Alternatives to Brown Plastic Jugs

[SofaKing]

My local photo place wants $9 a pop for those 1 gal. chemical jugs! I feel
it's a little much for 25 cents worth of plastic. Are they magic or
something. Couldn't I use rinsed out antifreeze jugs or windshield washer
jugs? Do they have to be opaque? Thx.

[Mark in Maine]

On Thu, 08 Apr 2004 14:17:53 GMT, "SofaKing"

Post by SofaKing
My local photo place wants $9 a pop for those 1 gal. chemical jugs! I feel
it's a little much for 25 cents worth of plastic. Are they magic or
something. Couldn't I use rinsed out antifreeze jugs or windshield washer
jugs? Do they have to be opaque? Thx.

A few thoughts:

In my case, I have a permanent darkroom, the lights are on in there
during setup, but when it is unused, or when I am working, it is dark
in there - so dark bottles are probably not all that important since
the room is dark almost all the time.

Having said that - I use a lot of little bottles - for example - I use
HC-110 as my main film developer - I dilute the syrup into the stock
solution strength, then put it into 2oz bottles - brown glass, which I
buy in bulk and they are not expensive (about $0.30 each?). To get
the working solution, I mix one entire bottle with the appropriate
amount of water.

I do a similar thing with Kodak HCA, Dektol, etc, using 2oz, 4oz and
8oz bottles as is appropriate so that for each working session I use a
small number of bottles and never use a partial bottle. Since the
bottles are full, there is little air in them, and I suspect that the
stock solutions might last longer - but I have no data on this.

The main chemical that I do not use as one shot is fixer - this is
because disposal of it in my case is a PITA, so I use it to
exhaustion. For fixer, I use brown glass 1gal jugs. Don't remember
what the 1 Gal jugs cost, but I don't think that they were as much as
the plastic ones that you are looking at.

If I recall correctly, the type of bottles that I use, which can be
found at scientific supply houses are referred to as 'Boston Round' or
something like that - I have found two different types of caps for
these - ones with plastic cone shaped liners, and ones with cardboard
liners - I prefer the plastic cone ones since they hold up better and
probably retain fewer chemicals on them.


Mark

[PSsquare]

Post by Mark in Maine
On Thu, 08 Apr 2004 14:17:53 GMT, "SofaKing"
Having said that - I use a lot of little bottles - for example - I use
HC-110 as my main film developer - I dilute the syrup into the stock
solution strength, then put it into 2oz bottles - brown glass, which I
buy in bulk and they are not expensive (about $0.30 each?). To get
the working solution, I mix one entire bottle with the appropriate
amount of water.

\Mark,

Mark,

Nice to see a discussion of darkroom practice in the newsgroup. Now, on to
the subject.

Check out this link: http://www.covingtoninnovations.com/hc110/

This presents an alternative to making the first dilution of HC110 and
avoids any aging of the stock solution. My darkroom instructor recommended
it and I have found it very practical. I simply go directly from syrup to
final dilution using 16.1 ml of HC110 in 485 ml of filtered water. I measure
the syrup in a 50 ml glass graduated cylinder, so I am accurate to around
plus/minus .15 ml. After measuring the syrup, I add around 10 ml of water,
cap it with my thumb (wearing a protective glove) and shake it before
putting it in the final bottle. I rinse several more times thru the
cylinder so that I am sure to get residual syrup into the mix. I put mix my
solution in a 500ml water bottle so there is little error and no real
measurement of the water; just fill the bottle to a mark on the neck that
equals 16.1 plus 485 ml of solution. Seems close enough since .15 ml is
around 2%. Any error in measurement is likely less important than
degradation of the developer activity. Use the solution once and discard.
No issue of storing at all.

Also, I have found that the simple 1 liter pop bottles are perfect for my
8x10 trays. Everything is stored in a cabinet in a room that is normally
dark anyhow. So light exposure is at the absolute minimum.

Regards,

PSsquare

[Mike]

Post by PSsquare
This presents an alternative to making the first dilution of HC110 and
avoids any aging of the stock solution. My darkroom instructor recommended
it and I have found it very practical. I simply go directly from syrup to
final dilution using 16.1 ml of HC110 in 485 ml of filtered water. I measure
the syrup in a 50 ml glass graduated cylinder, so I am accurate to around
plus/minus .15 ml. After measuring the syrup, I add around 10 ml of water,
cap it with my thumb (wearing a protective glove) and shake it before
putting it in the final bottle. I rinse several more times thru the
cylinder so that I am sure to get residual syrup into the mix. I put mix my
solution in a 500ml water bottle so there is little error and no real
measurement of the water; just fill the bottle to a mark on the neck that
equals 16.1 plus 485 ml of solution. Seems close enough since .15 ml is
around 2%. Any error in measurement is likely less important than
degradation of the developer activity. Use the solution once and discard.
No issue of storing at all.

Seems like more effort than I use for mixing HC110 directly from the
syrup. I use a 5mL medicine dropper that my local Target pharmacy gave me
for free. I draw 7.5mL (yes, it takes 2 draws) and squirt it into 240mL
of water. I don't even bother with gloves.

Why mix twice?

[BertS]

Post by PSsquare

Post by Mark in Maine
On Thu, 08 Apr 2004 14:17:53 GMT, "SofaKing"
Having said that - I use a lot of little bottles - for example - I use
HC-110 as my main film developer - I dilute the syrup into the stock
solution strength, then put it into 2oz bottles - brown glass, which I
buy in bulk and they are not expensive (about $0.30 each?). To get
the working solution, I mix one entire bottle with the appropriate
amount of water.

\Mark,
Mark,
Nice to see a discussion of darkroom practice in the newsgroup. Now, on to
the subject.
Check out this link: http://www.covingtoninnovations.com/hc110/
This presents an alternative to making the first dilution of HC110 and
avoids any aging of the stock solution. My darkroom instructor recommended
it and I have found it very practical. I simply go directly from syrup to
final dilution using 16.1 ml of HC110 in 485 ml of filtered water. I measure
the syrup in a 50 ml glass graduated cylinder, so I am accurate to around
plus/minus .15 ml. After measuring the syrup, I add around 10 ml of water,
cap it with my thumb (wearing a protective glove) and shake it before
putting it in the final bottle. I rinse several more times thru the
cylinder so that I am sure to get residual syrup into the mix. I put mix my
solution in a 500ml water bottle so there is little error and no real
measurement of the water; just fill the bottle to a mark on the neck that
equals 16.1 plus 485 ml of solution. Seems close enough since .15 ml is
around 2%. Any error in measurement is likely less important than
degradation of the developer activity. Use the solution once and discard.
No issue of storing at all.
Also, I have found that the simple 1 liter pop bottles are perfect for my
8x10 trays. Everything is stored in a cabinet in a room that is normally
dark anyhow. So light exposure is at the absolute minimum.
Regards,
PSsquare

I use a syringe, draw the amount of HC110 I need, stick the end of the syringe
in the water and pressure it out. Then I draw in some of the water, pressure
it out to rince the inside of the syringe. A bit of stirring afterwards does
the trick.

Bert

[BertS]

Post by Mark in Maine
On Thu, 08 Apr 2004 14:17:53 GMT, "SofaKing"

Post by SofaKing
My local photo place wants $9 a pop for those 1 gal. chemical jugs! I feel
it's a little much for 25 cents worth of plastic. Are they magic or
something. Couldn't I use rinsed out antifreeze jugs or windshield washer
jugs? Do they have to be opaque? Thx.

In my case, I have a permanent darkroom, the lights are on in there
during setup, but when it is unused, or when I am working, it is dark
in there - so dark bottles are probably not all that important since
the room is dark almost all the time.
Having said that - I use a lot of little bottles - for example - I use
HC-110 as my main film developer - I dilute the syrup into the stock
solution strength, then put it into 2oz bottles - brown glass, which I
buy in bulk and they are not expensive (about $0.30 each?). To get
the working solution, I mix one entire bottle with the appropriate
amount of water.
I do a similar thing with Kodak HCA, Dektol, etc, using 2oz, 4oz and
8oz bottles as is appropriate so that for each working session I use a
small number of bottles and never use a partial bottle. Since the
bottles are full, there is little air in them, and I suspect that the
stock solutions might last longer - but I have no data on this.
The main chemical that I do not use as one shot is fixer - this is
because disposal of it in my case is a PITA, so I use it to
exhaustion. For fixer, I use brown glass 1gal jugs. Don't remember
what the 1 Gal jugs cost, but I don't think that they were as much as
the plastic ones that you are looking at.
If I recall correctly, the type of bottles that I use, which can be
found at scientific supply houses are referred to as 'Boston Round' or
something like that - I have found two different types of caps for
these - ones with plastic cone shaped liners, and ones with cardboard
liners - I prefer the plastic cone ones since they hold up better and
probably retain fewer chemicals on them.

Those cones can be removed so you can rinse behind them. Just in case some
chemicals got in and you swapped caps with something different.

A jeweler's screwdriver will slide into the edge and you can pry them out.

Bert

[Dan Quinn]

Post by BertS

Post by Mark in Maine
If I recall correctly, the type of bottles that I use, which can be
found at scientific supply houses are referred to as 'Boston Round' or
something like that - I have found two different types of caps for
these - ones with plastic cone shaped liners, and ones with cardboard
liners - I prefer the plastic cone ones since they hold up better and
probably retain fewer chemicals on them.

Those cones can be removed so you can rinse behind them. Just in case some
chemicals got in and you swapped caps with something different.
A jeweler's screwdriver will slide into the edge and you can pry them out.
Bert

I've come across two brands, Polycone and Polyseal. My entire
mass of amber glass Boston Rounds have one or the other of those caps.
Do not overfill. I use the cap ledge as a guide. The cone is forced
into the neck of the bottle. I dry the bottle top then the cap goes
on. They are rinsed prior to reuse.
The cone mimics a rubber stopper and is held in contact by the
screw cap. I can't think of a more sure way to seal a bottle. Also
they may be reused many times.
Tri Ess Sciences is a source for the above as well as other gear
and chemistry. They do sell just caps. www.tri-esssciences.com Dan

[Mark A]

Post by SofaKing
My local photo place wants $9 a pop for those 1 gal. chemical jugs! I feel
it's a little much for 25 cents worth of plastic. Are they magic or
something. Couldn't I use rinsed out antifreeze jugs or windshield washer
jugs? Do they have to be opaque? Thx.

Spend a few bucks and get some glass jugs.
http://www.specialtybottle.com/

[jjs]

Post by SofaKing
My local photo place wants $9 a pop for those 1 gal. chemical jugs! I feel
it's a little much for 25 cents worth of plastic. Are they magic or
something. Couldn't I use rinsed out antifreeze jugs or windshield washer
jugs? Do they have to be opaque? Thx.

If you don't mind semi-transparent plastic, then 1-gallon bottles with
caps can be had new for between $1 to $3 each. Check out
<http://www.usplastic.com>. Try searching on "industrial jugs". Their
delivery service is very fast.

But what we could really use here is some true expert input from a
plastics engineer. Plastic technology is a mystery. Some plastics let
oxygen flow through, some let hydrocarbons pass, some are dark looking but
are not really opaque to light. What's best for chemicals? In our lab we
have some true light-opaque chemistry bottles that cost as much as $60 for
a quart size.

[David Nebenzahl]

Post by jjs

Post by SofaKing
My local photo place wants $9 a pop for those 1 gal. chemical jugs! I feel
it's a little much for 25 cents worth of plastic. Are they magic or
something. Couldn't I use rinsed out antifreeze jugs or windshield washer
jugs? Do they have to be opaque? Thx.

If you don't mind semi-transparent plastic, then 1-gallon bottles with
caps can be had new for between $1 to $3 each. Check out
<http://www.usplastic.com>. Try searching on "industrial jugs". Their
delivery service is very fast.
But what we could really use here is some true expert input from a
plastics engineer. Plastic technology is a mystery. Some plastics let
oxygen flow through, some let hydrocarbons pass, some are dark looking but
are not really opaque to light. What's best for chemicals?

Perhaps you missed my post on this very question in another thread

Post by jjs
From his page on plastic bottles ["he" being someone named "Ryuji"]
Why manufacturers and chemists recommend glass bottles for storing
photographic chemicals has a lot to do with idiot-proof factors. With a
little attention, inexpensive and convenient plastic bottles can be used
for most photographic chemical storage without compromising their shelf
life.
Plastic materials and chemical properties
material gas permeability acid resistance max usable temp
---------------------------------------------------------------
PET (PETE) very good reasonable 60°C
HDPE poor good 120°C
PVC very good reasonable 70°C
LDPE very poor good 80°C
PVdc (Saran wrap) excellent reasonable 65°C
PET (polyethylene terephthalate) is used as a clear (colorless or tinted)
bottle material in bottled water products. It has very small permeability
to oxygen and nitrogen.
Use PET for developers. Use PET or HDPE for most other chemicals. If you
store acetic acid stop bath in concentrated form, use HDPE. If PVC coated
cap is available, use it by all means.
My bottles of D-76, Microphen, and various other experimental formula are
still alive and as vigorous in filled and tightly capped 500ml PET bottles
after two years!

And as someone else pointed out, the best is still glass (assuming a good
tight seal of some non-permeable material).

[John]

On Thu, 08 Apr 2004 14:17:53 GMT, "SofaKing"

Post by SofaKing
My local photo place wants $9 a pop for those 1 gal. chemical jugs! I feel
it's a little much for 25 cents worth of plastic. Are they magic or
something. Couldn't I use rinsed out antifreeze jugs or windshield washer
jugs? Do they have to be opaque? Thx.

Use soda bottles (PET) properly labels and store them in a
cabinet.

Also, consider purchasing via mail order.

http://www.specialtybottle.com/store.asp

Regards,

John S. Douglas, Photographer - http://www.darkroompro.com
Please remove the "_" when replying via email

[Patrick Gainer]

Post by Mark in Maine
On Thu, 08 Apr 2004 14:17:53 GMT, "SofaKing"

Post by SofaKing
My local photo place wants $9 a pop for those 1 gal. chemical jugs! I feel
it's a little much for 25 cents worth of plastic. Are they magic or
something. Couldn't I use rinsed out antifreeze jugs or windshield washer
jugs? Do they have to be opaque? Thx.

Use soda bottles (PET) properly labels and store them in a
cabinet.
Also, consider purchasing via mail order.
http://www.specialtybottle.com/store.asp
Regards,

Drink lots of prune juice. It comes in nice wide mouthed brown bottles
of various sizes.

Post by Mark in Maine
John S. Douglas, Photographer - http://www.darkroompro.com
Please remove the "_" when replying via email

[John]

Post by Patrick Gainer

Post by John
Use soda bottles (PET) properly labels and store them in a
cabinet.
Also, consider purchasing via mail order.
http://www.specialtybottle.com/store.asp

Drink lots of prune juice. It comes in nice wide mouthed brown bottles
of various sizes.

And it just might help out the conversation on this group !


Regards,

John S. Douglas, Photographer - http://www.darkroompro.com
Please remove the "_" when replying via email

[l***@NOthe-wire.com]

On Thu, 08 Apr 2004 11:06:04 -0500, John <***@darkroompro.com>
wrote:
...

Post by John
And it just might help out the conversation on this group !

...

apr1004 from Lloyd Erlick,

But maybe not the subject matter!!

For chemical solution storage, I like Pepsi bottles. One liter, PETE
plastic, wide mouth, a plastic-lined screw cap made to contain
contents under gas pressure. Zero cost. Clear vs colored bottles is a
non-issue if they spend most of their time in a cabinet or darkened
room. Clear is preferrable because it permits examination of the
contents.

Things like jugs and funnels and the like are better purchased from
non-photo outlets. The nine dollar plastic jugs are a good
illustration of why.

regards,
--le

[Nicholas O. Lindan]

Post by SofaKing
My local photo place wants $9 a pop for those 1 gal. chemical jugs!

Cute, isn't it? Check out the price of an empty spray bottle at the
hardware store - $3.00 - compared to the same bottle filled with
Windex - $1.50.

Chemical jugs are made from thicker PE plastic than milk-jugs.
I have found the best equivalent to be Minute-Maid Orange Juice
jugs at $5.00 each when filled with rather good orange juice.

As other's have mentioned, 1 liter/quart PETE soda bottles are
also suitable as PETE is reasonably gas impermeable. And splitting
a gallon of solution into smaller lots makes it last a lot longer.

My favorite, though, is the Cubitaner:
http://bestcontainers.com/hedpak---cubitainer-cubitainer--combination-packaging.html
Dektol stock keeps for a year (when made with boiled distilled water; stirred,
not shaken).

Do-it-yourself cubitainers can be made from the cartons and aluminized
Mylar bags from wine-in-a-box (don't even think of drinking the wine,
it's uniformly awful).

[Dan Quinn]

Post by SofaKing
My local photo place wants $9 a pop for those 1 gal. chemical jugs! I feel
it's a little much for 25 cents worth of plastic. Are they magic or
something. Couldn't I use rinsed out antifreeze jugs or windshield washer
jugs? Do they have to be opaque? Thx.

I can't think of any good reason why anybody would want or need
to use gallon size anything for keeping darkroom chemicals.
Just in case somebody else has thought of at least one good reason,
I suggest the gallon jugs in which distilled water is packaged. For
79 cents I've a jug and one gallon of distilled water.
Purely a technicality: Volumn goes up by a power of three while
surface area by a power of two. In brief, the low surface area to
volumn ratio of large containers favors longer chemical life. That
is with all things being equall which is far from being the case.
From Google enter, Tri Ess Sciences . They have a large selection
of bottles, jugs, and jars. Also they have a variety of caps,
including Polycone, and lids. Dan

[Peter Irwin]

Post by Dan Quinn
I can't think of any good reason why anybody would want or need
to use gallon size anything for keeping darkroom chemicals.

I keep Dektol in a one gallon brown glass jug. I usually get to
the bottom before it gets seriously brown. I keep stock HCA in
a four litre plastic jug which used to contain vinegar. I do the
same with dilute photo-flo. Everything else goes in smaller bottles.

One good idea is to make sure that developer and fixer are kept
in very different looking bottles. Everything should have labels
on it too, but just having recognisible bottles reduces the chance
of error.

Plastic pop bottles with plastic caps are good.
Glass bottles with plastic caps are very good.

Peter.

[1***@_telus.net]

Post by Peter Irwin

Post by Dan Quinn
I can't think of any good reason why anybody would want or need
to use gallon size anything for keeping darkroom chemicals.

I keep Dektol in a one gallon brown glass jug. I usually get to
the bottom before it gets seriously brown. I keep stock HCA in
a four litre plastic jug which used to contain vinegar. I do the
same with dilute photo-flo. Everything else goes in smaller bottles.

I have found the best containers yet to keep Dektol fresh are the four
litre mylar wine bags sold by wine making stores. Mix the chemical,
put it in the bag, make sure as much air as possible is removed -easy
to do. I have found a bag of dektol stock solution in the back of a
closet that was over three years old. It still hadn't turned brown and
it still gave very good results when diluted 1:1



Take the " _ " out of ***@_telus.net to reply

[doug]

"SofaKing" wrote in message

Post by SofaKing
My local photo place wants $9 a pop for those 1 gal. chemical jugs! I feel
it's a little much for 25 cents worth of plastic. Are they magic or
something. Couldn't I use rinsed out antifreeze jugs or windshield washer
jugs? Do they have to be opaque? Thx.

Years ago I wandered into a shop that catered to home brewers (make your
own wine & beer). They sold a variety of sized brown glass bottles and a
nice assortment of caps for really cheap $. You may have bottles like them -
they have the glass fingerhole at the top of the neck. They ranged in size
from 30 oz. up to 160 oz. Of course they were all used. With a little
washing they've become my alternative to the damned expensive brown plastic
jugs.

Doug

[Nick Zentena]

Post by doug
"SofaKing" wrote in message

Post by SofaKing
My local photo place wants $9 a pop for those 1 gal. chemical jugs! I feel
it's a little much for 25 cents worth of plastic. Are they magic or
something. Couldn't I use rinsed out antifreeze jugs or windshield washer
jugs? Do they have to be opaque? Thx.

Years ago I wandered into a shop that catered to home brewers (make your
own wine & beer). They sold a variety of sized brown glass bottles and a
nice assortment of caps for really cheap $. You may have bottles like them -
they have the glass fingerhole at the top of the neck. They ranged in size
from 30 oz. up to 160 oz. Of course they were all used. With a little
washing they've become my alternative to the damned expensive brown plastic
jugs.

Any good homebrew place should be able to get new glassware. The other
choice is to go to the supermarket and walk around. By the time you've
walked up and down the aisles you might have found a bottle in the right
size for very little money. Of course you need to dump out whats in it.

Nick

[David Nebenzahl]

Post by Nick Zentena

Post by doug
"SofaKing" wrote in message

Post by SofaKing
My local photo place wants $9 a pop for those 1 gal. chemical jugs! I feel
it's a little much for 25 cents worth of plastic. Are they magic or
something. Couldn't I use rinsed out antifreeze jugs or windshield washer
jugs? Do they have to be opaque? Thx.

Years ago I wandered into a shop that catered to home brewers (make your
own wine & beer). They sold a variety of sized brown glass bottles and a
nice assortment of caps for really cheap $. You may have bottles like them -
they have the glass fingerhole at the top of the neck. They ranged in size
from 30 oz. up to 160 oz. Of course they were all used. With a little
washing they've become my alternative to the damned expensive brown plastic
jugs.

Any good homebrew place should be able to get new glassware. The other
choice is to go to the supermarket and walk around. By the time you've
walked up and down the aisles you might have found a bottle in the right
size for very little money. Of course you need to dump out whats in it.

Maybe not available at just any supermarket, but those fancy-schmancy beer
bottles with the built-in stopper with wire clamp are pretty good, too. I
remember they used to hold Grolsch. Drink the beer, then store your stuff in them.

[John]

On Thu, 8 Apr 2004 18:07:04 -0500, Nick Zentena

Post by Nick Zentena
Any good homebrew place should be able to get new glassware. The other
choice is to go to the supermarket and walk around. By the time you've
walked up and down the aisles you might have found a bottle in the right
size for very little money. Of course you need to dump out whats in it.

I did that with bottles of imitation vanilla when it went on
sale for $.75/bottle and I simply poured the vanilla into a soda
bottle ;>)


Regards,

John S. Douglas, Photographer - http://www.darkroompro.com
Please remove the "_" when replying via email

[Dr. Dagor]

Post by SofaKing
My local photo place wants $9 a pop for those 1 gal. chemical jugs! I feel
it's a little much for 25 cents worth of plastic. Are they magic or
something. Couldn't I use rinsed out antifreeze jugs or windshield washer
jugs? Do they have to be opaque? Thx.

Air (specifically O2) is probably a bigger concern than light. And
gallon is a large quantity. Even if you make developer in gallon
units you are better off with smaller bottles -- quart or liter. If
you fill them right to the top, the oxidization is minimized and your
chemicals will last longer.

Dark quart bottles are what things like Hydrogen Peroxide come in.
Just about any pharmacy has empty brown bottles in that size they will
sell you.

Here's another trick... The dusters you can buy at any office supply
store contain a heavier than air chemical that is pretty much inert to
photochemicals. If you put a couple of puffs of that stuff in the
bottle, it acts as a float and keeps the bad old air away from the
good old chemicals.

[jjs]

Post by Dr. Dagor
Air (specifically O2) is probably a bigger concern than light. And
gallon is a large quantity. Even if you make developer in gallon
units you are better off with smaller bottles [...]

Ya know, it has been a hard week and I'm tired so I'll quibble before
signing off to a good sleep. If (IF) you are using glass (or a plastic
that doesn't admit oxygen), then what you speak of is all about surface
area exposed to air - the amount of surface compared to total volume. Man,
just fill the bottle to the top. Big containers are a Good Thing to the
person who uses them. Can't say for those who mix it up and leave it a
year, but why should we care?

[David Nebenzahl]

Post by jjs

Post by Dr. Dagor
Air (specifically O2) is probably a bigger concern than light. And
gallon is a large quantity. Even if you make developer in gallon
units you are better off with smaller bottles [...]

Ya know, it has been a hard week and I'm tired so I'll quibble before
signing off to a good sleep. If (IF) you are using glass (or a plastic
that doesn't admit oxygen), then what you speak of is all about surface
area exposed to air - the amount of surface compared to total volume.

No need to quibble about it: you're right and he's wrong. As Dan Quinn pointed
out somewheres up above here, volume increases faster than surface area, so
the bigger, the bettah. Simple math, dontcha know.

[e***@yahoo.com]

Post by jjs
If (IF) you are using glass (or a plastic
that doesn't admit oxygen), then what you speak of is all about surface
area exposed to air - the amount of surface compared to total volume. Man,
just fill the bottle to the top. Big containers are a Good Thing to the
person who uses them. Can't say for those who mix it up and leave it a
year, but why should we care?

If the choice is between several small, half full containers vs. one large
half full container, you're right. The larger container wins.

If the choice is between several small, completely full containers plus one
small container with a variable amount vs. one large, variably full
container, the former will be better.

Like you said, it's all about exposed surface area. Keep your containers
completely full for longest life. It doesn't really matter whether you do
this by using small containers one by one or dropping marbles into a larger
one. It's about minimizing air contact with surface area.

--
Eric
http://canid.com/

[Dan Quinn]

Post by jjs

Post by Dr. Dagor
Air (specifically O2) is probably a bigger concern than light. And
gallon is a large quantity. Even if you make developer in gallon
units you are better off with smaller bottles [...]

Ya know, it has been a hard week and I'm tired so I'll quibble before
signing off to a good sleep. If (IF) you are using glass (or a plastic
that doesn't admit oxygen), then what you speak of is all about surface
area exposed to air - the amount of surface compared to total volume. Man,
just fill the bottle to the top. Big containers are a Good Thing to the
person who uses them. Can't say for those who mix it up and leave it a
year, but why should we care?

A very important point is being overlooked. IF, the bottle
material is entirely impermeable to air, if it is full, and if it is
sealed, THEN the surface area to volumn ratio is of no consequence.
I think most would agree that glass is the last word where
impermeability is concerned. I use glass, so big or small bottle, I
worry not. The less so because I use caps which SEAL.
I'll restate that. The aging of chemistry due to air finding
it's way through glass into the bottles is out of the question. I do
check and recheck the cap to be sure the slightly resilient cone
is snug whithin the neck of the bottle.

A few words about oxygen. There is'nt very much of it. I doubt
a 2.54 centimeter cube of air would keep a flea breathing more than
a few minutes. SEALED, impermeable bottles are an oxygen hungry
solution's best insurace. Dan

[jjs]

Post by Dan Quinn
[...]
A few words about oxygen. There is'nt very much of it. I doubt
a 2.54 centimeter cube of air would keep a flea breathing more than
a few minutes. SEALED, impermeable bottles are an oxygen hungry
solution's best insurace.

Now we will have people floating a flea in the top of the bottle.

[Patrick Gainer]

Post by Dr. Dagor

Post by SofaKing
My local photo place wants $9 a pop for those 1 gal. chemical jugs! I feel
it's a little much for 25 cents worth of plastic. Are they magic or
something. Couldn't I use rinsed out antifreeze jugs or windshield washer
jugs? Do they have to be opaque? Thx.

Air (specifically O2) is probably a bigger concern than light. And
gallon is a large quantity. Even if you make developer in gallon
units you are better off with smaller bottles -- quart or liter. If
you fill them right to the top, the oxidization is minimized and your
chemicals will last longer.
Dark quart bottles are what things like Hydrogen Peroxide come in.
Just about any pharmacy has empty brown bottles in that size they will
sell you.
Here's another trick... The dusters you can buy at any office supply
store contain a heavier than air chemical that is pretty much inert to
photochemicals. If you put a couple of puffs of that stuff in the
bottle, it acts as a float and keeps the bad old air away from the
good old chemicals.

The amount of air that is in the water you use to mix your solutions may
be enough to reduce considerably the capacity of your developer. This is
especially true of ascorbate developers. 0.09 grams of oxygen will
oxidize 1 gram of ascorbic acid, and sulfite will not prevent it.
Neither will storage at low pH. The oxygen scavenging power of ascorbic
acid not only works at pH of about 3, but the products of oxidation are
also acidic. 1 gram of ascorbic acid is also capable of reducing enough
silver halide to produce an average density of 1 on 38 rolls of film or
8X10 sheets, so 0.09 grams of oxygen may reduce your developer's
capacity by 38 rolls of film. The point is that keeping oxygen from
entering the solution after mixing may not be enough. A way to scavenge
all oxygen from the solution right from the start is needed.

[Dan Quinn]

The amount of air that is in the water...

(that would be .00845 grams of oxygen at saturation per liter)

...you use to mix your solutions
may be enough to reduce considerably the capacity of your developer.
This is especially true of ascorbate developers. 0.09 grams of oxygen
will oxidize 1 gram of ascorbic acid,

That be the case 1/10th of that gram will be oxidized when placed in
one liter of oxygen saturated water or 1/100 will be oxidized if ten
grams be placed in the same water.

and sulfite will not prevent it.
Neither will storage at low pH.

The two togeather will preserve ascorbic acid if the solution ph
is below 5.5.

1 gram of ascorbic acid is also capable of reducing enough
silver halide to produce an average density of 1 on 38 rolls of film
or 8X10 sheets, ...

I've real doubts about that. I've not actually put 38 rolls or
that many 8x10s through a developer with no more than one gram of
ascorbic acid as the developing agent.
In fact I don't even consider ascorbic acid a developing agent. If
the ph is way way up it will reduce some silver. I think it is best
likend to hydroquinone for it's regenerative function. That is
it reduces the other or other developing agent/agents present.

A way to scavenge
all oxygen from the solution right from the start is needed.

For most solutions I'd consider that more ado about nearly
nothing. Some very dilute solutions should be striped of that
.00845 gram of oxygen.
The usuall way to scavange that O2 is a pinch of sulfite first
than the whatever. For ascorbic acid try the bisulfite. I've
found the two to be harmonious.
Stirring of solutions which are subject to oxidation must be
minimized. Dan

[Patrick Gainer]

Post by Dan Quinn

The amount of air that is in the water...

(that would be .00845 grams of oxygen at saturation per liter)

...you use to mix your solutions
may be enough to reduce considerably the capacity of your developer.
This is especially true of ascorbate developers. 0.09 grams of oxygen
will oxidize 1 gram of ascorbic acid,

That be the case 1/10th of that gram will be oxidized when placed in
one liter of oxygen saturated water or 1/100 will be oxidized if ten
grams be placed in the same water.

and sulfite will not prevent it.
Neither will storage at low pH.

The two togeather will preserve ascorbic acid if the solution ph
is below 5.5.

1 gram of ascorbic acid is also capable of reducing enough
silver halide to produce an average density of 1 on 38 rolls of film
or 8X10 sheets, ...

I've real doubts about that. I've not actually put 38 rolls or
that many 8x10s through a developer with no more than one gram of
ascorbic acid as the developing agent.

It wouldn't make any difference if you had 10 grams of ascorbic acid. 1
of those grams is still used up by 38 rolls of film. None of the
phenidone or metol is used up. So which is the developing agent? The
phenidone alone will certainly not do that.

Post by Dan Quinn
In fact I don't even consider ascorbic acid a developing agent. If
the ph is way way up it will reduce some silver. I think it is best
likend to hydroquinone for it's regenerative function. That is
it reduces the other or other developing agent/agents present.

You can look at it that way if you want, but it is wrong. It is not
proper to consider the ascorbic acid or hydroquinone as only
regenerating the phenidone. The phenidone or metol activates the
hydroquinone or ascorbate, which do the actual work. In the case of
ascorbates, the product of reaction with any so-called "free radical" is
dehydroascorbic acid. The developer solution becomes more acidic as
development of silver halide progesses. It also becomes more acidic as
oxygen is converted to water by the two hydrogen atoms it gets from
ascorbic acid or any ascorbate. This occurs at pH of 3 or so and higher.
How much ascorbate is in Xtol diluted 1+2?

Sulfite is required for the synergism between hydroquinone and other
agents, as one of the intermediate products is hydroquinone
monosulfonate. Sulfit is not required for the synergism between
ascorbates and othe agents. The mechanism is not the same as for
hydroquinone.

I think the solubility of oxygen in water is greater than 0.09
grams/liter. The amount of silver needed to cover a given area to a
given optical or photographic density is well known for old emulsions.
It is probably even less for the tabular grained ones. 0.0001 grams of
silver per cm square per unit density is a conservative number for the
calculations I did. 1 molecular weight of ascorbic acid will be oxidized
to dehydroascorbic acid by 1 atomic weight of oxygen. If there are any
other things in the water, such as bacteria, they may as well oxidize
some ascorbate. Iron is known to catalyze the oxidation process.

The easiest way to avoid some of these real or imagined problems that I
have found is to keep the stock solution inactive until you want to
develop film by dissolving it in a glycol.

Post by Dan Quinn

A way to scavenge
all oxygen from the solution right from the start is needed.

For most solutions I'd consider that more ado about nearly
nothing. Some very dilute solutions should be striped of that
.00845 gram of oxygen.
The usuall way to scavange that O2 is a pinch of sulfite first
than the whatever. For ascorbic acid try the bisulfite. I've
found the two to be harmonious.
Stirring of solutions which are subject to oxidation must be
minimized. Dan

[Patrick Gainer]

Post by Patrick Gainer

Post by Dan Quinn

The amount of air that is in the water...

(that would be .00845 grams of oxygen at saturation per liter)

...you use to mix your solutions
may be enough to reduce considerably the capacity of your developer.
This is especially true of ascorbate developers. 0.09 grams of oxygen
will oxidize 1 gram of ascorbic acid,

That be the case 1/10th of that gram will be oxidized when placed in
one liter of oxygen saturated water or 1/100 will be oxidized if ten
grams be placed in the same water.

and sulfite will not prevent it.
Neither will storage at low pH.

The two togeather will preserve ascorbic acid if the solution ph
is below 5.5.

1 gram of ascorbic acid is also capable of reducing enough
silver halide to produce an average density of 1 on 38 rolls of film
or 8X10 sheets, ...

I've real doubts about that. I've not actually put 38 rolls or
that many 8x10s through a developer with no more than one gram of
ascorbic acid as the developing agent.

It wouldn't make any difference if you had 10 grams of ascorbic acid. 1
of those grams is still used up by 38 rolls of film. None of the
phenidone or metol is used up. So which is the developing agent? The
phenidone alone will certainly not do that.

Post by Dan Quinn
In fact I don't even consider ascorbic acid a developing agent. If
the ph is way way up it will reduce some silver. I think it is best
likend to hydroquinone for it's regenerative function. That is
it reduces the other or other developing agent/agents present.

You can look at it that way if you want, but it is wrong. It is not
proper to consider the ascorbic acid or hydroquinone as only
regenerating the phenidone. The phenidone or metol activates the
hydroquinone or ascorbate, which do the actual work. In the case of
ascorbates, the product of reaction with any so-called "free radical" is
dehydroascorbic acid. The developer solution becomes more acidic as
development of silver halide progesses. It also becomes more acidic as
oxygen is converted to water by the two hydrogen atoms it gets from
ascorbic acid or any ascorbate. This occurs at pH of 3 or so and higher.
How much ascorbate is in Xtol diluted 1+2?
Sulfite is required for the synergism between hydroquinone and other
agents, as one of the intermediate products is hydroquinone
monosulfonate. Sulfit is not required for the synergism between
ascorbates and othe agents. The mechanism is not the same as for
hydroquinone.
I think the solubility of oxygen in water is greater than 0.09
grams/liter. The amount of silver needed to cover a given area to a
given optical or photographic density is well known for old emulsions.
It is probably even less for the tabular grained ones. 0.0001 grams of
silver per cm square per unit density is a conservative number for the
calculations I did. 1 molecular weight of ascorbic acid will be oxidized
to dehydroascorbic acid by 1 atomic weight of oxygen. If there are any
other things in the water, such as bacteria, they may as well oxidize
some ascorbate. Iron is known to catalyze the oxidation process.
The easiest way to avoid some of these real or imagined problems that I
have found is to keep the stock solution inactive until you want to
develop film by dissolving it in a glycol.

Post by Dan Quinn

A way to scavenge
all oxygen from the solution right from the start is needed.

For most solutions I'd consider that more ado about nearly
nothing. Some very dilute solutions should be striped of that
.00845 gram of oxygen.
The usuall way to scavange that O2 is a pinch of sulfite first
than the whatever. For ascorbic acid try the bisulfite. I've
found the two to be harmonious.
Stirring of solutions which are subject to oxidation must be
minimized. Dan

Sorry. One of the hazards of the slide rule is decimal point errors. I
think the solubility of oxygen in cold water is about 4.5 cc per liter.
That would be about 0.009 grams at atmospheric pressure.

I don't want to use any sulfite in my ascorbate developers, for other
reasons. Perhaps a tiny bit of hydroquinone would be a more appropriate
scavenger than sulfite, since it has practically no developing power of
its own at low pH and low concentration, and is not superadditive with
either ascorbic acid or phenidone without sulfite. Better yet, a tiny
bit of pyro. But that would increase the hazard slightly, enough to
scare off many people.

[Dan Quinn]

Post by Patrick Gainer

Post by Dan Quinn
(that would be .00845 grams of oxygen at saturation per liter)

NOT COLD but 20*C

Post by Patrick Gainer

Post by Dan Quinn
The two togeather will preserve ascorbic acid if the solution ph
is below 5.5.

Bisulfite and a low ph.
That is according to the book. I've some mixed up and now ageing.
I'll likely test again in a few weeks.

Post by Patrick Gainer

Post by Dan Quinn
In fact I don't even consider ascorbic acid a developing agent. If
the ph is way way up it will reduce some silver. I think it is best
likend to hydroquinone for it's regenerative function. That is
it reduces the other or other developing agent/agents present.

The phenidone or metol activates the
hydroquinone or ascorbate, which do the actual work.

THAT will be news to quite a few! Dan

Post by Patrick Gainer

Post by Dan Quinn

Post by Patrick Gainer
A way to scavenge
all oxygen from the solution right from the start is needed.

For most solutions I'd consider that more ado about nearly
nothing. Some very dilute solutions should be striped of that
.00845 gram of oxygen.
The usuall way to scavange that O2 is a pinch of sulfite first
than the whatever. For ascorbic acid try the bisulfite. I've
found the two to be harmonious.
Stirring of solutions which are subject to oxidation must be
minimized. Dan

[Patrick Gainer]

Post by Dan Quinn

Post by Patrick Gainer

Post by Dan Quinn
(that would be .00845 grams of oxygen at saturation per liter)

NOT COLD but 20*C

Post by Patrick Gainer

Post by Dan Quinn
The two togeather will preserve ascorbic acid if the solution ph
is below 5.5.

Bisulfite and a low ph.
That is according to the book. I've some mixed up and now ageing.
I'll likely test again in a few weeks.

Which book?

Post by Dan Quinn

Post by Patrick Gainer

Post by Dan Quinn
In fact I don't even consider ascorbic acid a developing agent. If
the ph is way way up it will reduce some silver. I think it is best
likend to hydroquinone for it's regenerative function. That is
it reduces the other or other developing agent/agents present.

The phenidone or metol activates the
hydroquinone or ascorbate, which do the actual work.

THAT will be news to quite a few!

But not to the authors of "Theory of the Photographic Science"
Pat

Post by Dan Quinn

Post by Patrick Gainer

Post by Dan Quinn

Post by Patrick Gainer
A way to scavenge
all oxygen from the solution right from the start is needed.

For most solutions I'd consider that more ado about nearly
nothing. Some very dilute solutions should be striped of that
.00845 gram of oxygen.
The usuall way to scavange that O2 is a pinch of sulfite first
than the whatever. For ascorbic acid try the bisulfite. I've
found the two to be harmonious.
Stirring of solutions which are subject to oxidation must be
minimized. Dan

[Dan Quinn]

Post by Patrick Gainer

Post by Dan Quinn
The two togeather will preserve ascorbic acid if the solution ph
is below 5.5.
Bisulfite and a low ph.
That is according to the book. I've some mixed up and now ageing.
I'll likely test again in a few weeks.
Dan

Which book?

In a manor of speaking, a book. I found that information via
Google. The paper dealt, IIRC, with various anti-oxidates used with
pharmaceuticals. I'll see if I can find it. Dan

[Patrick Gainer]

Post by Dan Quinn

Post by Patrick Gainer

Post by Dan Quinn
The two togeather will preserve ascorbic acid if the solution ph
is below 5.5.
Bisulfite and a low ph.
That is according to the book. I've some mixed up and now ageing.
I'll likely test again in a few weeks.
Dan

Which book?

In a manor of speaking, a book. I found that information via
Google. The paper dealt, IIRC, with various anti-oxidates used with
pharmaceuticals. I'll see if I can find it. Dan

I should have said my idea of ascorbic acid as a developing agent would
not be surprising to the authors "Theory of the Photographic Process."
This what happens when I trust my 76 yeaar old memory. I believe in the
hereafter. When I set out to get something, I get where I think it is,
but cannot remember what I am here after

[Dan Quinn]

Post by Patrick Gainer

Post by Dan Quinn
The two togeather will preserve ascorbic acid if the solution ph
is below 5.5; bisulfite and a low ph.
That is according to the book. I've some mixed up and now ageing.
I'll likely test again in a few weeks.

Which book?

I've yet to find that article.
I may have made an error. A ph of 5.5 may be the
equallibrian ph.
BTW, have you tested ascorbic by itself for keeping qualities?
With it's ph in solution well below 3, I think it might do well. I've
some in Polycone sealed glass bottles and intend to test it. Dan

[Norman Worth]

Shop around. Chemical supply houses sell quality plastic ware at a quite a
bit less. Some of the bigger photo mail order places do too. If I don't
need the brown color (usually I don't), I've been using 2 liter soft drink
bottles. They are impermeable to air (unlike LD polyethylene), convenient,
and extremely cheap, but you may have to replace them a bit more often.

Post by SofaKing
My local photo place wants $9 a pop for those 1 gal. chemical jugs! I feel
it's a little much for 25 cents worth of plastic. Are they magic or
something. Couldn't I use rinsed out antifreeze jugs or windshield washer
jugs? Do they have to be opaque? Thx.

[l***@NOthe-wire.com]

This post might be inappropriate. Click to display it.