Photo Forum / Film Photography / Darkroom / January 2008
B/W print turned mottled gold
|
|
Thread rating:  |
Jim Stewart - 11 Dec 2007 16:31 GMT I'm in trouble.
I sent my mother-in-law a really nice B/W print that I made and after about a year, the black areas turned an ugly mottled gold color.
She wants a new print and I need to know what to do so that the problem doesn't happen again.
I used Ilford chemistry and Mitsubishi Gekko paper.
Thor Lancelot Simon - 11 Dec 2007 16:40 GMT >I'm in trouble. > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >what to do so that the problem doesn't happen >again. This is probably a problem with fixation or washing. Either the print is not adequately fixed (less likely; this would usually give some silvering instead of fading to a gold color) or was not adequately washed after it was fixed.
The other possibility is that the print was mounted with materials that are not acid-free, which will cause fading which is visually similar to fading from improper washing.
Revise your fixing and washing steps of your process so they are standard (don't use Ilford's fast-processing recommendations with non-Ilford papers) and ensure that the new print is archivally mounted.
 Signature Thor Lancelot Simon tls@rek.tjls.com
"The inconsistency is startling, though admittedly, if consistency is to be abandoned or transcended, there is no problem." - Noam Chomsky
Lawrence Akutagawa - 11 Dec 2007 20:03 GMT > I'm in trouble. > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > I used Ilford chemistry and Mitsubishi Gekko > paper. Gold? Perhaps more dull yellowish? Like spots of silver tarnish? If so, print is not adequately fixed/washed. Make sure you are using fresh fixer. And it certainly does not hurt to tone with highly diluted selenium mix.
Nicholas O. Lindan - 11 Dec 2007 20:12 GMT > after about a year, > the black areas turned an ugly mottled gold > color. I used Ilford chemistry and Mitsubishi Gekko > paper. This happens to RC paper - the reason for it is a matter of debate. Titanium dioxide in the paper reacting with UV light is one current suspect, sulfur from pollution or the mount material is another.
The history of RC materials is one of problems followed by Kodak/Agfa/Ilford/xxx claiming 'we have fixed the problem' followed by either the reemergence of the old problem or the creation of an entirely new problem. I greet any explanation or solution with suspicion.
Agfa RC was very prone to bronzing. I haven't seen any on Ilford RC but that may be a matter of luck/time.
To keep it from happening again you might try using Ilford paper. Err on the safe side: use fresh fixer for 5 minutes, a hypo eliminator, wash for 1/2 hour. There are all sorts of fast processing methods but the old methods are known to not contribute to the problem.
If the picture is in a frame then make sure you use acid free board for the mat and mount board - "4-ply 100% cotton museum board" is considered the safest: the core of the board should be pure white, not grey.
 Signature Nicholas O. Lindan, Cleveland, Ohio Darkroom Automation: F-Stop Timers, Enlarging Meters http://www.darkroomautomation.com/index.htm n o lindan at ix dot netcom dot com
Pieter - 11 Dec 2007 22:38 GMT I don't know that RC has a history or a current problem like this, but I think the suggestions offered below are excellent. I immediately thought of incomplete fixing or incomplete washing, but mounting materials could also be a problem as suggested ny Nicholas below. I have never had a problem myself, but I frequently test fixer and fix with a timer then use an effective print washer. Hypo eliminator would remove any fixer left on the paper. I have only seen strange coloration and fading occur as the result of chemical contamination, usually in group darkroom settings.
>> after about a year, >> the black areas turned an ugly mottled gold [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] > safest: the core of the board should be pure white, > not grey. ____ - 01 Jan 2008 03:06 GMT By accounts I have reference to; that is personal conversations and experience some RC Papers from 1980's and before do have this issue. Especially machine printed RC silver based papers- Like Agfa RC's.
Not fixing properly always can produce the issue: bronzing, the silver will migrate out to the surface if the fixer does not seal the top most silver molecules, having an airspace between paper surface and glass also seems rather important.
Its probably also a result of how certain papers were once made with regard to the placement of the silver layer within the emulsion.
> I don't know that RC has a history or a current problem like this, but I > think the suggestions offered below are excellent. I immediately thought of [quoted text clipped - 39 lines] > > safest: the core of the board should be pure white, > > not grey.
 Signature Reality is a picture perfected and never looking back.
darkroommike - 23 Dec 2007 20:22 GMT I use a lot or Gekko RC and haven't seen this happen I do have a Polycontrast !!! contact sheet in hand that has started turning, I know for a fact it was inadequately fixed (old fixer) and washed. It was done where I work and the fixer was always left in the tray. Prints I do at home in my darkroom do not exhibit this issue since I process and wash one print at a time.
>> after about a year, >> the black areas turned an ugly mottled gold [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] > safest: the core of the board should be pure white, > not grey. Richard Knoppow - 12 Dec 2007 04:55 GMT > I'm in trouble. > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > I used Ilford chemistry and Mitsubishi Gekko > paper. This is called silvering out and is common on very old photographs. It comes from oxidation of the silver image. The silver oxide is very finely devided and can migrate to the surface, where it can be again reduced to metallic silver by other polutants. Very finely devided silver (colloidal silver) is bright yellow, hense the gold color. The problem comes from oxidants in the atmosphere or from mounting materials. Sources of peroxides are plentiful, automobile exhaust, vapours from fresh paint, many other sources. Well fixed and washed prints are vulnerable. Actually, a very small amount of hypo left in the emulsion acts to protect the image by creating a layer of silver sulfide on the individual silver grains. However, a much better way of protecting the image is toning. The best toners for image protection are sulfiding toners, selenium toners, and gold toner. While it was found that Kodak Rapid Selenium Toner, in very high dilutions, was not effective for microfilm a stronger dilution _is_ effective for pictorial films and prints where some change in image color or density is acceptable. According to Dr. Douglas Nishimura, of the Image Permanence Institute of the Rochester Institute of Technology, a minimum of three minutes in a solution of 1:9 KRST will protect the image. Another very good toner is Kodak Brown Toner, a polysulfide toner. Polysulfide tones all densities evenly so any amount of toning which results in a visible effect on the image will protect it. Gold toning is similar but is expensive so its not much used although its still the standard for microfilm. While inadequate fixing and washing can cause image degradation the effect is most often a brown or yellow staining. Lack of complete fixing causes overall staining because the remaining insoluble reaction products are distributed throughout the emulsion. Inadequate washing can result in an overall stain but often shows up more as an imagewise stain. While both stains can be removed the process can further damage the image and the resusults are not always permanent. Once an incompletely fixed image is allowed to age for a few weeks it can no longer be completely fixed by re-fixing because the reaction products continue to change in the emulsion, eventually becoming impossible to remove. Despite the problems with inadequate fixing and washing oxidation of the image is caused by external polution and well fixed and washed images are particularly vulnerable. About 15 years ago some RC papers had problems with image oxidation caused by peroxides being emmitted by the titanium dioxide used in the reflective layer. This problem was solved by adding peroxide scavengers to the reflective coating and emulsion. The scavengers are self-regenerating so they remain effective essentially for the life of the print. These same peroxides also attacked the plastic layer in which they are suspended causing it to crack and flake. This has not been a problem for RC for many years now.
Silvering out can sometimes be removed by a mild silver bleach, a treatment similar to removing dichroic fog. The safest method is to treat the print is a bath of fresh rapid fixer to which is added citric acid in the amount of about 15grams per liter. The print must be watched carefully because this treatment will also bleach out the image.
However, the best solution for your problem is to make new prints and tone them as suggested above. The toning will protect the prints against even pretty severe oxidative attack.
 Signature --- Richard Knoppow Los Angeles, CA, USA dickburk@ix.netcom.com
Richard Knoppow - 12 Dec 2007 05:49 GMT >> I'm in trouble. >> [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > 1:9 KRST will protect the image. Another very good toner > is Kodak Brown Toner, a polysulfide toner. I should have stated this more clearly. Tone in KRST at a dilution no weaker than 1:9 for a time of not less than 3 minutes. This should give protection to all parts of the print or negative. The problem with KRST is that it tends to tone the more dense areas of the image more quickly than the less dense parts. So, when toned according to the old recommendations, that is, in a 1:19 solution for a couple of minutes, as when combining KRST with a wash aid, the toning is not sufficient to protect the shadow areas of negatives or the highlight areas of prints. The high dilution method was first suggested because it did not significantly change the structure, density, or color of the image, important properties when toning microfilm but less important to pictorial film or prints. Toning according to the current recommendation _will_ result in some change to the image as will toning in KBT as suggested. Toning of pictorial materials is less critical than toning of microfilm so some restrictions which apply to the latter do not apply to the materials we mostly use. Again, gold toning is quite effective and does not cause much change to the image appearance but the toners tend to be expensive. Gold tends to generate a neutral to blue image and, for this reason, may be desirable for some prints. In general, the warmer toned the original image the more it change in appearance in any toner, becoming more yellow in sulfiding toners and more blue in gold toner. However, the color is dependant on many factors, so, for instance, microfilm does not become sepia colored in KBT but rather shifts toward blue.
 Signature --- Richard Knoppow Los Angeles, CA, USA dickburk@ix.netcom.com
Geoffrey S. Mendelson - 12 Dec 2007 05:59 GMT > new prints and tone them as suggested above. The toning will > protect the prints against even pretty severe oxidative > attack. Having similar problems with early digital prints, we got into the habit of spraying them with a fixative designed for art work.
Would this work?
Geoff.
 Signature Geoffrey S. Mendelson, Jerusalem, Israel gsm@mendelson.com N3OWJ/4X1GM IL Voice: (07)-7424-1667 U.S. Voice: 1-215-821-1838 Visit my 'blog at http://geoffstechno.livejournal.com/
jjs - 12 Dec 2007 12:56 GMT Richard Knoppow wrote: [...]
So very well expressed. Thank you for that, Richard.
(I thought maybe the OP had The Mydas Touch.)
Jim Stewart - 12 Dec 2007 16:34 GMT > Richard Knoppow wrote: > [...] > > So very well expressed. Thank you for that, Richard. > > (I thought maybe the OP had The Mydas Touch.) Thanks to everybody, especially Richard and Nickolas. I *really* appreciate the details.
I will be remaking the print with Ilford paper and toning as Richard described.
Thanks again, -jim
Richard Knoppow - 12 Dec 2007 22:06 GMT >> new prints and tone them as suggested above. The toning >> will [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > Geoff. At one time it was recommended that prints be coated with laquer, in fact, Kodak used to sell print laquer. However, although it may protect surfaces from contact with air this is not always effective since oxidizing material can reach the print through the support plus the coating makes it difficult if not impossible to treat the print should that become necessary. In the case of RC prints it was found that covering the prints caused a trapping of the gasses emitted by the reflective layer. This may no longer be the case for paper containing the scavengers and anti-oxidants but is still not recommended. Remember that the digital images are composed of dyes or pigments, not metallic silver. It may be that laquer would be suitable for color prints were the images are composed of dyes. The best protection for silver prints is to tone them. I did not mention in my other post the use of protective agents such as Agfa Sistan or Fuji Ag-Guard. The Agfa products is discontinued but may still be found and, AFAIK, Fuji does not sell Ag-Guard outside of Japan. They are not identical but both use substances which are supposed to stabilize the image without having any effect on its appearance. Fuji released some research on its product indicating it was effective but less so than toning. AFAIK, there was never any serious research done for Sistan although there is anecdotal evidence that it works. However, Sistan is sensitive to the amount left in the emulsion, too much results in staining.
 Signature --- Richard Knoppow Los Angeles, CA, USA dickburk@ix.netcom.com
|
|
|