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

"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.

(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.
When the toner is diluted in water its life is quite long, probably
several months. Diluting it in wash aid was recommended only for high
dilutions, 1:20 or more, when using it as a combined wash aid and
protective toner. The working solution wash aid has a life of several
hours in a tray. Since the capacity of the toner is very limited at
high dilutions it was intended to be an expendible.
Selenium toner somtimes developes a black, thread like precipitate.
This may be elemental Selenium coming out of solution. If the toner
continues to tone the precipitate does no harm. You can filter it out
if desired.
KRST at 1:20 is no longer recommended as a universal protective
toner. There is a great deal about this in the archives of this list,
do a search under my name to find much more. At 1:9 it is satisfactory
for protective toning. If an image is toned enough to make a definite
change in color or density it will be be toned enough to protect the
image.

Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA

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

If my toner capacity calculations are correct my small 11 oz bath of
1:10 mix with one oz of toner would tone less than one print of 8x10
size (100 prints per gallon divided by 128 oz per gallon= 0.8 print at
1:3 dilution as per Kodak label). If I assume the capacity of the 1
oz is not changed by dilution, my quart of toner stock should do about
25 prints, whether diluted 1:3 or 1:10. This doesn't seem like very
much capacity. If what I'm stating here is true, I will be a little
more selective which of my photo's I tone. Does anyone else have
experience that contradicts this?

When the toner is diluted in water its life is quite long, probably
several months. Diluting it in wash aid was recommended only for high
dilutions, 1:20 or more, when using it as a combined wash aid and
protective toner. The working solution wash aid has a life of several
hours in a tray. Since the capacity of the toner is very limited at
high dilutions it was intended to be an expendible.

I'm ok with the life as I throw out the apparantly depleted bath when
done anyway.

Selenium toner somtimes developes a black, thread like precipitate.
This may be elemental Selenium coming out of solution. If the toner
continues to tone the precipitate does no harm. You can filter it out
if desired.
KRST at 1:20 is no longer recommended as a universal protective
toner. There is a great deal about this in the archives of this list,
do a search under my name to find much more. At 1:9 it is satisfactory
for protective toning. If an image is toned enough to make a definite
change in color or density it will be be toned enough to protect the
image.

I am using the selenium toner for protection so I will back the
dilution off to 1:9.

Thanks for your response.

Fred

Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA


I searched through the archives on selenium. But, I could not find
anyone commenting about the number of prints they were successfully
toning in any one bath.

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.

(Fred) wrote

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.

Is that the only reason you are using KRST? You're not interested
in the archival properties it can confer? A just perceptable, subtel
darkening in the shadows will not confer archival properties. That
amount will not protect the most vunerable highlight areas.
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.
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

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.

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.

(Fred) wrote

Dan 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.

Any addition of selenium will extend a silver images already long
lifespan. I doubt any disagreement of that.

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 increases the shadow densities in prints with little
or no change in the image tone.

I believe that implication correct, but for some reason though, tests
have showen that the highlight areas are still vunerable. Keep in
mind we have to start a very long lasting base silver image.


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.

Nelson's Gold Toner may be your ticket. It is a sulfide plus Gold
toner. I've read that it can be used at room temperature although more
usually at 100-110 F. Ready-Mix can be bought from Photographer's
Formulary. Cost per print is a small fraction of KRST. For more
Info search this NG for, nelson's gold .
I compound all my own chemistry. I've all the chemicals for Nelson's
but have yet to mix the toner. I'm wraped up in refining my print
developer test methods and testing some new formulas. Dan

"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