White flakes in my Dektol ?
John Ceccon
Why do I end up with white flakes in my Dektol after I mix up a batch. I am
mixing the stuff as per the directions. As the powder disolves, there are these
white flakes that look like crystals of the powder. I have been using a coffee
filter to get them out. Can somebody please tell me why I am getting these
flakes and will they cause a problem if I don't get rid of them.
Thanks
John Ceccon
Jean-David Beyer
I would suspect impurities in your water, or just plain hardness.
You could add the appropriate amount of Kodak's Anti-Calcium if you
have some (6 grams/litre of stock), but I would not bother. You
might try filtering the water prior to making up your solution.
If that fixes it, you should seriously consider filtering your
water also for the chemicals you use to process negatives.
Basically, though, if the developer works satisfactorily, I would
forget about it. I run all my chemicals through a (fresh) cotton
ball in a funnel as I bottle them. We are not mixing chemicals for
hypodermic injection after all.
--
Jean-David Beyer
Shrewsbury, New Jersey
MarBau
Totally normal to get undisovable white flakes in Dektol after its mixed.
I just let it sit in the bottle a day or two and then pour the lot lot
thru a coffee filter, to get anything that hasn't disolved.
I've been using Dektol for years and always gotten the leftover flakes, so
don't sweat it too much!!
Mark.
The above thoughts are opinions, flame me for errors in fact but do not flame me for having an opinion.
Kathleen Lytle
John Ceccon (z...@inetworld.net) wrote:
: Why do I end up with white flakes in my Dektol after I mix up a batch.
I've had dektol danduff in every batch I've ever mixed, and that's a lot
of batches. I've used filtered water, bottled water, you name it. I don't
filter it out. I just mix my stock 1+2 when I'm ready to use it and have
never had spots on prints, uneven development or whatever.
Richard Knoppow
fin...@wheel.dcn.davis.ca.us (Kathleen Lytle) wrote:
Same here. By the time the stuff has cooled enough to use the
flakes disappear. I get a small residual of undissolved material with
most powdered chemicals with the same result, whatever it is seems to
go into solution given a few hours of storage.
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, Ca.
dick...@ix.netcom.com
LFORMAT
I have found a similar problem with RA-4 color developer. I simply use a
paper towel or a non-woven supermarket purchased wiper to filter the
developer before use. On color paper, the contamination sticks as little
specks of brilliant color. They look like pieces of broken soap bubbles
-- very pretty -- and they ruin the print.
Try using distilled water. As I recall Kodak recommended that I NOT use
distilled water for RA-4 developer. Call Kodak at 800-242-2424.
Manny
Eugene Hsieh
re: White flakes in my Dektol
> I have found a similar problem with RA-4 color developer. I simply use a
> paper towel or a non-woven supermarket purchased wiper to filter the
> developer before use. On color paper, the contamination sticks as little
> specks of brilliant color. They look like pieces of broken soap bubbles
> -- very pretty -- and they ruin the print.
My two cents worth after just trying it once...
I got interesting white flakes in my Dektol and D76 at stock
concentrations. (I didn't pay attention to the temp. I must admit.) I
left them there and when I diluted the entire amounts 1+3 most of the
flakes disappeared.
Eugene
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
To succeed in politics it is often
necessary to rise above one's principles.
+--------------------------------!!!!!------+
/ www.interlog.com/~eug Eugene |9 9| Hsieh \
+----------------------------------( " )--------+
| ////// // // //// Suite \O/ 1009 |
| // // // // 25 Saint Mary St. |
| //// // // // /// Toronto M4Y 1R2 |
| // // // // // Tel: 416-925-4547 |
| ////// //// //// Fax: 416-925-0667 |
+-----------------------------------------------+
LLenkus
I too get the white flakes.
However, I notice that I don't if I kick up the temperature of the water
an extra 10 degrees. It may be a horrible thing to do, but I haven't
noticed a difference.
Neal Findley
>
> I got interesting white flakes in my Dektol and D76 at stock
> concentrations. (I didn't pay attention to the temp. I must admit.) I
> left them there and when I diluted the entire amounts 1+3 most of the
> flakes disappeared.
>
> Eugene
Sometimes conditions are such that the liquid becomes saturated prior to
all the solid powder being absorbed - leaving the white flakes in
suspension as you described. Usually when you dilute the stock solution
then the white flakes become absorbed as the liquid is no longer saturated.
-Neal
gpackard
In Article<01bc319d$65e71200$fc8792cf@mary>, <nealf...@worldnet.att.net> writes:
> Path: news1.stny.lrun.com!news-out.internetmci.com!pull-feed.internetmci.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!worldnet.att.net!newsadm
> From: "Neal Findley" <nealf...@worldnet.att.net>
> Newsgroups: rec.photo.darkroom
> Subject: Re: White flakes in my Dektol ?
> Date: 16 Mar 1997 00:05:50 GMT
> Organization: AT&T WorldNet Services
> Lines: 14
> Message-ID: <01bc319d$65e71200$fc8792cf@mary>
> References: <5fsdjs$k...@frog.inetworld.net> <19970315042...@ladder01.news.aol.com> <332AE9...@interlog.com>
> NNTP-Posting-Host: 207.146.135.252
> X-Newsreader: Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1155
Does the same thing happen with XTOL? I have noticed white flakes in mine
even after diluting 1:3. Anyone know what's going on?
Gary
Brian M. Hankins
The white flakes are probably a precipitate that forms when the chemicals are mixed up. I've head these form before and usually they disappear when you dilute the solution. With d76 it is VERY important that you mix at the right temperature to ensure
that all the chemicals will disolve. The higher temp of the water allows for a more saturated solution than would be possible at a lower temperature. Usually. if you mix at the right temps., no white flakes will form. And don't use the solution if it
does have flatkes in it or it will ruin your negatives....
--Brian Hankins
Richard Knoppow
I've had some luck eliminating this with both D-76 and Dektol by
keeping the solution temperature up to 125°F until everything is
dissolved. I suspect that as the water cools during mixing some of
the chemicals either come out of solution or the temp gets too low for
some of it to dissolve.
Kathleen Lytle
gpackard (gpac...@stny.lrun.com) wrote:
: Does the same thing happen with XTOL? I have noticed white flakes in mine
It's Kodak messing with our heads! Dektol, Xtol, similar names, mere
coincidence? I think not!
wi...@isrc.net
Metol doesn't dissolve well in the presence of soduim sulfite. This is
the reason for the high temp for dissolving the powder. If you will
keep the temp up, you will have little or no problem. Straining helps,
but does not solve the problem. Sometimes, you can heat the solution
after it has cooled and get the metol flakes to go into solution. If
the developer were supplied as a 2 part powder, its shelf life
undissolved would be reduced, but this problem would be eliminated.
Michael Gudzinowicz
It's just coincidence: Microdol, Polydol, Selectol, Ektonol, Technidol.
The "ols" were required so they could tell the developers from the fixer.
Pharmaceutical companies determined that drugs with "X" and "Z" in the
names were the high volume sellers. Perhaps EKC learned something from
their drug venture which lead to the "Xtol" name.
Along similar lines, there has been speculation that only LSD could have
led to the name UNIX, which MS decided to call Xenix, to cash in on the
two Xs.
David Torix
fin...@wheel.dcn.davis.ca.us (Kathleen Lytle) wrote:
>gpackard (gpac...@stny.lrun.com) wrote:
>: Does the same thing happen with XTOL? I have noticed white flakes in mine
>: even after diluting 1:3. Anyone know what's going on?
>
> It's Kodak messing with our heads! Dektol, Xtol, similar names, mere
>coincidence? I think not!
Have you tried a good dandruff shampoo? <Grin>
David T.
General Purpose Nerd.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Disclaimer: My opinions are my own. My employer doesn't pay me enough
to claim them. You want 'em? Rent them like everybody else.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Why are you taking me seriously? I'm not!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Moon...@nidlink.com Moon...@aol.com Tor...@pss.iix.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Kathleen Lytle
David Torix (moon...@nidlink.com) wrote:
: Have you tried a good dandruff shampoo? <Grin>
Yes, I have. But I still keep getting those little white flakes.<sigh>
Kathleen Lytle
Michael Gudzinowicz (bg...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA) wrote:
: Along similar lines, there has been speculation that only LSD could have
: two Xs.
I've known a lot of people who did acid and none of them named their kids
Unix.
Jean-David Beyer
In case anyone cares, the UNIX Operating System was named shortly after
some of its developers had worked on another operating system named
Multics. Multics was designed to run on a multiple CPU system (using
General Electric 645 processors). Unix at that time ran on a single
DEC processor. It may have been a PDP 11/20, but I think an earlier
version ran on some other DEC processor. Memory is weak by this time.
That was in the very early 1970's or late 1960's.
Surely off topic here.
Michael Gudzinowicz
It was a PDP-7, with UNIX written in assembly, so Sapce Travel could be
played w/o time sharing overhead. Later it was redone in "B" (C's
predecessor) to port to the PDP-11.
Still, the clones liked the letter "X", like many developer names (X-22;
FX-1, etc.). One exception was bsd, which rhymed with lsd - another
coincidence.
Kathleen Lytle
Jean-David Beyer (jdb...@exit109.com) wrote:
: Kathleen Lytle wrote:
: >
: > Michael Gudzinowicz (bg...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA) wrote:
: > : Along similar lines, there has been speculation that only LSD could have
: > : led to the name UNIX, which MS decided to call Xenix, to cash in on the
: > : two Xs.
: >
: > I've known a lot of people who did acid and none of them named their kids
: > Unix.
:
: In case anyone cares, the UNIX Operating System was named shortly after
In case anyone cares, I just trying to inject a little goofiness into this
newsgroup.
so...@cyberport.cyberportal.net
I use Head and Shoulders High Contrast Flake reducer...
RODEKTOL
White flakes are usualy due to insufficient mixing but they could be due
to:
1. water that is too hard or too soft. This usually is
seen with developers such as D-7 6 when it is not
mixed in distilled water. Dektol is usually forgiving but
I've seen a variation in results in mixing developers in various parts of
the country.
2. The vessel in which it is mixed can effect some developers but
usually not Dektol.
3. 100 degrees F is the recomended temp. Is your thermometer correct.
Cold water does not work well.
4. It is usually best to mix developers by stirring rather than putting
the chemicals in a bottle and shaking to put it in solution.
5. Ethol makes a liquid developer that works great but is
a bit more pricey and less available than Dektol . I hope some of this
helps but it is not a problem I have faced except when attempting to mix
it a too low a temp.
Paul in Denver.
e...@clark.net
For many years, I have mixed my Dektol, Microdol-X, and other Metol-based
developers with a small amount of added alchohol. Ordinary hardware-store
denatured alchohol or drugstore isopropyl alchohol will do. About an
ounce to two ounces per gallon of stock is fine. Metol is extremely
soluble in alchohol, so it doesn't have any trouble dissolving in the
alchohol-water mix. There is no noticeable difference in development
time, contrast, or print color.
Edward M. Lukacs, LRPS
Washington, DC, USA
wi...@isrc.net
The caus is that Metol doesn't like to dissolve in the presence of
sodium sulfite and BOTH are present in the powder. Making sure that
the temperature is high enough will help solve this problem. Someone
else suggested a little alcohol would help (in the developer, not in
the darkroom worker!).
Jean-David Beyer
wi...@isrc.net wrote:
>
> The caus is that Metol doesn't like to dissolve in the presence of
> sodium sulfite and BOTH are present in the powder. Making sure that
> the temperature is high enough will help solve this problem. Someone
> else suggested a little alcohol would help (in the developer, not in
> the darkroom worker!).
>
which is very similar, but using benzotriazole instead of potassium
bromide as restrainer) from scratch, using 5-micron filtered, fairly
soft (4-5 grain) water. I dissolve the Metol completely at 125F
before adding the sulfite. Then the rest of the ingredients in the
prescribed order. Each component seems to dissolve thoroughly
(after prolonged stirring, especially in the case of the Sodium
Carbonate). The little flakes seem to appear later. I tried using
the prescribed amount of Kodak's anti-calcium, to no avail.
As I have said earlier, just filter the stuff if it worries you and
then forget about it.
Jean-David Beyer
wi...@isrc.net wrote:
>
> You even agree with me! The cause IS metol won'
> t dissolve in sulfite.
I do not see where I agree at all. I dissolve the Metol thoroughly in
water before adding the sulfite. The Metol DOES NOT precipitate out
on adding the sulfite.
> You say you dissolve the metol first and them
> the sulfite. Metol takes a while to dissolve in plain water and will
> give fits in sulfite.
I have never noticed any fits. It just takes a lot more stirring.
According to "The Handbook of Chemistry and Physics", Metol can be
made into 5% solution in cold water and 16.67% in hot water. As
you point out, it is "completely" soluble in alcohol. It does not
comment on solubility in sulfite solutions.
I get more fits when adding acids to bicarbonate or carbonate
solutions. ;-)
> Benzatrizole, bromide, etc. have nothing to do
> with it.
I Agree; at least this seems very likely to be true.
> The best solute for metol is alcohol or slightly acidic
> water,
I am not aware that an acid would help, since the Metol already
contains sulfuric acid and dissolves perfectly well in plain water.
> but the latter will alter the pH of the developer and hence its
> characteristics.
That would depend on what acid you used and how much you required
to dissolve the metol. Since none is required, you would probably
not need much. 8-) If you use only a little of a strong acid, such as
sulfuric or hydrochloric, it would probably make no practical
difference in the pH of the developer, since it is so heavily buffered
with Carbonate.
> OIf course, you can try phenidone as a replacement
> for the metol if you are brewing your own - it is less likely to
> produce an allergic reation. Filtering is a good idea whether or not
> you have visible flakes, but it is better to solve the problem than to
> work around it.
My view, as I have now stated ad infinitum, is that there is no
problem, so neither a need to solve it nor a need to work around it
exists.
>
> Jean-David Beyer <jdb...@exit109.com> wrote:
>
> >This [poor solubility of Metol in sulfite solutions] cannot be the
wi...@isrc.net
You even agree with me! The cause IS metol won'
the sulfite. Metol takes a while to dissolve in plain water and will
with it. The best solute for metol is alcohol or slightly acidic
water, but the latter will alter the pH of the developer and hence its
characteristics. OIf course, you can try phenidone as a replacement
for the metol if you are brewing your own - it is less likely to
produce an allergic reation. Filtering is a good idea whether or not
you have visible flakes, but it is better to solve the problem than to
work around it.
Jean-David Beyer <jdb...@exit109.com> wrote:
>wi...@isrc.net wrote:
>>
>> The caus is that Metol doesn't like to dissolve in the presence of
>> sodium sulfite and BOTH are present in the powder. Making sure that
>> the temperature is high enough will help solve this problem. Someone
>> else suggested a little alcohol would help (in the developer, not in
>> the darkroom worker!).
>>
>This cannot be the whole truth. I mix my "Dektol" (actually D-72,
wi...@isrc.net
You are in complete agreement with what I said. Metol will not
dissolve in sulfite and will dissolve in water. That is what I said
and always said. if you are dissolving Metol in sulfite, them you are
not getting complete solution, but you say you are dissolving it is
water which is what I said to do.
Jean-David Beyer <jdb...@exit109.com> wrote:
>wi...@isrc.net wrote:
>>
>> You even agree with me! The cause IS metol won'
>> t dissolve in sulfite.
>I do not see where I agree at all. I dissolve the Metol thoroughly in
>water before adding the sulfite. The Metol DOES NOT precipitate out
>on adding the sulfite.
>> You say you dissolve the metol first and them
>> the sulfite. Metol takes a while to dissolve in plain water and will
>> give fits in sulfite.
>I have never noticed any fits. It just takes a lot more stirring.
>According to "The Handbook of Chemistry and Physics", Metol can be
>made into 5% solution in cold water and 16.67% in hot water. As
>you point out, it is "completely" soluble in alcohol. It does not
>comment on solubility in sulfite solutions.
>I get more fits when adding acids to bicarbonate or carbonate
>solutions. ;-)
>> Benzatrizole, bromide, etc. have nothing to do
>> with it.
>I Agree; at least this seems very likely to be true.
>> The best solute for metol is alcohol or slightly acidic
>> water,
>I am not aware that an acid would help, since the Metol already
>contains sulfuric acid and dissolves perfectly well in plain water.
>> but the latter will alter the pH of the developer and hence its
>> characteristics.
>That would depend on what acid you used and how much you required
>to dissolve the metol. Since none is required, you would probably
>not need much. 8-) If you use only a little of a strong acid, such as
>sulfuric or hydrochloric, it would probably make no practical
>difference in the pH of the developer, since it is so heavily buffered
>with Carbonate.
>> OIf course, you can try phenidone as a replacement
>> for the metol if you are brewing your own - it is less likely to
>> produce an allergic reation. Filtering is a good idea whether or not
>> you have visible flakes, but it is better to solve the problem than to
>> work around it.
>My view, as I have now stated ad infinitum, is that there is no
>problem, so neither a need to solve it nor a need to work around it
>exists.
>>
>> Jean-David Beyer <jdb...@exit109.com> wrote:
>>
>> >This [poor solubility of Metol in sulfite solutions] cannot be the
Miller H. Peterson
In article <19970325080...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
rode...@aol.com (RODEKTOL) wrote:
> White flakes are usualy due to insufficient mixing but they could be due
> to:
My solution for many years has been to boil the water before mixing. I
started doing this because it eliminates the dissolved oxygen so that the
Dektol stock doesn't change color (which doesn't seem to make any real
difference either) and the improved solubility was an acidental
by-product.
Pete
--
Pete
Marc F. Hult
Why can't the 40,000 mg/L or so of sodium sulfite in Dektol/D-72
remove the 1 to 3 mg/L of dissolved O2 that warm water can hold (if in
equilibrium) ?
Puzzled ... Marc
Marc F. Hult
hu...@cinternet.net
Jean-David Beyer
sulfite in protecting the reducing agents is more complex than merely
using up the dissolved oxygen.
Marc F. Hult
>Marc F. Hult wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, 27 Mar 1997 09:20:06 -0500, pete...@anvil.nrl.navy.mil
>> (Miller H. Peterson) wrote:
>>
>> >In article <19970325080...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
>> >rode...@aol.com (RODEKTOL) wrote:
>> >
>> >> White flakes are usualy due to insufficient mixing but they could be due
>> >> to:
>> > My solution for many years has been to boil the water before mixing. I
>> >started doing this because it eliminates the dissolved oxygen so that the
>> >Dektol stock doesn't change color (which doesn't seem to make any real
>> >difference either) and the improved solubility was an acidental
>> >by-product.
>> >
>>
>> Why can't the 40,000 mg/L or so of sodium sulfite in Dektol/D-72
>> remove the 1 to 3 mg/L of dissolved O2 that warm water can hold (if in
>> equilibrium) ?
>>
>Actually the air redissolves in the water as it cools. The action of
The water can redissolve O2 [we don't much care what the N2 and argon
in the air do), but only as permitted by mass transfer at the
atmosphere/liquid interface which requires a free surface and that
dissolved O2 be removed from the interface by convection and(or) that
there be enough time for diffusion. This is partly why I wrote "if it
is in equilibrium". This mass transfer is easy to prevent if one uses
the right vessel and atmosphere which is what we do when we keep
developer in a tightly stoppered glass bottle.
>sulfite in protecting the reducing agents is more complex than merely
>using up the dissolved oxygen.
>
So how, I still wonder, can boiling the water to remove the dissolved
oxygen (DO) "improve[s] solubility" or prevent a precipitate? I am
not questioning that it does (I haven't tried) but am curious as to
what the mechanism might be. Of course boiling water with substantial
concentrations of dissolved constituents will do things other than
just removing O2, such as precipitating carbonates.
If one simply adds the Dektol mixture to water, presumably there are
kinetics or competition for the DO involved and oxidation of the
organics and the sulfite occurs simultaneously as long as some oxygen
is available. So some fraction of the 0-3 mg/L (I need to look my
guesses up) of the dissolved O2 in warm water might be available for a
reaction that results in a precipitate.
But as well as heeding EKC's advice on temperature (32-38C), I also
abide by the "Slowly add" part of EKC's recommendations. Perhaps this
is why I don't seem to have the dreaded "white flakes" syndrome. The
amount of DO left in the water by the time substantial amounts of the
organics arrive is presumably diminishing small because a few 10's of
mg/L of sulfite from the Dektol is adequate to remove the DO in the
water if added slowly. One could accomplish the same thing by first
putting in a pinch of sodium sulfite rather than a small amount of the
the Dektol mixture, but this might be seen as a mischievous suggestion
in light of another thread in this subject ;-}. The "Slowly add"
recommendation seems to do the trick for me. I mix film developer in
an Erlenmeyer flask with a magnetic stir bar but don't bother to do
this with paper developer.
(If one _really_ were interested in this infamous precipitate ("white
flakes"), knowing its composition would be a good place to start in
determining how to prevent its formation. Also, is it a single
precipitate or are there various phenomena involved?)
One reason for my curiosity is that I'd like to try
using pyro for sheet-film development using Jobo expert drums and have
visions of having to provide an anoxic atmosphere during mixing,
transfer, and use of the developer. Being able to mix Dektol
consistently seems trivial in comparison. But since I don't seem to
have trouble with Dektol, maybe I really am ready for the compressed
argon and tubes and valves and such rigamarole as might prove
necessary ;-}
User393897
Last night I found white flakes on the actual prints that I developed
(5x7)
I later found that that was due to panic while trying to avoid water spots
on the negitives. I lightly pampered the negitives with the only thing
that I could find.
Toilet paper. Now I know better.
The results? Have you ever seen photos from the 20's with light scratch
like things on the picture?
Well, there's your answer. Carl in
N.J. (Exit 10)
Kathleen Lytle
User393897 (user3...@aol.com) wrote:
: I later found that that was due to panic while trying to avoid water spots
: on the negitives. I lightly pampered the negitives with the only thing
: that I could find.
: Toilet paper. Now I know better.
The downside to using a bathroom for your darkroom? ;-)