RE: Sodium Bisulfite

From: Kate M ^lt;[email protected]>
Date: 08/25/04-03:06:44 PM Z
Message-id: <000601c48ae7$6dff41a0$0d26f6d2@kateiwpiarptn6>

I've cleared between coatings to check image colour balance with no ill
effects - I have no idea why this is recommended.....some of the things
others have said about clearing baths softening the gum might have some
bearing.
Kate

-----Original Message-----
From: gdimase@hotmail.com [mailto:gdimase@hotmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, 26 August 2004 7:13 a.m.
To: alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca
Subject: Re: Sodium Bisulfite

Can anybody explain me why it is written all over that the clearing bath
should be done at the end of the whole process and NOT between various
pigment printing or when you realize there is a stain?
Thanks,
Giovanni

----- Original Message -----
Wrom: OTWFAOBUZXUWLSZLKBRNVWWCUFPEGAUTFJMVRESKPNKMBI
To: <alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca>
Sent: Wednesday, August 25, 2004 7:22 AM
Subject: Re: Sodium Bisulfite

> Katharine,
> The chemists in the group can answer your question better than
I, so
> y'all have at it.
> The necessity for a longer wash is in the lit since 1898 (Packham
in
> Barnet's book). Warren recommends hypo with a long wash (1898,
Handbook to
> the Gum Process). Maskell says sod bi is extremely soluble so wash a
minute
> or two (one refute). Sod bi and alum were actually the clears of
choice,
> alum the most, until the 70's until its archivalness was questioned.
Or
the
> sun, as we have talked about here a year ago. Henney first to say pot
> metabi more effective than alum or sod bi in 1939--no mention of the
wash
> time. Beloved Scopick says this p. 42 and and sources Wm Crawford.
Whether
> all these authors are repeating misinformation or not, who knows.
Maybe
> they are using the "smell" test, and the paper still stunk sulfury
longer
> when using the other clears. I can just about guarantee there is no
chemist
> who has tested gum prints for this--who would know who cleared with
what?
> Except maybe the Getty institute is onto it. All I know is I use pot
metabi
> because I feel confident that a 10 min wash is sufficient therefore.
If I
> clear.
> Gum was born during a time when there were massive problems with
prints
> fading, spotting, deteriorating, so perhaps the advice is
springloaded. I
> know from photographic work over the last 8 years the problems that
ensue
> from not washing out fixer enough.
> This is as good as I can give you at the moment--do not have time
to
go
> back and check every source for exact wording, etc., so please excuse
me
if
> I have something incorrect, in advance. It is more important that I
plan
> assignments for a 2D art class that is coming up in 4 hr.
> Most recommend drying the print before clearing. I do both,
mostly
dry
> first, tho.
> Chris
>
> > Christina Z. Anderson wrote:
> > >
> > The reason
> > > why potassium metabisulfite is recommended the most is it is very
water
> > > soluble and thus requires shorter wash times afterwards for
archival
> > > purposes--10 minutes as opposed to 20-30 or more.
> >
> > Chris,
> > Do you have a reference for this? I've never heard anyone say this
> > before; the arguments for using potassium metabisulfite I've seen or
> > heard have always been based on it being less apt to soften the gum.
> >
> > This argument doesn't even make sense to me on the face of it, but
I'm
> > willing to be enlightened. To me the water soak isn't about
something
> > going into solution in the water; after all the xsulfite is in
solution
> > when the paper goes into it, and the paper is still soaking wet when
it
> > goes from the clearing bath into the water bath. So it's a matter of
the
> > solution that's in the paper diffusing out into the water, rather
than
> > something actually going into solution, no? What you're doing is
just
> > make an already existing solution more dilute, rather than putting
> > something that wasn't in solution into solution. So if you've got a
> > solution in the paper that's 5% sulfite, or in other words 95%
water,
> > oozing out into 100% water, why would the sulfite move into the
water
> > more slowly than say a 5% solution of metabisulfite? I can sort of
make
> > myself imagine that theoretically the solubility of the material in
> > solution might possibly make a slight difference in the speed with
which
> > the 95% water diffuses into the 100% water, but I'd need to be shown
> > empirically that that's the case, and how it could account for the
"less
> > soluble" bisulfite solution taking 2 or 3 times longer to leach out
of
> > the paper than the "more soluble" metabisulfite solution does.
> >
> > At the same time, in my own experience I haven't seen a whole heck
of a
> > lot of difference, at least between sodium bisulfite and sodium
> > metabisulfite, in the inherent solubility of the two.
> >
> > I did look for the paper Richard mentioned on Ryuji's website that
talks
> > about the difference between sodium bisulfite and sodium
metabisulfite,
> > but didn't see it there. And clicking on "photographic chemistry" or
> > "notes on chemicals" gave me a "not found" error. (As a matter of
> > fact, clicking on anything on the site gives me a "not found"
error).
> >
> > Unfortunately I took solution chemistry as a summer course, five
days a
> > week-- lecture all morning, lab all afternoon, homework all night.
As
> > anyone who knows anything about the psychology of learning can tell
> > you, this is a surefire way to learn nothing, as time is needed
between
> > sessions to absorb the information. I can vaguely remember
equations
> > with equilibrium constants and other gizmos, but I'm afraid I didn't
get
> > a whole lot out of it. So if someone knows enough about this to
explain
> > to me why this argument makes sense, I'd appreciate it. Thanks,
> >
> > Katharine Thayer
> >
>
>
>

---
Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.737 / Virus Database: 491 - Release Date: 11/08/2004
 
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.737 / Virus Database: 491 - Release Date: 11/08/2004
 
Received on Wed Aug 25 15:07:10 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 09/14/04-09:18:00 AM Z CST