If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Kodak rapid selenium capacity
What is the useful capacity of Kodak rapid selenium toner? The label
indicates at least 100 8x10 per gallon diluted 1:3. I've been using a 1:20 dilution. Is the logic such that the quart mixed with 20 quarts to make 5.25 gallons 1:20 would still do only about 100 8x10 prints. Seems this is expensive stuff to use. My quart cost $23.79 usa. Thats 24 cents for each 8x10. Fred |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Kodak rapid selenium capacity
"Fred" wrote in message
... What is the useful capacity of Kodak rapid selenium toner? The label indicates at least 100 8x10 per gallon diluted 1:3. I've been using a 1:20 dilution. Is the logic such that the quart mixed with 20 quarts to make 5.25 gallons 1:20 would still do only about 100 8x10 prints. Seems this is expensive stuff to use. My quart cost $23.79 usa. Thats 24 cents for each 8x10. Fred Depends on how much color shift you want. For a slight color shift to neutral, it may last longer. Also, I think you paid too much, although it may be hard to get the stuff mail order these days with hazmat shipping restrictions. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Kodak rapid selenium capacity
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Kodak rapid selenium capacity
Fred wrote: On 31 Jan 2004 14:45:41 -0800, (Dan Quinn) wrote: Is that the only reason you are using KRST? You're not interested in the archival properties it can confer? Acutally that's the reason I started using selenium. It turns out I like the effect of selenium toner on Ilford MCIV paper. Eventhough its subtle, the darkening of the shadow areas seems to me to give the print a crispness not ususlly seen from my 35mm negatives. A just perceptable, subtel darkening in the shadows will not confer archival properties. That amount will not protect the most vunerable highlight areas. Are you saying that the archive effect of the toner is proportional to the toning effect? The general recommendation for film and paper is to tone for a minimum of 3 minutes at 1:9 or less dilution. Kodak's long recommended dilution of 1:20 isn't thought to be effective for low density areas of a print. Selenium split tones, toning higher density areas (shadows) first. To get complete image protection it's recommended to tone to full completion, which might produce unwanted color intensity in some papers. If you want a paper that tones and intensifies shadows but still remains a neutral image color, try Ilford Gallerie (graded) FB paper. Selenium changes it from a greenish to a neitral tone and you can tone as long as you want without unwanted color changes. At least that is the conventional wisdom. To read quickly an explanation of the preferential toning behavior of selenium, one might think thin areas of silver are immune. Perhaps the dense areas exert some sort of gravitational pull and hoard the selenium untill they've had their fill. Gravitational pull? Your joking, right? More likely has only to do with density of the silver. I like the idea that the selenium toner serves to protect the print from oxidizing gases. The implication is that the protection covers the whole spectrum of silver density on the print even though the selenium only the increase the shadow densities in prints with little or no change in the image tone. Silver-gelatine with no after treatment can last generations, even a century or more in good condition. I think there are quite a few who do tone but not for it's lengthening the life span of the print. BTW, have you considered dilution and carry out of the solution when costing that KRST? Dan I just divided the suggested number of prints capacity by the cost. I've never used selenium toner untill last week. I guess if I want more toning effect from selenum, I'll try a warmer tone paper. Buy a gallon. The cost per quart will drop 20 - 25%. Go to www.freestylephoto.biz and do a search for rapid selenium toner. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Kodak rapid selenium capacity
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Kodak rapid selenium capacity
On 31 Jan 2004 14:45:41 -0800, (Dan Quinn) wrote:
(Fred) wrote (snip) Is that the only reason you are using KRST? You're not interested in the archival properties it can confer? Acutally that's the reason I started using selenium. It turns out I like the effect of selenium toner on Ilford MCIV paper. Eventhough its subtle, the darkening of the shadow areas seems to me to give the print a crispness not ususlly seen from my 35mm negatives. A just perceptable, subtel darkening in the shadows will not confer archival properties. That amount will not protect the most vunerable highlight areas. Are you saying that the archive effect of the toner is proportional to the toning effect? At least that is the conventional wisdom. To read quickly an explanation of the preferential toning behavior of selenium, one might think thin areas of silver are immune. Perhaps the dense areas exert some sort of gravitational pull and hoard the selenium untill they've had their fill. I like the idea that the selenium toner serves to protect the print from oxidizing gases. The implication is that the protection covers the whole spectrum of silver density on the print even though the selenium only the increase the shadow densities in prints with little or no change in the image tone. Silver-gelatine with no after treatment can last generations, even a century or more in good condition. I think there are quite a few who do tone but not for it's lengthening the life span of the print. BTW, have you considered dilution and carry out of the solution when costing that KRST? Dan I just divided the suggested number of prints capacity by the cost. I've never used selenium toner untill last week. I guess if I want more toning effect from selenum, I'll try a warmer tone paper. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Kodak rapid selenium capacity
On Sat, 31 Jan 2004 17:24:53 +0000, Tom Phillips
wrote: The general recommendation for film and paper is to tone for a minimum of 3 minutes at 1:9 or less dilution. Kodak's long recommended dilution of 1:20 isn't thought to be effective for low density areas of a print. Selenium split tones, toning higher density areas (shadows) first. To get complete image protection it's recommended to tone to full completion, which might produce unwanted color intensity in some papers. If you want a paper that tones and intensifies shadows but still remains a neutral image color, try Ilford Gallerie (graded) FB paper. Selenium changes it from a greenish to a neitral tone and you can tone as long as you want without unwanted color changes. I'll try it. Buy a gallon. The cost per quart will drop 20 - 25%. Go to www.freestylephoto.biz and do a search for rapid selenium toner. Thanks, I'll do that too. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Kodak rapid selenium capacity
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Kodak rapid selenium capacity
"Fred" wrote in message ... On 31 Jan 2004 02:30:19 -0800, (Richard Knoppow) wrote: (Fred) wrote in message ... What is the useful capacity of Kodak rapid selenium toner? The label indicates at least 100 8x10 per gallon diluted 1:3. I've been using a 1:20 dilution. Is the logic such that the quart mixed with 20 quarts to make 5.25 gallons 1:20 would still do only about 100 8x10 prints. Seems this is expensive stuff to use. My quart cost $23.79 usa. Thats 24 cents for each 8x10. Fred Kodak's statement is a bit vague. Presumably the capacity of other dilutions is proportional to the amount of toner concentrate in them. So, if one gallon of toner diluted 1:20 will do 100 prints a gallon of toner diluted 1:20 should be good for 15 prints. Of course this is very approximate since the amount of toner taken up depends on how much dark area there is in the print and how darkly its toned. In practice one can use the toner until it begins to take too long to tone or won't tone enough. I'm using Ilford Multigrade IV Deluxe MGD.1M paper and the selenium toner seems to subtely darken the shadows slightly making my photo's pleasantly more crisp. Often I can see no effect in the bath unless I compare the toned print with an untoned print. I guess I could experiment, but the effect is so subtle, I feel like the experiment would be very subjective Its normal for KRST to make little or no color change on neutral or cold toned papers. Its still toning as can be seen by the slight intensification of the image. The effect of all toners is dependant on the configuration of the original silver image. Toners tend to be more effective on fine grain images. The color of the silver image is mostly a matter of how finely devided the silver is, the finer the more yellow the color. Since warm tone paper has finer silver grains it tones more rapidly than cold tone paper _and_ the toned color also tends to be yellower (for selenium or sulfide toners). In the case of Gold toners there is again very little color change to neutral or cold tone papers but warm toned papers will be toned blue, the warmer the paper the brighter the blue. -- --- Richard Knoppow Los Angeles, CA, USA |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|