RE: Iron

Clay, I haven't seen any that have gone off either. I haven't read the
papers that are being referred to by the link. I would also suspect residual
iron levels in some water supplies. I have felt better about the EDTA/Sodium
Sulfite baths that have been in my practice too.

Bob, my use of EDTA Di sodium/Sodium sulfite for the first bath is because
it has a lower pH than tetra sodium. Then I don't worry about the acid
interaction with the base. Many may recall the gas that comes off prints
that were cleared in HCL and then placed in Hypo clearing agent.

Eric

Eric Neilsen Photography
4101 Commerce Street, Suite 9
Dallas, TX 75226
214-827-8301
http://ericneilsenphotography.com
 
Skype : ejprinter
> -----Original Message-----
> From: wcharmon@wt.net [mailto:wcharmon@wt.net]
> Sent: Monday, March 27, 2006 10:44 AM
> To: alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca
> Subject: RE: Iron
>
> I have a good sample of ten year old prints cleared in
> EDTA/sodium sulfite
> that look as good as the day they were made. I have not
> personally seen any
> EDTA cleared prints that have degraded, but by no means have I
> seen every
> print ever made and cleared with this method.
>
> So far, we apparently have heard of a single example of an EDTA
> cleared print
> that has turned brown. My first reaction is that it probably
> wasn't properly
> cleared at the time it was made. Without knowing the exact
> procedure used, how
> it was checked for total clearing and so forth, it seems to be
> a large jump in
> reasoning to pin the 'browning' wholly on EDTA. Sort of the
> 'cum hoc ergo
> propter hoc' logical fallacy.
>
> OTOH, I have seen many early 1900's platinum prints whose paper
> base is badly
> yellowed, which I might guess is most likely from the acidic
> clearing
> procedure used at that time. On yet another hand, I have seen
> other platinum
> prints from the same period that look brand new.
>
> What conclusions can I draw from this? 'Stuff happens' and
> 'cleanliness is
> next to.. impossible' and 'a foolish consistency may be the
> hobgoblins of
> little minds, but a reasonable consistency is a damn good
> idea'.
>
> 2cents
>
> Quoting Eric Neilsen <e.neilsen@worldnet.att.net>:
>
> > Ryuji, Does the reading that you have done then suggest that
> use of an EDTA
> > clearing bath would not good? One reason that I switched to
> using it years
> > ago, was that it left the paper feeling better. The acid
> washed paper felt
> > stiff or brittle. Which is worse for paper, residual acid or
> iron? Both? And
> > is it a specific EDTA? I have started with di sodium for bath
> 1 and then
> > switch to tetra as the clearing proceeds. Would a pH change
> slow the iron
> > from reacting?
> >
> > Eric Neilsen Photography
> > 4101 Commerce Street
> > Suite 9
> > Dallas, TX 75226
> > http://e.neilsen.home.att.net
> > http://ericneilsenphotography.com
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Ryuji Suzuki [mailto:rs@silvergrain.org]
> > > Sent: Monday, March 27, 2006 8:20 AM
> > > To: alt-photo list
> > > Subject: RE: Iron
> > >
> > > On Mon, 27 Mar 2006 11:48:39 +0300, "Loris Medici"
> > > <mail@loris.medici.name> said:
> > >
> > > > In the light of the previous exchange, I believe residual
> iron is a real
> > > > and serious problem for iron-silver processes.
> > >
> > > I agree iron can be a problem, but I would want to compare
> what level of
> > > iron is detrimental to paper and what level of iron is
> found in
> > > traditionally processed iron-silver prints. It is probably
> that the
> > > aging of paper is accelerated by any amount of iron in
> rather
> > > dose-dependent manner. If this is the case, we want to get
> some idea of
> > > what amount of iron impregnation that would not
> significantly shorten
> > > the life of paper compared to non-impregnated paper, and
> aim that value
> > > as the archival standard for the processing of iron-silver
> processes.
> > > However, I have no idea what that level would be, at all.
> > >
> > > > Actually, that was another person's question. My
> understanding was since
> > > > iron is a strong catalyst for silver oxidation + a
> catalyst won't
> > > > exhaust, even a small amnt. is not tolerable. This is not
> an absolute
> > > > fact, it's my (maybe completely wrong) personal take. I
> hope future
> > > > messages on this issue will clear that for us (including
> me).
> > >
> > > Iron catalyst won't be exhausted by the mechanism described
> in the web
> > > page in yesterday's post and a few other review papers I
> managed to get
> > > last night. This is typical of iron catalyzed oxidation
> seen in many
> > > places. I've also seen a research that showed that EDTA
> treatment of
> > > iron-gall inked paper worsened its keeping property, which
> is consistent
> > > with the idea that iron is acting as the catalyst.
> > >
> > > Users of iron-silver processes should be concerned about 2
> issues.
> > >
> > > 1. degradation of silver image due to environmental
> pollutants
> > > 2. degradation of silver image and paper substrate due to
> iron
> > >
> > > For 1, I think the best method is to use noble metal toning
> or use Fuji
> > > Ag Guard.
> > > For 2, I think the best method is to modify the process to
> ensure
> > > thorough removal of iron and then treat the paper with
> something that
> > > inactivates iron's catalyst action and also act as an
> antioxidant.
> > >
> > > In these, we are concenrned about easier problems than
> those
> > > ink-corroded paper conservators because the treatment is
> applied at the
> > > time of creating the work. Much of the problems in paper
> conservation
> > > seems to be related to the fact that most useful treatments
> being
> > > water-based, change of color or strength of the ink, and
> volume
> > > processing of the material.
> > >
> > > However, before any treatment is justified, I think there
> are two points
> > > that need to be demonstrated: 1. a problem exists. 2. the
> problem can be
> > > solved by the treatment without any adverse effect.
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
> --
> This message has been scanned for viruses and
> dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
> believed to be clean.
Received on Mon Mar 27 12:55:45 2006