# Important Health & Safety Information



## Hertz van Rental

This thread is the result of a comment made in another conversation.

Over the years I have come to realise that although a great many people enjoy processing and printing their films they are completely unaware of the risks some of the chemicals used in the darkroom can pose to health.
I am not attempting to put people off using photographic processes, or to frighten them. But it is important to treat photographic chemicals with care and respect and not take unnecessary risks.
Observing safe practice is essential for those who teach or run classes of any kind. Nobody likes a law suit except a lawyer.

The purpose of this thread, then, is to provide advice, information and links to other relevant sites concerning known health risks posed by photographic chemicals, and to promote safe working practices.

I would therefore strongly advise everyone to visit these web pages, print them out and read them carefully.

http://www.trueart.info/photography.htm
http://www.ci.tucson.az.us/arthazards/photo2.html

It is a reasonably complete list of chemicals used in photography along with the various health risks they pose.

The level of hazard posed by the various chemicals depends upon a number of factors, including age, fitness and general health. The risks are also assessed on the basis that the chemical is undiluted. Even so it is best to err on the side of caution.

This page contains some very useful links:

http://www.trueart.info/hazards.htm

The site itself has lots of other interesting and useful information for artisits.


----------



## ksmattfish

This would be a good thread for a sticky!


----------



## ksmattfish

On a related note...

Keep your cats (and I suppose other pets) out of your darkroom.  Besides getting cat hair on everything, and that they like to lick the gelatin on the prints, apparently some cats find darkroom chems tasty, and it's not good for them.


----------



## Hertz van Rental

Some more useful links including information about dermatitis:
http://www.ehs.ufl.edu/HMM/photo.htm
http://www.ccohs.ca/oshanswers/diseases/dermatitis.html
http://www.lhc.org.uk/members/pubs/factsht/72fact.htm
http://www.ci.tucson.az.us/arthazards/medium.html

This one is of particular interest. It deals with the health problems associated with silver and it's compounds.
http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxprofiles/phs146.html

Please try to find time to read these.


----------



## DocFrankenstein

Hehe Great info Hertz. Thank you very much for putting this up.

I I'll use:
lab coat
gloves
and maybe even a respirator of some sort


----------



## darin3200

I just read all of those articles and I need to be safer in the darkroom. I'm usually in it under an hour and its a big room but I'm going to set up a ventilation system now. In the first months of my darkroom I didn't bother wearing gloves  :shock: Now I'm glad I have plenty of gloves.


----------



## 'Daniel'

Are rubber gloves alright?


----------



## darin3200

Daniel said:
			
		

> Are rubber gloves alright?


That's what I use, my mom works at a hospital so she can get some for me


----------



## Glorsclaws

Thanx for sharing the links Hertz ...just the info I need for my course.


----------



## marwa45

thank you for info


----------



## Rolleistef

Rubber gloves are hardly protecting from anything... You should use those nice big gloves you use when you want to wash the floor with detersives or others.
Always work with some cool air coming, if you work in your room (dark-bedroom technic, works very well, shut the blinds and curtains and that's okay), open the window behind the curtains.
if you work in your bedroom
NEVER DO PRINTING JOB BEFORE SLEEPING OR AFTER 11PM FOR THOSE TWO REASONS :
(unless you don't have the choice of course)
-chemicals are volatil products, and you may sniff nice bad things all night long,
-you feel smarter than Ilford or Kodak or Tetenal and misuse the chemicals "because it's faster/better/etc". the result is : you get go-directly-to-the-trash printings
I suspect chemicals for being a bit hallucinogen. I always feel so smart and then over-disappointed when I'm printing pics :mrgreen::mrgreen:.
Have fun
Stéphane


----------



## fightheheathens

as a chemist, i would like to say that of all the good safty measures you can take, some form of eye protection is the most important. 
I have been working with chemicals for a while and while gloves and coats are a good idea, eye protection is top.


----------



## Bobby Ironsights

fightheheathens said:


> eye protection is top.


 
:thumbup:


----------



## montresor

Y'all probably know this already, but the two lead docs linked herein don't print out perfectly, there's a lot of right margin overhang. If you can't get your computer to re-size it, try what worked for me -- edit:select all:copy.

Open a word processing document and paste. Woo-hoo! All correctly justified.

Now I need to find the best price on hazmat suits! :stun:


----------



## RedStarRevels

GOOD GOD! It's a wonder I'm alive...GLOVES!?! Never even thought about wearing them. I'm self taught, so I have a lot of darkroom bad habits...Like drinking and smoking while printing. Six Guinness can make it very difficult to tell whether or not an image is in focus! I'm going to give these sites a good read, thanks mate.


----------



## christopher walrath

I have a dorky looking rubber apron, at least covers over my footwear, protective glasses (as I sweat like the dickens under goggles) and, if mixing chemicals from a stock solution, a half face respirator (you can pick these up cheap enough from auto parts stores that sell paint).


----------



## shootLib

well ... i have been sticking my hands in the chemicals for awhile now. 
i hope i havent caused any damage. and i can't say that i actually want to stop and used something to protect myself. time consuming. 

but....now i have little concern...


----------



## sunshinedaydream

shootLib said:


> well ... i have been sticking my hands in the chemicals for awhile now.
> i hope i havent caused any damage. and i can't say that i actually want to stop and used something to protect myself. time consuming.
> 
> but....now i have little concern...



I do it too, i hate using tongs...and who wants to wear thick rubber gloves? but I've learned my lesson about sticking your hands in the sepia toning chemicals. Three fingers on my right hand look so brown and dirty, and it won't go away!!!


----------



## lisa_13

i almost don't want to read anything on the website that is in all papyrus...


----------



## compur

Dipping ones hide in metol type developers can cause an ugly and painful 
allergic skin rash after years of doing this.  I've seen it on others.

I use a surgical type rubber glove on one hand for times when I must poke my 
fingers in the soup.  They are cheap.


----------



## maris

Hertz van Rental said:


> This thread is the result of a comment made in another conversation.
> 
> Over the years I have come to realise that although a great many people enjoy processing and printing their films they are completely unaware of the risks some of the chemicals used in the darkroom can pose to health.
> I am not attempting to put people off using photographic processes, or to frighten them. But it is important to treat photographic chemicals with care and respect and not take unnecessary risks.
> Observing safe practice is essential for those who teach or run classes of any kind. Nobody likes a law suit except a lawyer.
> 
> The purpose of this thread, then, is to provide advice, information and links to other relevant sites concerning known health risks posed by photographic chemicals, and to promote safe working practices.
> 
> I would therefore strongly advise everyone to visit these web pages, print them out and read them carefully.
> 
> Photography
> Health & Safety in the Arts: Photography Chemicals
> 
> It is a reasonably complete list of chemicals used in photography along with the various health risks they pose.
> 
> The level of hazard posed by the various chemicals depends upon a number of factors, including age, fitness and general health. The risks are also assessed on the basis that the chemical is undiluted. Even so it is best to err on the side of caution.
> 
> This page contains some very useful links:
> 
> Hazards
> 
> The site itself has lots of other interesting and useful information for artisits.



The information qouted in the links is both correct and amazingly irrelevant to the needs of people working in an amateur darkroom. 

The lists look like what anyone could cobble together from reference sources like the Merck Index or the CRC Handbook. Most of the items listed are not used by any photographers working in a modern darkroom and probably represent a compendium of things that may have been tried at one time or another in the past. Also very conspicious is complete absence of discussion (probably reflecting complete ignorance) about actual photographic processing practice.


You need to know all this stuff if you intend to set up a chemical engineering factory to manufacture photographic processing solutions from pure raw materials. Otherwise it is largely alarmist folderol. 

The photographic developing solutions that ordinary people can buy in shops are weak alkalis, weak reducing agents, with rare allergy potential for sensitive people. Compared to scented bath soap photographic developers are very safe, mild, and unlikely to cause a rash.

Photographic stop bath is an acetic acid solution weaker than pickle vinegar, another acetic acid solution. People eat pickle vinegar!

Photographic fixer is a solution of ammonium thiosulphate which is far far safer than ordinary laundry bleach or toilet cleaner. And so on...

Common sense and actual information about practical photochemistry is a better source of darkroom safety.


----------



## terri

Hertz is neither alarmist or ignorant, and the links have been there for some time with no one crying foul.    To somehow imply this post, in offering links to get people reading and thinking about safety procedures in the darkroom, is somehow irresponsible and doing us a disservice, is absurd.



> Photographic stop bath is an acetic acid solution weaker than pickle vinegar, another acetic acid solution. People eat pickle vinegar!


You wouldn't take a deep whiff of acetic acid, though, would you?     :er:     Of all the things you just went off about, this might be the most dangerous thing you've said.


----------



## CW Jones

I feel this thread should have been made, and locked as to keep chatter and fallacy to a minimum...

Let people add links and facts via PM to a mod or something.


----------



## maris

terri said:


> Hertz is neither alarmist or ignorant, and  the links have been there for some time with no one crying foul.    To  somehow imply this post, in offering links to get people reading and  thinking about safety procedures in the darkroom, is somehow  irresponsible and doing us a disservice, is absurd.



Hertz  is OK but the links are poor because they don't get people reading and  thinking about safety procedures in the darkroom. The hazard data in the  links does not connect to the actual photochemistry that people  encounter in the darkroom. It should. 

There is a modern trend  toward alarmism and an overestimation of actual hazards. I noticed this  years ago when I was a consultant for Eastman Chemicals (the chemical  engineering arm of Kodak). As the "hot-line" guy I would get 'phone  calls about developers, stops, and fixers from spooked amateurs and I  can't recall an unequivocal case of chemical injury. The people at most  risk were in the professional processing labs where they actually  handled stuff like glacial acetic acid. Amateurs could not (and should not)  get stuff like this without an appropriate chemical handling ticket, a  hazmat clearance, and a training course. The big pro labs had eye wash  stations, safety showers, spill control kits, antidotes, and "disaster"  procedures. I made sure they did. Home darkroom formulae were  specifically made in small packages with a big safety factor in mind.

Later  I did scientific research in toxicology at a government laboratory and  had the sobering experience of watching thousands of animals die in the  cause of knowledge. Chemical poisoning is a grim business but in  everyday life it is hard to encounter accidentally. There is a wall of laws and restrictions for public access to laboratory style chemicals. And it's those laboratory and industrial chemicals that the links at the top of this thread refer to. But what if you are standing in front of a tray of rapid fixer in a regular darkroom; what's the hazard there? The links have absolutely nothing to say!



> Photographic stop bath is an acetic acid solution weaker than pickle  vinegar, another acetic acid solution. People eat pickle vinegar!
> 
> 
> 
> You wouldn't take a deep whiff of acetic acid, though, would  you?     :er:      Of all the things you just went off about, this might be the most  dangerous thing you've said.
Click to expand...

A whiff of glacial  acetic acid is dangerous but I can't get glacial acetic acid and I  expect most of this forum's members don't have the legal clearances  either. Those that can get it should know it and fear it. Home darkroom stop-bath concentrate is a nasty smell  which you won't want to repeat. But you won't die. A dilute working stop  bath is weaker than pickle vinegar.

By way of comparison  ordinary laundry bleach is terrifying. Every year scores of people  (mostly children) die, suffer mutilation or go blind from it.

I  urge darkroom workers to get the real facts from the manufacturers themselves. If you use D-76 developer  ask Kodak, about ID-11 ask Ilford, for SB-50 stop bath ask Fotospeed and so on.... The links at the top of  this thread don't really inform you about what to buy, how to mix it, and how to use it so you stay safe.


----------



## terri

It's easy to join a forum and spout off, which is all you're doing so far.    

Since you claim to have consultant experience, why not offer up some helpful links yourself on the subject and contribute to this thread in a more positive way?    

Thanks.


----------



## HowToDevelopFilm

maris said:


> terri said:
> 
> 
> 
> There is a modern trend  toward alarmism and an overestimation of actual hazards.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This probably has to do with the sue-happy society we live in. Unless companies warn against every single way somebody could get injured, some say they could be at risk.
Click to expand...


----------



## jasonphoto

thans a lot for this info,,


----------



## unpopular

The concentration of acetic acid in stop bath is about 7%, slightly more than white distiller vinegar. Stock solutions are at 30%, which might be a bit more of a concern. I don't know about Australia, but you can get glacial acetic acid in the united states pretty easily. It is a very harmful acid, but not, as far as I've known, controlled. I do not even think it's a dea list chemical, like silver nitrate is, and you can still get clearance pretty easily for that, and most other common photo chemicals that are listed. It's just a matter of telling the DEA who you are and where you live. Most retailers handle this for you and all you have to do is fill out a form. 

Fixer is metabisulfite or thiosulfite, which is pretty safe, and is used as an benign sterilizer in food and beverages. I used it to clear ammonia in our cats litter box. It can be found at any brewshop, and I've never seen any warnings on it. It irritates the mucus membranes pretty bad, but I don't think it's toxic, especially not in a solution.Clearing agents are sodium sulfite, which I am not totally familiar with but I doubt is excessively toxic. Both sodium sulfite and metabisulfite have a health rating of 2.

I have all these msds in storage with my chemistry set. If anyone wants more specific information I can get them out.

Developers are very broad, but primarily are combinations of two chemical, metol and hydoquinone. They typically also contain potassium bromide and potassium or sodium hydroxide to increase pH. All of these chemicals are relatively toxic when taken internally over a long period of time. Potassium Bromide, an anticonvulsant used in Europe, was taken off US markets due to bromide buildup in the blood. It is difficult to dose over the long term. However, the amount of bromide in developer is very small, something like one gram per gallon of stock (I think, it's been a while). Potassium Bromide is often prescribed in greater than one gram amounts for seizures.

Metol and Hydroquinone are both known carcinogens over prolonged acute exposure. I'm not an expert, but I wouldn't be too worried about then unless you work for Illford or Kodak. Gloves should be plenty enough protection. Both are very water soluble. Other developers, like Pyrocatechol are another matter, and are extremely toxic.Potassium and sodium hydroxide are used only to adjust pH. Both of these chemicals are very caustic and will burn you, but not at the concentrations of prepared developer.

While daily photochemistry is prob. Pretty safe, be aware that concentrated stock solutions need a bit of extra care. Both developer and stop may cause mild burns or dermatitis, and used fix contains metallic silver and should be handled as toxic. The other stuff might have some environmental concerns, so check with local regulations about disposal, and use common sense when handling.


----------



## BlackSheep

For any chemical (darkroom or otherwise), you can look up the Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS) online, usually right on the manufacturer's website. These sheets include information on what the active ingredients are, how it can affect you (i.e. if you swallow some, or if it contacts your skin, etc., etc.) and first aid info. So, for example - here is the link to the available MSDS's on Kodak D-76:

Search Results

The best part about using the MSDS's is that they are specific to the product you are using, so there's no second-guessing about concentrations and that sort of stuff.  

The MSDS's are available for pretty much anything, at least here in Canada - even for Windex and deodorant room sprays!


----------



## edcculus

BlackSheep said:


> For any chemical (darkroom or otherwise), you can look up the Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS) online, usually right on the manufacturer's website. These sheets include information on what the active ingredients are, how it can affect you (i.e. if you swallow some, or if it contacts your skin, etc., etc.) and first aid info. So, for example - here is the link to the available MSDS's on Kodak D-76:
> 
> Search Results
> 
> The best part about using the MSDS's is that they are specific to the product you are using, so there's no second-guessing about concentrations and that sort of stuff.
> 
> The MSDS's are available for pretty much anything, at least here in Canada - even for Windex and deodorant room sprays!



I was going to mention this, and I'm glad you did. I think this should be put on the first post rather than here at the end. If you want to know about any chemical, look up the MSDS. I work in printing, and we have to have an MSDS sheet for any ink, coating, varnish, chemical, plate developer etc that comes in the building. 

If you can't find the MSDS online, contact the manufacturer, and they can send you one.


----------



## jeremyh1988

Are vinyl gloves alright


----------



## unpopular

jeremyh1988 said:


> Are vinyl gloves alright



Kitchen marigolds were always available to us in school. If anything, household chemicals are going to be more reactive and corrosive. The issue with darkroom chemistry is long-term exposure.


----------



## jeremyh1988

unpopular said:


> jeremyh1988 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Are vinyl gloves alright
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kitchen marigolds were always available to us in school. If anything, household chemicals are going to be more reactive and corrosive. The issue with darkroom chemistry is long-term exposure.
Click to expand...


Not sure what a "kitchen marigold" is.


----------



## unpopular

marigolds!


----------



## vintagesnaps

I've used those (but never heard them called that). Sounds like gardening gloves! lol

Those are what I was taught to use; I don't know about those vinyl gloves.


----------



## Derrel

jeremyh1988 said:
			
		

> Are vinyl gloves alright


----------



## petrochemist

compur said:


> I use a surgical type rubber glove on one hand for times when I must poke my
> fingers in the soup.  They are cheap.


Surgical type gloves vary considerably. Nitrile rubber ones are reasonably impenetrable to chemicals, but Latex ones allow most of the chemicals in our lab to pass straight through - they actually give a false sense of security so could be worse than nothing!


----------



## compur

My surgical gloves are certified by the Surgical Glove Manufacturer's Guild to be free of any false senses of security.


----------



## timor

On the other hand : which gloves stop radiation from computerlike devices ?


----------



## unpopular

timor said:


> On the other hand : which gloves stop radiation from computerlike devices ?



Biodex Radiation Attenuating Gloves.


----------



## timor

unpopular said:


> timor said:
> 
> 
> 
> On the other hand : which gloves stop radiation from computerlike devices ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Biodex Radiation Attenuating Gloves.
Click to expand...

Thank you. Might be useful for all editing digital pictures way to long.


----------



## Douglas Brown

Geeze guys!

In my teens thru 40's I processed my own work in my B&W darkroom without a mask, safety glasses or gloves and, truth be told, I even used to smoke, drink and eat in there...on occasion.  Now I am 63 years old and still have all my digits and health after running film and prints thru the soup .

Maybe scientists should sample my blood to see how I survived.


----------



## Space Face

Wow, this is 6 years old.


----------



## Douglas Brown

And yet we are still learning things every day for the next person that joins TPF.


----------



## Space Face

Douglas Brown said:


> And yet we are still learning things every day for the next person that joins TPF.


Apparently it's a software issue with the new Forum set-up that keeps kicking up old threads.  Folk see the thread appear and generally without realising it's old, comment on it.  Admin are actively looking to resolve the matter.  There, that's something else learned.


----------



## Space Face

Space Face said:


> Wow, this is 6 years old.


16 years I meant to say, not 6.


----------

