DIY dipping processor

Discussion in 'Darkroom Equipment' started by AgX, Jun 9, 2013.

  1. AgX

    AgX Member

    Messages:
    11,200
    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2007
    Location:
    Germany
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
  2. hoffy

    hoffy Member

    Messages:
    2,274
    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2009
    Location:
    Adelaide, Au
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Very Cool! So, it looks like their is some bugs to iron out with agitation, which I am sure can be reasonably easily fixed.
     
  3. jbrubaker

    jbrubaker Member

    Messages:
    42
    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2008
    Shooter:
    35mm
    Very interesting. Thanks for sharing this! ---john.
     
  4. viridari

    viridari Member

    Messages:
    330
    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2008
    Location:
    Raleigh, Nor
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
  5. Noble

    Noble Member

    Messages:
    277
    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2012
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Waaayyyyy too slow. My frustration with using the Paterson tanks at the "kitchen table" (ie daylight) is you have to pour chemicals in and out of the tank. So when you are timing your development when is the "start" of the development? When you start pouring in the developer or when the last drop of the developer goes into the tank. This process can take several seconds. Dumping out is a bit faster because you don't have to use care. Then the next thing is adding the stop. You really want all developing to stop at the same time on the negative. This simply is not possible because again it takes a few seconds to pour in the stop.

    Developing in the darkroom with steel reels and multiple tanks seems ideal. You just quickly drop the film in the tank and developing begins everywhere almost simultaneously. That system seems nice once you have done the stop. I personally wash my film using the fill, soak, dump and refill routine instead of continuous water flow. It would be nice if there was a system that dumped the water and refilled it at different progressively longer intervals. I never have problems with pink/purple negatives even with tabular films like some people. If you soak them long enough in multiple water baths the dyes eventually rinse out... a tedious process though.
     
  6. hoffy

    hoffy Member

    Messages:
    2,274
    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2009
    Location:
    Adelaide, Au
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Way too slow maybe, but this can be dealt with and tuned. Once the process is sorted, it should be a very consistent approach.
     
  7. Jeff Searust

    Jeff Searust Member

    Messages:
    361
    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2007
    Location:
    Texas
    Shooter:
    Med. Format Pan
    I teach film developing and get people asking this once in a while. My answer is that film development times can be broken into discrete chunks of either 10 seconds or 15 seconds. If you need to time development down to the second, or can tell the difference between development of one second and the next one, then you are probably not using a daylight tank in the first place. --- While you are stressing over seconds, the rest of the class is done, has good looking film, and is moving onto the next step.
     
  8. Noble

    Noble Member

    Messages:
    277
    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2012
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Wouldn't "stressing" about it make you proceed thorough the fluid changes faster? That too me would seem the logical solution not going slower.

    I shoot TMAX 100 @ ISO 50 and develop in XTOL. The Kodak datasheet recommends 30 seconds less developing versus shooting at ISO 100. I haven't had a lot of time to experiment because I had other issues that were more pressing. I was just thinking 5 seconds is 16% of of 30. When you look at it that way that's a lot of slop. I wasn't sure whether it made a difference in the final print. I didn't really "stress" about it but it is something a logical person would think about. I have traced 90% of my issues in developing to deviating from the manufacture's recommendations. I overly complicated my efforts by being sloppy. Anyway I haven't done any experiments and if you say it is irrelevant then that is good enough for me for now.

    My biggest problems with developing were uneven developing (particularly in smooth skies) and air bells. Adding an acid stop bath helped with some of the uneven development but the type of swift fluid changes and vigorous thump to reliably dislodge bubbles one needs leads me to believe you would need a machine that is a lot more robust. The overall concept seems sound, but the materials don't seem like the could stand up to the necessary level of violence. Having said that I would welcome anything that took that chore off my hands and resulted in nice negatives.
     
  9. WayneStevenson

    WayneStevenson Member

    Messages:
    145
    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2009
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    "When you start pouring in the developer or when the last drop of the developer goes into the tank."

    When all of the developer is poured in, and you have slamed your bubbles out. Start the timer and then start your initial constant agitation.

    That will help ensure even development. Avoiding processing times less than 5 minutes will also aid. If I can't hit the 5 minute mark with my film / developer combintation, I go with a different dilution, or I use a different developer.
     
  10. jamonadap

    jamonadap Member

    Messages:
    13
    Joined:
    May 23, 2006
    Thanks for all contributions!

    As I write in the video, it is a showoff of the first tryout. A lot is to say about speed and so on. For me count at this moment this procedure shows some potential.....and I will continu it with more tryouts like change in speed, change in agitation and more diffrences in concentration of the liquids. I promise to report later!

    with mind regards,

    Jan
     
  11. Steve Smith

    Steve Smith Subscriber

    Messages:
    8,970
    Joined:
    May 3, 2006
    Location:
    Ryde, Isle o
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Absolutely.

    My normal development times are between ten and fifteen minutes. I don't think the five seconds it takes to fill the tank is going to give me negatives with more density at the bottom.


    Steve.
     
  12. StoneNYC

    StoneNYC Inactive

    Messages:
    8,093
    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2012
    Location:
    Connecticut,
    Shooter:
    8x10 Format
    I can see stressing over dev times when it's short like 5 minutes or less, some of the dev times can be about 4 minutes or you have to adjust the dilution (HC-110 & Ifsol 3 come to mind) and pouring in a 2 reel (120) tank takes me 22 seconds with a 3 reel (120) tank it takes 36 seconds which is significant in a 5 minute window, that said... I've honestly never had an issue with uneven development even at fast times.
     
  13. Mick Fagan

    Mick Fagan Subscriber

    Messages:
    3,054
    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2005
    Location:
    Melbourne Au
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    On the commercial dip-n-dunk E6 and C41 machines I have used, the time between baths was 15 seconds. C41 with a developing time of 3'15" was always the hardest one as the film was usually in the first developer for 3'35" which is getting close to a ½ stop push.

    The thing is, if you wish to develop your dip-n-dunk machine, you don't have to alter much from what I can see, just ensure consistency and temperature stability.

    One thing our commercial dip-n-dunk machines did have, were blasts of Nitrogen every 10 seconds for agitation.

    Perhaps you can have a little lift of the film reel or holder by pulling it up say 4cm then it just drops back in and hits the bottom where there is a small glass marble on one side making the reel go sideways a bit, then immediately it starts pulling up 4cm again. This may be a way of getting some simple agitation happening.

    Mick.
     
  14. Neal

    Neal Subscriber

    Messages:
    1,562
    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Wes
    Shooter:
    4x5 Format
    Dear Jan,

    Thanks for sharing. I look forward to seeing more.

    Neal Wydra
     
  15. paul ron

    paul ron Member

    Messages:
    1,442
    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2004
    Location:
    NYC
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    hahahahhahha now I have seen it all!

    So cool n a wonderful imagination.. that is waht we need more of in this world.
     
  16. Noble

    Noble Member

    Messages:
    277
    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2012
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    My problem is I use XTOL and TMAX film a lot these days. Kodak recommends at most a 1:1 dilution so my times are never in the 15 minute range. XTOL straight up might be wonderful but I never tried it because I worried developing times would be too short. Anyway you point is well taken.

    Thank you. I was considering getting a 2 reel 120 tank and I was afraid of things like air bells and uneven development.

    Good to know.

    Thanks for the real world (no pun intended) examples. They are comforting.
     
  17. yellowcatt

    yellowcatt Member

    Messages:
    47
    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2010
    Shooter:
    35mm
    No more slow than using a dip and dunk machine that has to lift a 120 film out of one tank and lower it into the next.
    I never noticed any problems with the negatives produced like that.
     
  18. chip j

    chip j Member

    Messages:
    763
    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2012
    Location:
    NE Ohio
    Shooter:
    35mm
    A pre-soak has helped me w/air bubbles.
     
  19. yellowcatt

    yellowcatt Member

    Messages:
    47
    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2010
    Shooter:
    35mm
    I remember I had to add a presoak when processing C41 with a Jobo CPE2 to prevent the occasional air bubble.
     
  20. Noble

    Noble Member

    Messages:
    277
    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2012
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    The dip and dunk machines I've seen don't use reels. One of the big problem areas I was having with uneven development was with 120 film on the outer edges. It looked like if I wasn't quick and vigorous about getting the developer off the part of the film that came in contact with the reel it would slightly over develop in places. At least that's what it looked like to me. Eliminating the reel would solve that issue. It really didn't show up in 35mm negatives. I think it's because the image area is further away from the reel lip.
     
  21. Kirk Keyes

    Kirk Keyes Member

    Messages:
    3,268
    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2004
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    Shooter:
    4x5 Format
    That's great. I'm constantly amazed these days at how many cool things can be done with relatively inexpensive things and cheap computers.

    I'm sure you'll get the agitation figured out with a few more test runs.
     
  22. jamonadap

    jamonadap Member

    Messages:
    13
    Joined:
    May 23, 2006
    For those who are expecting a quick update. I'm sorry, at this moment I'm busy with the last weeks of this school year and then a break. When I have time, I will try some changes and after that I will publish my results.

    Sincerely,

    Jan
     
  23. jamonadap

    jamonadap Member

    Messages:
    13
    Joined:
    May 23, 2006
    LS,
    Should anyone expect and waiting for an update of this project, then I have "bad" news: I do not continue with this concept! I stop it for the following reasons:
    * I prefer a system with a lower consumption of chemicals and
    * I hope next week to become the owner of a factory system, namely a Filmrunner (a rotation system).

    If I unexpectedly cannot or do not buy the Filmrunner, then I will pick up the 'lego-route' again. I have already made a new concept. This time using the RCX in a rotation system to the Filmrunner, I have already worked out this idea on paper which you can see here: http://www.janvandenbroekfotografie.nl/index.php/blog


    Sincerely,

    Jan
     
  24. Steve Smith

    Steve Smith Subscriber

    Messages:
    8,970
    Joined:
    May 3, 2006
    Location:
    Ryde, Isle o
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Whilst it's fun making things, getting something ready made to do the job is good too - it frees up time to make something else!


    Steve.
     
  25. jamonadap

    jamonadap Member

    Messages:
    13
    Joined:
    May 23, 2006
    My last Update and contribution: A rotation system!

    This will be my last update! Sometimes you must take a little bit of time and ask yourself questions like 'How many times do I photograph with film?'. The answer then does you realize that an automatic film development system for me really is not viable. But I took the challenge based on some ideas that 'haunted' me to make a film processor based on rotation development. Photos of the project and some results can be seen here: http://www.janvandenbroekfotografie.nl/index.php/blog
    OK I succeeded, the system need some tweaks, but as I stated earlier, a system like this, for me is after all not the most practical and therefore I will not continue with it. Sometimes, as often, the way hat you go is sometimes more important than the result in the end!:wink: