CWC2
CWC2 is the moniker for a developer which was introduced in the
March l5th, 1984 issue of Applied Optics[1]
in an article by D. J. Cooke and A.
A. Ward, hence the CW part of the name. Dr. Cooke is one of the authors of "Volume Holography and Volume Gratings[2]",
a technical book which lists for about $100. Mr. Ward was a co‑author[3]
along with Nick Phillips for the first article on using the dreaded PBQ as a bleach for reflection holography[4].
When I first
read the article, I thought that it was just another paper that promised a lot
but would deliver nothing. The original
PBQ recipe, the infamous GP432, never really seemed to work,
even though that was the formula published by Agfa on their Technical Data Sheets[5]. But since I had invested in a half‑pound
of PBQ, ($22) I figured I had to try
it so that maybe I could use up the poison.
I set up my Standard Single Beam Reflection Test Object,
a silver spray painted waffle iron mold.
This object presents a not very deep texture which is homogenous
throughout the exposure test quadrants.
Plus it's fun to look at the pseudoscopic side because it then
looks like the waffle. The holographic
plate sits on three ball bearings glued onto the waffle iron, and a piece of
cardboard the size of the holographic plate is laid on top of it. The cardboard is a test exposure mask. One of its quadrants had been cut away, so
that four different exposures can be made on the plate as the masking card is
rotated between them.
In the first
round of testing, I compared this new process to the then current champions,
the "original recipe Pyrochrome[6]*", and the phenidone-doped "Pyrochrome Plus" of Graham
Saxby[7]. 10 by 10 cm squares were cut from 30 by 40
cm Agfa 8E75HD plates, and placed on
the test object. Each plate received
four exposure doses, approximately 50, 100, 200, 400 microJoules per square
centimeter** in each quadrant thanks to
the exposure mask. For each developer
three of these test plates were shot so that there was a plate developed for
one, two or four minutes. The CWC2 developed plates were bleached in
the CWPBQ2 formula, the Pyro developed ones in the 'Chrome silver solvent bleach.
The Pyrochrome processing worked as
expected, with a replay color of orange with the weak exposure and a green at
the maximum exposure, thanks to the shrinkage of the gelatin and therefore the
fringe spacing as more of the exposed and developed silver was removed in the
bleaching. But the CWC2 developed and CWPBQ2
bleached plates were all the same color; laser red. The hologram looked red under white light, but when illuminated
with laser light, the image was also reconstructed so well, that it could steal
the light from the object underneath and make a reconstruction that was
brighter than the actual object! And
even more remarkable, the plate could be repositioned on top of the object and
generate real time interferometric fringes!
This definitely shows that there is no shrinkage and distortion of the
recorded interference structure, which makes this process the highest in
recording fidelity.
And the
highest in brightest. Even though the
holograms are longer wavelength replay compared to the Pyrochrome, where our eyes are less sensitive, the image looks
"solider". But this process
also gives noisier results at the greater exposures ‑ the plate takes on
a pale blue milky appearance so that the shadow areas are not completely
black. This is due to scatter from the
newly rehalogenated grains which grew in size during the bleaching. The noise is dominated by the blue end of
the spectrum, and will be obvious under white light illumination, but the same
exposure will look less noisy illuminated by red laser light. Putting a red filter on the replay light
will also alleviate this condition.
Comparing the
plates with different development times showed that as the development time
increases so does brightness as well as noise.
Two minutes proved to be the best compromise for this batch of plates,
and later experimentation with 8E75HD
film used in reflection mode showed that one minute was fine for that
application.
Other
experiments attempted on that day included a plate developed in CWC2 but bleached in the 'Chrome bleach. This yielded a plate with four different
colors in each of the quadrants, but the colors were shifted even more to the
green than those of the corresponding exposures in the Pyro developed plates. For
instance, the Pyrochrome processed
plate may yield a slightly shorter than laser red replay at 50 uJ/cm2 but the CWC2 and 'Chrome bleach combo would give a definite orange. The Pyro
developer tans the gelatin so that it is stronger structurally than the gelatin
in an area developed by CWC2 to the
same density, where the shrinkage then is much more severe. Simply by choosing the proper developer‑bleach‑exposure
combination, the holographer can generate any color from the exact laser replay
to a color approximately 150 nm shorter.
He‑Ne
HOLOGRAPHER'S PALETTE
|
633 nm CWC2 Developer CWPBQ2 Bleach |
633‑550 nm Pyro Developer 'Chrome Bleach |
600‑500 nm CWC2 Developer 'Chrome Bleach |
What about
plates developed in Pyrochrome
developer but bleached in CWPBQ2? The plate took a long time to bleach, and
did not look very good, as it appears that the wavelength had been shifted to
something slightly longer. The heavily
tanned gelatin prevented the flow of bleach into the emulsion, and the tanning
by the developer had occurred while the emulsion was wet and bloated, so that
the fringe system was expanded to Bragg reflect at a longer wavelength
than the recording one. This may have
applications for holographers starting out with green wavelengths and intending
to go to longer replay colors.
What about
transmission holograms? Previously I had
tested five different developers (Original recipe Pyrochrome, Pyrochrome Plus,
Kodak D‑19, D‑19 Minus[8],
and Agfa GP6l[9])
coupled with a reversal bleach and had come to the conclusion that all the
developers used were capable of the same results, the only difference being the
exposure energies necessary. Setting up
my Standard Transmission Hologram
Exposure and Development Setup, which is a piece of wrinkly glass placed in
the path of the diverging light issuing from the spatial filter and used as a
transmissive object, placed approximately 15 cm away from and parallel to the
holoplate with a large mirror next to it angled so that the light missing the
glass is directed to the holoplate as a reference beam*
and duplicating as close as possible the previous transmission test's alignment
by replaying one of the previously shot test holograms and arranging the
equipment to coincide with their positions in the hologram's reconstruction, I
shot holograms with an exposure series of 50, 100, 200, 400 uJ/cm2 on Agfa
8E75HD four by five sheet film and processed them for 1,2, 4 and 6 minutes
development time, a set bleached with PBQ,
the other with the reversal bleach. The
latter looked just like the original set; the new developer worked pretty much
like the rest. But the PBQ bleached ones were significantly
brighter, and the replay reference angle stayed the same as the recording
one. Again, overexposed areas looked a
bit milky, but the signal to noise ratio was still very high, mainly
because the signal was greatly increased.
So I adopted this process for my transmission holograms also.
The Optimal
Developed Density for both transmission and reflection holograms is about 2.0
to 2.5; pretty dark. It is hard to
give an exact number, as reading the density of a hologram is difficult because
of surface artifacts. But the density
is somewhat irrelevant, as fine tuning for optimal results is more by trial and
error exposure bracketing around the best guess. Usually I bracket over and under 200 microJoules/cm2 for 8E75HD used at 633 nm and the same for 8E56HD used at 515 nm.
The reason why
PBQ bleach gives brighter results
than the reversal bleach is not because of the ingredients but because of its
mode of action. In both processing
schemes, the developer changes the crystal clear light‑sensitive silver
bromide grains which were in the bright fringes into elemental silver
filaments, resembling steel wool pads.
Nothing happens to the silver bromide grains sitting in the dim
fringes. But the reversal bleach is a
silver solvent thanks to the potassium dichromate in it, and all the
developed silver is dissolved away just like sugar in water. This leaves only the gelatin matrix to
represent the bright fringed areas of the holographic pattern, with the dim
fringes represented by areas containing the original complement of silver
bromide in the emulsion. But the
application of a rehalogenating bleach like CWPBQ2 changes all the developed silver strands back into
transparent silver halide grains, silver bromide in particular for this bleach.
Holographic
plates start off with a homogenous distribution of silver bromide grains in
them, and if all the developed silver were changed back into its original form,
the plate should then regain its virgin condition, and there would be no
modulation of the incoming reconstructing light since there is nothing to
differentiate where a bright fringe had been as opposed to where the dim ones
had been. But this process works really
well, and the theory is that the developed grains migrate into the dim fringe
areas as they are being rehalogenated. Again the bright fringe areas are
represented by pure gelatin, and the dim fringe areas contain silver bromide,
but there is now more modulable material in those areas so that efficiency is higher. Since nothing left the emulsion, things were
only rearranged in there, the original thickness of the layer is preserved
along with the spacing of the fringes during recording, so that it is possible
to replay a reflection hologram with the laser that made it.
At first I
thought that this migration-diffusion mechanism was unreasonable, but it was
proven to me when I was making some extremely low frequency gratings*.
They had fringe spacing of about 2 line pairs per mm; these fringes are
visible to the naked eye. I made my
first exposure test, developed and bleached in CW solutions, and discovered almost no diffraction while wet. It dried while I was interrogating it with
the undiverged laser beam, and I could see in the woodgrain caused by internal
reflection between the two glass surfaces an excellent red Lippmann mirror. The process made a better hologram of the
back of the glass than it did of the coarse interference system!
The simple
grating had a fringe spacing of 100's of microns; the reflection grating's
spacing had fringes about 300 nanometers apart, which is three orders of
magnitude difference. If it were true
that the silver grains were swimming from bright fringe to dim fringe as they
rehalogenated, then this mechanism would be more effective in travelling short
distances rather than longer ones.
Develop ‑
rehalogenating processes then have a lower limit of useful spatial frequency,
and don't really come into their highest efficiency until about 1000 lines per
millimeter, as papers by Hariharan[10]
and Ward[11]
show. Benton had also predicted these
effects when writing about his IEDT
processing[12], which
shifts the unexposed silver grains which had been in the dim fringes over to
the developing bright fringe grains.
These are extreme cases; certainly the process functions well on fringes
formed in the transmission mode by an object placed along the normal to the
holographic plate and a reference beam incident at 45 degrees from the normal.
The lack of
low spatial frequency response aids in the suppression of intermodulation
noise from the object's light interfering with itself. The fringes formed by points on the object
are very widely spaced for points immediately next to each other, and are at
their minimum for the interference caused by the extreme ends of the object,
but rarely are these fringes as tiny as the reference ‑ object
fringes. The process will tend to
ignore these coarse noise fringes and strengthen the more closely packed
holographic ones. Bullseyes caused by
dirt on optics will be less apparent on the CW processed holograms as the processing makes them lower
contrast. Ditto for the dreaded
woodgrain. It is strange to think of a holographic material's modulation
transfer function being at zero for the low spatial frequencies, then climbing
to a peak in the 1000's of line pairs per millimeter then falling off. But silver halide materials processed in
this mode are not alone in this respect, as DuPont's Photopolymers which work by a diffusion mechanism exhibit
this effect, with products manufactured specifically for reflection or
transmission work.
THE RECIPE
The developer formula, as first published looked like this:
10 g Catechol
5 g Ascorbic Acid
5 g Sodium Sulfite
50 g Urea
30 g Sodium Carbonate
Water to make one litre
But I changed it to look like this:
|
CWC2 Part A 20 g
Catechol 10 g
Ascorbic Acid 10 g
Sodium Sulfite 50 g Urea Water to
make one litre |
CWC2 Part B 60 g Sodium Carbonate Water to make one litre |
It was broken up into two parts like the Pyrochrome type developers to extend the shelf life. Notice that the Part B is exactly the same as Pyrochrome
Part B. The amount of everything is
double from the published formula, as you are in essence making two litres of
working solution. The urea is not doubled,
as I made a mistake in weighing it once and only put half in the soup and it
seemed to make no difference in the results.
The Catechol is one of the developing agents in this brew, and
contributes the second C in the
formula's name, which is the second of their formulae that was
catechol-based. Like Pyrogallol,
it is a tanning developer, although not as strong. It not only develops the exposed silver bromide grains, but tans
the gelatin for structural rigidity. Ascorbic
Acid is the other developing agent in here, but it does not affect the
gelatin the way the Catechol does.
The combination of developers exhibit super-additive effects; more
density is formed than would be expected based on the sum of the performances
of each of the developers alone. By not
totally relying on the tanning Catechol to provide the density, enough silver
can be developed to fuel the diffusion bleaching action, with the proper amount
of tanning to retain the structural integrity of the gelatin. Without the Ascorbic Acid the results
can be disappointing, as noted in the section on CWC2.5 below.
Sodium Sulfite is included to preserve the
developing agents. Ten grams seems to
be the proper amount as the two unmixed parts will last for a month on the
shelf. Even mixed they will last all
day, especially if left in a covered tray.
Excessive amounts of sodium sulfite, like 90 g/l as found in Kodak D‑19, can dissolve the
silver bromide grains, causing unwanted shrinkage of the emulsion from the
developer. It also prevents the tanning
developer, catechol, from staining the gelatin. CWC2 leaves a light
beige color, if any, in the hologram.
Urea is an unusual ingredient to find in
any developer. Its role is to soften
the gelatin to aid the penetration of the bulky molecular chain of the organic
developers. This makes development more
even throughout the depth of the emulsion.
Thanks to this additive, I was able to develop some of the infamously
overhard Agfa plates[13]
that were a disaster developed in Pyrochrome. This batch of plates seemed to require much
more than usual exposures to get any density, but in truth it was not a matter
of sensitivity but of lack of developer penetration through the depth of the
emulsion which was responsible for the slow rate of darkening. More exposure developed more grains at the
top of the gelatin because the tanning action of the Pyro sealed off diffusion of developer downward while the bottom
grains were still thirsty, so the density got in the proper range but it was
all confined to the upper level, so the holograms were weak no matter how you
applied the Pyro. But the CWC2 opens up the pores and evenly
develops the whole volume of the coating.
Sodium Carbonate provides the proper pH environment
for the developing agents to do their thing.
It doesn't seem to matter if anhydrous or monohydrated
Sodium Carbonate is used.
Time of development varies with the application. For reflection work, I use one minute
for 8E75HD film, two minutes for
plates, although you may want to test this for yourself. For transmission holograms, I usually
use 2 to 4 minutes on most materials, and have gone as long as eight minutes
when trying to bail out an underexposed mess.
The original paper kept the brew at 20C (68F). Here at SAIC
our recommended temperature is 75F
to speed things up a bit. Shorter
exposures will produce the same density if the developer is at a slightly
higher temperature. Using this higher
temperature makes the holographer more aware of checking it. If the developer temperature drops 4-5
degrees from 75F, the time can be extended.
But dropping under 65F can be disastrous, as almost all silver-halide
developers for photographic as well as holographic purposes lose their power,
and don't develop any appreciable density.
A variation of CWC2 was
published[14] omitting
the ascorbic acid and the urea which I christened CWC2.5. I believe that the
error was a typographical one, as the missing ingredients would have fit on a
single line. I tried it, figuring if
the omission of the ascorbic acid and urea gave just as good a result, I could
save money by not using them. But all I
got were not very bright holograms with a dark tan stain, similar to the
Pyrochrome tan. But the paper on holographic reciprocity law failure by Kostuk
et al.[15] lists the shortened formula as their main
developer and quotes efficiencies of 50%, which is totally erroneous. This leads me to believe that the results
documented in this paper are entirely bogus, as well as those in a related
paper from this same Stanford group[16].
The CWPBQ2*
Bleach formula is as follows:
15
g Citric Acid
50
g Potassium Bromide
Water
to make one litre
Add
2 g p‑Benzoquinone per litre of bleach just before use.
At one time I had broken the bleach into two solutions, one an
acidified salt solution, the other 4g/1 PBQ, but inevitably the PBQ oxidized
into uselessness within a day and was wasted.
The citric acid/potassium bromide solution will last indefinitely, just
pour out what you need and then weigh out and add the proper amount of PBQ for that volume.
The Citric Acid serves two purposes: to provide a buffered acid
environment for the oxidizer, PBQ
to work in, and also minimizes the stain of the PBQ. Comparing holograms
bleached with this PBQ formula with
those bleached in GP432, a PBQ-based bleach with boric acid
as the buffer shows that the PBQ in
the latter stains the gelatin. Old‑time
photographers knew the value of citric acid as a tanning stain remover by
prescribing the raw crystals to be rubbed over the fingers to remove pyrogallol
stains.
The Potassium Bromide is the salt, which donates its bromine
to the developed black silver to change it back to a transparent crystal, silver
bromide. Fifty grams is a good
compromise for signal to noise; 100 grams bromide in the bleach gives brighter
but noisier results, while 25 grams gives less noise at the expense of
efficiency[17].
PBQ is the oxidizing agent used in this bleach. It knocks electrons out of the silver atoms
so that it becomes an anion, which is positively charged since there is
one less electron than protons in the atom.
The bromine in the bleach solution picks up the electron, becoming a
negatively charged cation, and then the two ions form a crystal by ionic
bonding. The positive silver ions
are locked in a lattice by their attraction to the bromine which is negatively
charged in the newly-formed silver bromide crystal lattice.
PBQ is the
oxidized remains of the developing agent hydroquinone. It is quite poetic that an alkali solution
of hydroquinone will develop the transparent silver bromide grains into
black silver while an acid solution of PBQ
will bleach the black developed silver back into a transparent crystal.
The relationship between developers and oxiding agents was utilized in
a series of bleaches formulated by Nick Phillips and Hans Bjelkhagen[18]. A variety of bleaches were compounded using
developing agents which were then turned into oxidizing agents by an even
stronger oxidizer, potassium persulfate.*
Efficacy of this organic compound is quite high. Just two grams of PBQ per liter will clear a plate in the same time as 30 grams of Ferric-Sodium
EDTA or Potassium Ferricyanide, or 35 grams of Copper Sulfate. A few drops of the solution on my
bathroom/darkroom carpet bleached the fibers perfectly white.
But it is a very smelly, toxic compound that causes distress to the
eyes, nose and lungs. There are a
couple of "cures" for PBQ,
which seem to work just as well as the CWPBQ2
recipe. The first one, described by
Nick Phillips in holosphere[19],
is based on Ferric EDTA**:
30 g Ferric Sulfate (not
Ferrous!)
30
g di‑Sodium EDTA
30
g Potassium Bromide
10
ml Sulfuric Acid (concentrated) or 30 g Sodium Bisulfate
One liter of Water
Or if you have a source for Ferric EDTA without having to mix
two chemicals together***:
30 g Ferric Sodium‑EDTA
30 g Potassium Bromide
10 ml Sulfuric Acid
(concentrated) or 30 g Sodium Bisulfate
One liter of Water
Ferric EDTA is the oxidizing agent in this case,
and the acid environment is supplied by sulfuric acid, with pH around 6.0. Ten
ml of the concentrated form of Sulfuric Acid could be used to provide
the proper pH, or 20 ml of the usual concentration of 48%, (which is cheaper to
ship, and is more commonly known as battery acid) could be used, or Sodium
Bisulfate, a cheap powder that forms sulfuric acid when it is dissolved in
water might be more to your liking. The
conversion factor is 2.82 grams of the powder for each ml of concentrated acid,
which can safely be rounded to 3 g/ml. KBr
plays its usual role as the source of bromine.
Although this bleach gives results as bright as those with the PBQ and is more environmentally safe,
(color photographic processors use Fe EDTA for their kiloliters of
bleach as it is safe to release into the sewer) the color always seemed to
shrink to a shorter wavelength. This
fact coupled with the cost of Fe EDTA (>$200/lb.!) leads me to use another
rehalogenating ‑ diffusing formula, the Copper Sulfate bleach
described by Jeff Blyth in the now defunct Wavefront
magazine[20]:
35 g Copper Sulfate
10 ml Glacial Acetic Acid
110 g Potassium Bromide
One liter of Water
Copper Sulfate is the driving force in this bleach,
while a different organic acid is used to buffer the pH, running at 5.7. This
bleach seems to be exactly equivalent to CWPBQ2,
plus it has a beautiful cyan color when fresh.
As it goes bad, it turns a sickly green.
A very interesting property of all the above bleaches is that they can
erase a latent image! I made this
discovery by accident when I placed a plate in the Ferric EDTA bleach before developing[21]. I rinsed the plate off, thinking that it had
only gotten wet, then tried to develop it, and no density would appear even
after ten minutes in CWC2. The
bleach had replaced the missing bromine of the developable speck on the silver
bromide crystal. If the lights are ever
turned on while the plate box is open, the plates can be salvaged by a dunk in
any of these rehalogenating/diffusing bleaches, a 3 to 5 minute wash, Photo-Flo
solution for 1 to 2 minutes, and an air dry, ALL IN THE DARK!
PROCESSING
REGIMEN:
DEVELOP one to six minutes. (Two
minutes is a good starting point.)
WASH two to
three minutes in running water.
BLEACH for one and a half times the clearing time.
WASH three to
five minutes. (The sensitizing dye
undergoes an indicator reaction, turning pink in the acid bleaches, and back to
normal as it returns to neutral pH.)
WETTING AGENT one to two minutes.
DRY.
The CWC2 developer with
rehalogenating bleach is my primary choice for Agfa 8E75HD and 8E56HD
materials for transmission masters and transfers, and for reflection holograms
that replay in the laser color. For
shorter than laser color replay I would change the bleach to a solvent one, or
go to the Pyrochrome system.
This process works on Agfa 10E75
materials, but is quite a bit noisy, especially compared to the wonders that
original formula Pyrochrome works on
this material.
For Bulgarian Academy of
Sciences HP‑490 plates this formula is my only choice, as I do not
have their colloidal developer formulae.
The final result is a crystal clear plate with good efficiency in the
reflection mode with laser color replay.
This process can be applied to the Ilford
products, but because this manufacturer includes a Built‑In Pre‑Swell (BIPS) ingredient, the final color of reflection holograms will
shift to shorter wavelengths. To
preserve the wavelength I use their Pyrogallol-based
developer with one of the above rehalogenating bleaches.
For Kodak products, this
process doesn't work so well because of their extra hard gelatin makes
diffusion very difficult to accomplish.
In the Fall of 1987, Dr. Tung Jeong asked me if I knew any holographic
developers which lasted longer than the Pyrochrome
one. I told him CWC2, and I remembered how he had marketed the Pyrochrome process through Photographer's Formulary a few
years ago as the JD-1 Hologram
Processing Kit. Sure enough, in the
next mailing I received from the folks in Montana[22]
there was the JD-2 Hologram Processing
Kit, which included the CWC2 developer,
designed to be mixed in A & B
solutions, as described in this handout, and with the 'Chrome bleach. Of course
this silver-solvent bleach does not give the strong exact laser wavelength
replay that is possible with the developer but greenward-shifted reflection
hologram replay. If he had realized
that the 'Chrome bleach could be
turned into a rehalogenating bleach by adding a salt solution to it[23],
then the kit could be have been so versatile that it could answer all needs.
During my last months working full-time at the Lake Forest College
Center for Photonics Studies, Dr. Jeong was querying me about dry
substitutes for Acetic Acid. He
had confided in me that he would like to update the JD-2 kit with a rehalogenating bleach, as the typically green
holograms the kit gave were not so exciting.
He knew that I was using the Jeff
Blyth Copper Sulfate Bleach at the School of the Art Institute of
Chicago, since it seemed to be more environmentally palatable than PBQ and cheaper than Ferric EDTA. But the Acetic Acid liquid, in no matter how small an amount,
carried a hefty shipping surcharge.
Although I knew that Sodium Diacetate dissolved in water produces
Acetic Acid[24], (much like
Sodium Bisulfate produces Sulfuric Acid in solution) I pleaded ignorance, as I
could see more money coming his way and none for me.
In the Summer of 1993, while I was working with Nick Phillips in the
labs at Lake Forest College, we were processing holograms with the Copper Sulfate Bleach. Dr. Phillips was astounded with the high
(110 g/l) concentration of KBr in this formula. He recommended diluting the bleach with an equal part of water,
and it worked just as well for his current experiment. Dr. Jeong was quite excited by this
revelation, as now his new and improved JD-3
Kit could include a rehalogenating bleach that would cost half as much as he
had projected, leaving more room for profit.
The acid substitute that he arrived upon was Succinic Acid, a
powder which doesn't demand a handling surcharge. However this bleach formulation (18 g CuSO4, 2 g Succinic Acid,
55 g KBr) takes a long time to bleach, since the pH is higher, and seems less
noisy but at the expense of brightness.
If Dr. Jeong had indulged in further experimentation he probably could
have hit upon a more satisfying formula.
Purchasers of the JD-3 kit
would serve themselves well by replacing the Succinic with Acetic, easily
purchased at camera stores, and mixing up the bleach formula with half the
amount of water.
This process has remained my standard for so long because it fully
utilizes the potential of the material.
Side by side comparisons with the likes of D‑19, Holodev 602,
etc. show that others can give similar
or equivalent results, yet never surpassing the CWC2 performance, as they are pushing the limits of the
material. The next big breakthrough in
brighter silver halide holograms will have to come from improvements in the
films themselves.
REFERENCES
[1]. D. J. Cooke
and A. A. Ward, "Reflection-Hologram Processing for High Efficiency in
Silver-Halide Emulsions," Applied Optics 23, 973 (1984).
[2]. L. Solymar
and D. J. Cooke, Volume Holography and Volume Gratings, Academic Press, London,
1981.
[3]. N. J. Phillips,
A. A. Ward, R. Cullen, D. Porter, "Advances in Holographic Bleaches,"
Photographic Science and Engineering 24, 120 (1980). Also Agfa Gevaert Technical Information Bulletin 21.7271(480).
[4]. N. J.
Phillips, A. A. Ward, R. Cullen, D. Porter, "Advances in Holographic
Bleaches," Photographic Science and Engineering 24, 120 (1980). Also Agfa Gevaert Technical Information
Bulletin 21.7271(480).
[5]. Agfa
Corporation, Technical Information Bulletin 21.7271(480).
[6]. Walter
Spierings, "'Pyrochrome' Processing Yields Color-Controlled Results with
Silver-Halide Materials", holosphere Volume 10, Numbers 7 and 8, p.1,
(1981)
[7]. Adapted from
Graham Saxby, "Jottings From the U.K.", holosphere, Volume 12, Number
5. p.9 (1983)
[8]. Nicholas J.
Phillips, "The Making of Successful Holograms", Proceedings of the
First International Symposium on Display Holography, 1982, p.27.
[9]. Agfa Gevaert
Technical Information Bulletin 21.7271(480)
[10]. P. Hariharan,
C. M. Chidley, "Photographic Phase Holograms: The Influence of Developer
Composition on Scattering and Diffraction Efficiency", Applied Optics 26,
1230-1234, (1987).
[11]. Ward and
Solymar, Applied Optics. Have to find
it.
[12]. Stephen A.
Benton in Handbook of Optical Holography, H. J. Caulfield editor, Academic
Press, 1979, New York.
[13]. In a
holosphere I no longer have.
[14]. J. M. Heaton
and Laszlo Solymar, Wavelength and angular selectivity of high diffraction
efficiency reflection holograms in silver halide photographic emeulsion,
Applied Optics, Vol. 24, No.18, p. 2931.
Dr. Solymar is the co-author of the expensive grating book referenced in
1, and both of the authors of this paper are in the same Engineering group at
Oxford as Cooke and Ward. They should
know the real recipe, so I assume that the omission of the two ingredients was
a typographical error.
[15]. Raymond K.
Kostuk, Joseph W. Goodman, and Lambertus Hesselink, "Volume Reflection
Holograms with Multiple Gratings: an Experimental and Theoretical
Evaluation," Applied Optics Vol. 25, No. 23, 1986, p. 4362.
[16]. Kristina
Johnson, Kostuk, and Hesselink, on multiple exposures. Can't find the citation at the moment.
[17]. L. Joly,
"Grain Growth During Rehalogenating Bleaching", The Journal of
Photographic Science, Vol. 31, 1983, p. 143.
[18]. H. I.
Bjelkhagen, N. Phillips, W. Ce, "Chemical symmetry - Developers that look
like bleach agents for holography", in Practical Holography IV, edited by
S. A. Benton, Proceedings of SPIE 1461, 321-328 (1991).
[19]. Nicholas
Phillips, "Benign Bleaching for Healthy Holography", holosphere,
Volume 14, Number 4, p.21, (1986)
[20]. Jeff Blythe,
"A Novel Approach to Colour Processing", Wavefront, Volume 2, Number
3, p.23 (1987).
[21]. Ed Wesly,
"Recycling of Holographic Plates", Proceedings of the Third
International Symposium on Display Holography, Lake Forest College, (1988).
[22].
Photographer's Formulary, P.O. Box 5105, Missoula MT, 800-922-5255.
[23]. A handout
circa 1979 from Integraf, (Dr. Jeong's personal business) prescribed developing
in Kodak D-8 or D-19 and bleaching in a bath composed of 2 grams Potassium Dichromate,
2 milliliters of Sulfuric Acid, and 30 grams of Potassium Bromide in a liter of
water. Mixing the basic 'Chrome bleach
(4 g Potassium Dichromate and 4 ml Sulfuric Acid) with an equal part of a 6%
solution of Potassium Bromide would produce the bleach above. Care should be taken to use only 'Chrome
bleach that has never bleached material, as the dissolved silver compounds
floating in it would precipitate in the holographic emulsion. This bleach formula yields results just as
bright as any others mentioned in this handout, except that it seems to be
slightly noisier.
[24]. 2.3 grams of
Sodium Diacetate added to water yields the same pH as adding 1 milliliter of
Glacial Acetic Acid; use .66 gram of Sodium Diacetate for every milliliter of
28% Acetic Acid solution. From 150
Do-It-Yourself black and White Popular Photographic Formulas, Edited by Patrick
D. Dignan, Dignan Photographic, North Hollywood, California, 91606. Available from Photographer's Formulary.