Wearing gloves when processing black & white paper

[cliveh]

I would suggest that one of the main reasons for not wearing gloves, is controlling the development of the print. I don’t often do this, but as any printer worth their salt will tell you, by using your hands and finger tips on the print during development, you can increase development by enhancing the temperature at certain areas of the print. Just like you may burn certain areas of the image when projected on the baseboard. To demonstrate just how effective this technique can be over a couple of minutes of development time, just hold the base of a thermometer in your finger tips and watch how fast the temperature climbs in just a few seconds.

 

[_T_]

It’s basic lab safety. Wear gloves goggles and closed toe shoes. No eating or drinking in the lab. Even if you’re working in your kitchen, while the chemicals are out it is the lab

 

[DREW WILEY]

Plenty of people have died using common chemicals stored under the kitchen sink, or out on a garage shelf, mixing chlorine bleach and ammonia for example. Dilution mistakes are made with common muriatic acid, or it gets used on an indoor garage floor as a degreaser, and someone's lungs are scarred for life. Certain common drain cleaners are straight sodium hydroxide, others concentrated sulfuric acid. Then there are those who light up a cigarette while they are spraying nitrocellulose lacquer onto their kitchen cabinets. There are many paths to winning a Darwin award. Even if you only win a bronze medal for being careless in the darkroom itself, is it worth it?

 

[snusmumriken]

I would suggest that one of the main reasons for not wearing gloves, is controlling the development of the print. I don’t often do this, but as any printer worth their salt will tell you, by using your hands and finger tips on the print during development, you can increase development by enhancing the temperature at certain areas of the print. Just like you may burn certain areas of the image when projected on the baseboard. I was taught this technique when I was about 17, by a very experienced photographer in his late 50’s. To demonstrate just how effective this technique can be over a couple of minutes of development time, just hold the base of a thermometer in your finger tips and watch how fast the temperature climbs in just a few seconds.

Yes, but Clive, that is surely only useful if you then snatch the print out as soon as it looks right? If you develop to completion, everything else will catch up anyway.

 

[khh]

I use gloves when I mix chemicals or develop film. I also have safety goggles and a lab coat available for working with nasty stuff, but that's not necessary day to day. With black and white in trays, I use tongs but not gloves. I don't trust I will feel any accidental exposure through the gloves, possibly leading to fixer stains on my paper. So instead I just wash my hands if I feel any liquid. I haven't figured out how I should go about RA4 yet, but reusable gloves sound like a good idea.

 

[Bill Burk]

I’m not interested in acquiring contact dermatitis. I’ve read enough about it, I don’t need to experience it. When I was in high school I would use my fingers. I also ran a Linotype and chewed my fingernails.

 

[Bill Burk]

I would suggest that one of the main reasons for not wearing gloves, is controlling the development of the print. I don’t often do this, but as any printer worth their salt will tell you, by using your hands and finger tips on the print during development, you can increase development by enhancing the temperature at certain areas of the print. Just like you may burn certain areas of the image when projected on the baseboard. I was taught this technique when I was about 17, by a very experienced photographer in his late 50’s. To demonstrate just how effective this technique can be over a couple of minutes of development time, just hold the base of a thermometer in your finger tips and watch how fast the temperature climbs in just a few seconds.

I can tell in a test print where a third stop burn will help. Never felt the need to try to accelerate development locally. But it is an old-hand trick.

I am interested in practicing some farmers reducer. I have seen some printers make good use of local bleaching

 

[cliveh]

Yes, but Clive, that is surely only useful if you then snatch the print out as soon as it looks right? If you develop to completion, everything else will catch up anyway.

You don't snatch the print out, as it still has full development time. As to "If you develop to completion everything will catch up anyway" -???????????? I obviously haven't explained this correctly, as no it does not.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Bill - Farmer's Reducer technique really deserves it's own thread, so I'll keep it brief. I now get mine from Photographer's Formulary, since the Kodak version is gone. But Formulary's instructions end up with a far stronger
batch, which has to be significantly more diluted for reasonable control. And not all papers behave the same. With some, you'll end up with a mismatched yellowing effect in the reduced areas due to the silver reduction. But in every case, you need to re-fix the paper afterwards.

In terms of the expression, "snatch development", that has specific connotations of its own. Current VC papers "snatch" quite poorly. But that doesn't mean development length always needs to go to completion. I ALWAYS tailor my development times for what looks "right" for any particular image, both in terms of contrast, Dmax, and final specific image tone. One shoe size does NOT fit all. But if the time is too brief, most current papers simply come out looking muddy, and not delicately nuanced.

 

[GregY]

You don't snatch the print out, as it still has full development time. As to "If you develop to completion everything will catch up anyway" -???????????? I obviously haven't explained this correctly, as no it does not.

nitrile gloves are pretty thin.... i'd imagine finger temperature passes through...

 

[DREW WILEY]

Besides localized "finger" development, another old trick was to pour warmer developer selectively. I do neither. It's more controllable with today's VC papers to selectively burn in during enlargement, or even better, use a tailored registered mask to do it.

But yes, disposable nitrile gloves are thin enough that, after a minute or so of immersion, you can place your palm or some fingers against the paper for a bit of control in that manner. I tend to gently rub areas of the paper sometimes a little more aggressively than the rest of the print, for say, correcting a bit of stubborn corner falloff, or something like that. But I prefer to do any such correction during enlargement instead.

 

[Tim Stapp]

Years ago one customer supplied electrical line workers, those that work on the high voltage power lines (17 kv here in Michigan). Their gloves were exchanged monthly and sent for testing/certification.

The very first test was for pinholes. The gloves were pressurized at approximately 5 psi and submerged in water for a prescribed time. Any evidence of bubbles signaled a pinhole and was cause for immediate disposal.

 

[Loose Gravel]

I use bamboo tongs. New ones are flaky so they require some help such as glue to hold the stick in the top. I don't mind getting my fingers in the soup sometimes, if required, such as with 16x20 prints. My developer is DS-14, formula by Ryuji Suzuki. NO METOL, NO HYDROQUINONE. Hate those chems. I have enough cancer.

 

[eli griggs]

I've processed prints, since I was a teen, now 66, and used both hands and tongs, on occasion gloves, and have been very lucky, in that no contact rashes or respirator issues that have kept me out of the darkroom.

I've read some photographers can not even walk into a darkroom, their sensitivity is just that high.

I've also had really bad Psoriasis, since my stint at Eniwetok Atoll, and lots of exposure to the residue of 67 atomic and nuclear bombings.
My meds that are suppose to help with symptoms also have made my skin thinner and I can often brush against something and start bleeding, but I've never had any issues with darkroom exposure, or other skin sensitivities while developing and printing any films and papers.

Since it was mentioned earlier, I'm one of the lucky ones, I've only ever once had a case of Poison Ivy, from one Forth of July, where I had trimmed over grown shrubs while really sweating in 100⁰ F heat and not showering till evening.

My youngest catches a bad P.I
rash just looking at the stuff.

if I could not go into a darkroom, make my own negatives and prints my photography and my love of the processes from camera to framing prints would be very much reduced, perhaps to the point of just not bothering to keep my kit.

Not to steal this thread but, how about you?

 

[wiltw]

The smell of fixer permeating the skin of the hands long after the darkroom session has ended...a major motivation for me to wear gloves!

 

[koraks]

carcinogens like Metol and Hydrochinon

Metol to the best of my knowledge is not classified as a carcinogen. With hydroquinone it's more nuanced; effectively we don't really know for sure, but it might be, although epidemiological studies suffer from statistical problems (too few cases) and unknown effects of compounding factors (e.g. was the subject's lung cancer caused by the developer or by their one pack a day habit). Evidently for both substances it was not known when you studied whether they were carcinogens.

This is not to say that the macho culture you refer to was good practice. But carelessly flinging about big words also has its risks. Contact dermatitis is very nasty and should evidently be prevented. But it's a different thing from cancer.

With toxicity, potential for harm etc. there's a tendency to think in terms of extremes. Something is horribly dangerous and should be prevented at all cost. Or the opposite: it's really not that bad, grandma also smoked two packs a day and look at this photo here of her 90th birthday, etc. In truth, we're generally stuck somewhere in that confusing grey area of nuance. When it comes to safety, I'm all for giving the advice to err to the side of safety, in particular if the risks are difficult to qualify and quantify. At the same time, I'm also a proponent of being as exact and specific as possible about those risks.

 

[Don_ih]

There should be many instances of hydroquinone causing cancer, if it can, due to its prevalent use as a skin bleach.

 

[koraks]

if not carcinogene, at least as very harmful

Yeah, but those are different things. That's the point I'm making. They're harmful, but there are many modes in which something can be harmful, and this has implications for safe handling and use.

cumulative, meaning that they slowly 'pack' up in the body

Both are reducers and are degraded in the body (and other ecosystems). They simply cannot bio-accumulate. You're probably mixing them up with heavy metals occasionally used in the darkroom, such as selenium and chromium.

 

[koraks]

hydroquinone (metabolite of benzene)

The benzene ring is a common building block in many, many chemicals. As such it doesn't mean much that there's a benzene ring in something.
That hydroquinone is a metabolite of benzene is hardly relevant in a discussion of photochemistry, unless there's a bizarre practice of drinking benzene that's involved in some arcane development process I'm not aware of.

 

[Bill Burk]

I've processed prints, since I was a teen, now 66, and used both hands and tongs, on occasion gloves, and have been very lucky, in that no contact rashes or respirator issues that have kept me out of the darkroom.

I've read some photographers can not even walk into a darkroom, their sensitivity is just that high.

I've also had really bad Psoriasis, since my stint at Eniwetok Atoll, and lots of exposure to the residue of 67 atomic and nuclear bombings.
My meds that are suppose to help with symptoms also have made my skin thinner and I can often brush against something and start bleeding, but I've never had any issues with darkroom exposure, or other skin sensitivities while developing and printing any films and papers.

Since it was mentioned earlier, I'm one of the lucky ones, I've only ever once had a case of Poison Ivy, from one Forth of July, where I had trimmed over grown shrubs while really sweating in 100⁰ F heat and not showering till evening.

My youngest catches a bad P.I
rash just looking at the stuff.

if I could not go into a darkroom, make my own negatives and prints my photography and my love of the processes from camera to framing prints would be very much reduced, perhaps to the point of just not bothering to keep my kit.

Not to steal this thread but, how about you?

I develop my prints for three minutes in Dektol 1:2. I’m using those blue gloves.

I do this to avoid future contact dermatitis.

I don’t often get poison oak but one time I was helping coastal cleanup day with a bunch of scouts (several are Eagle now, one just had board of review two days ago -congrats).

One tree was being strangled by poison oak and I decided that would be my assignment. I was very careful. Wore gloves and used tools to take it down.

But then we went camping and I stayed in the uniform and next day sure enough a rash developed on my right arm.

It didn’t hurt or itch but the redness lasted a couple months.

 

[cliveh]

I can't imagine Eugene Atget wearing nitrile gloves.

 

[GregY]

I can't imagine Eugene Atget wearing nitrile gloves.

Gloves, masks & safety glasses, ventilation came later..... so did seat belts and other 'safety devices'.......... not everything from the past is worth repeating.....

 

[revdoc]

I can't imagine Eugene Atget wearing nitrile gloves.

It seems he used print-out papers and would have limited exposure to chemicals when processing them:

Topics in Photographic Preservation

His film (plate) processing doesn't seem to be documented. Given how simple he kept everything else, it probably wouldn't have involved anything exotic.

 

[MattKing]

I can't imagine Eugene Atget wearing nitrile gloves.

I don't think he could time travel, so I can't imagine that either.
But I also can't imagine people wanting to smoke cigarettes in the darkroom, even though I have worked with photographers who disliked the change in rules that stopped them from doing so in their shared workplace darkroom.
After some getting used to them, I find them comfortable and efficient in use, despite having not used them for decades previously.
I don't think I ever would have got comfortable using the sort of bulky kitchen gloves that were available when I started working in the darkroom.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Oh gosh, A couple years ago PBS ran a fascinating documentary on just how dangerous Victorian/Edwardian era homes were due to naivety about household chemicals, indiscriminate bottle labeling, the toxicity of common colorants even in wallpaper, the arrival of electrical hazards, etc. It's hard to imagine that houses in Paris in Atget's era didn't have comparable risks. Even earlier, some surmise that the premature death of Napoleon during his exile was due to the toxicity of the curtain dye where he was confined. And look at what kinds of nasty chemicals many early photographers were routinely exposed to. It wasn't just hatters who went mad from mercury fuming. Even surgeons didn't wear gloves or sterilize anything; do you want to return to that? People live longer on average these days for a reason, at least during peacetime.