pointing out the acid. I think I forgot that long before I started dechlorinating tap water. Are you specifically referring to hypochlorous acid?
Sparrow
Veteran
Sounds a bit of a story to me ... I simply don't believe water that one would be prepared to drink could possibly effect development. Just consider how low the dilution of the contaminants would be; how could an amount that one cannot taste possibly make any difference when compared to the amount of photo-chemicals that are being added?
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Dear Chris,
There is absolutely nothing wrong with using distilled water, but you are letting your hatred of corporations cloud your judgement. I have talked to Kodak, Ilford and Paterson (the late Geoffrey Crawley) about this. These are people I know well, who would not lie to me. These are not low-level travelling salesmen.
One of my friends at Ilford (who has since left the company, but is still a good friend), said exactly the same as x-ray: "Why would we lie? Spite? Do people think we WANT them to get poor results?"
You are also being extremely parochial in your outlook. Yes, you may be able to get distilled water cheaply. In most of the world, it's hard to find and expensive, and de-ionized water is sold instead (which is effectively equivalent to distilled water for photographic purposes if it's done with the usual resin exchange). It's not a lot more expensive here in France: maybe twice the price. But in the UK it was (and from the post below, still is) absurdly expensive, sold by the litre for topping up steam irons and car batteries. When I moved back from California to the UK in 1992, it was about ten times the US price, and much harder to find. There are no doubt places where it is effectively unavailable.
In other words, it's partly money, and it's very much hassle. Why would any sane person waste time and money on something they don't need to do? In the unlikely event that they find, after a simple test, that they DO need to use it, fine; but if not, quite honestly, why would they bother?
The classical advice, in case of problems, was to use water that had been boiled and allowed to go cold; but here are a couple of quotes from people who REALLY knew what they were talking about. First L.P. Clerc, Photography Theory and Practice, Pitman, London and New York, 2nd. ed. 1937, page 185: "As a general rule, therefore, distilled water is not necessary for the preparation of photographic baths, in spite of instructions to the contrary which are given in various formulae." Second, Glafkides, Chimie et Physique Photographiques, Paul Montel, Paris 1967, page 70, "A défaut de l'eau bouilli, on peut cependant prendre de l'eau ordinaire, sans inconvénient grave". Coote doesn't even mention it, and although Haist says it's a good idea, he most certainly doesn't say it's essential. In fact, Haist is the ONLY major writer in the 'Anglo-Saxon' world (as the French call it) who even mentions the question, and he worked for Kodak, whom you seem determined to paint as the Great Satan. You might also care to look up 'Water' in The Focal Encyclopedia, at least prior to the 4th edition, where the subject was effectively dropped. Nor does it appear in The Oxford Companion to the Photograph.
Haist (I've met him) is one of many REAL experts who doesn't believe in making anything more complicated than it needs to be. This is why, to me, to me, the whole argument smacks of Internet paranoia and the belief, widely held by Zonies and others who look for a precision that does not and cannot exist, that the most difficult and tiresome way of doing something is always the best.
Cheers,
R.
kanzlr
Hexaneur
summary: it depends 🙂
Gabriel M.A.
My Red Dot Glows For You
Gabriel M.A.
My Red Dot Glows For You
Evidently. I have used distilled water to mix my chemicals, but recent research suggests that knowledge, rather than speculation, get you them facts, and straight. 😉
Seems like I should go back to filtered water for development chemicals (developer, stop, fixer) and distilled for photo-flo. Although I'm sticking to distilled for Diafine; I have found that doing it that way I get consistent results and zero crud in the negatives. With Diafine. Repeated for speed/fast readers. Although after a couple of sentences the nuances get lost.
Anyway, yes: Twitter tweets are effective for Twitter, not for photography instruction.
Nomad Z
Well-known
I bought, amongst other things, 5L of distilled water a couple of years ago, for making silver nitrate solution. Cost me 9 GBP. Just went back to the reagent.co.uk site to see what would cost now. 9 quid for the water, 8.31 for delivery, all plus VAT, comes to 20.77 GBP, or about 32USD.
Tadhgo
Established
Calzone
Gear Whore #1
I happen to work in a lab where I can get 18 mega ohm chemically pure water that is processed via reverse osmosis. It is HPLC grade water that is used for manufacturing drugs.
It is so pure and chemically reactive that it is not really a good idea to drink because it has the potential to damage living tissue.
I use this water to mix my developers (mostly Diafine) and for the water rinse before fixing.
I use NYC tap water for final rinsing.
Cal
Similar threads
