Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,299   Posts: 1,535,785   Online: 729
      
Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 57
  1. #21
    keithwms's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Charlottesville, Virginia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,079
    Blog Entries
    20
    Images
    129
    Ron, I realize that the DIY approach is very unlikely, hence my rolled eyes!

    Even if one could get it all to work... why not just shoot ordinary film? We could build an E6 develop-on-the-spot portable film processor....
    "Only dead fish follow the stream"

    [APUG Portfolio] [APUG Blog] [Website]

  2. #22

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    30
    Theres an idea!

  3. #23

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    30
    I'd love to do that with 35mm.

  4. #24
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    22,972
    Images
    65
    Then E6 would dissapear!



    PE

  5. #25
    David A. Goldfarb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Honolulu, Hawai'i
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    17,232
    Images
    20
    If you just want to develop film quickly, look at this thread--

    http://www.apug.org/forums/forum37/1...evelopers.html

    As long as you can get the film from the holder into the solution in the dark, you've got a neg ready to wash in 6 minutes, and if you match it up with the right film, it's got some of the same characteristics as Type 55--very sharp with high acutance--because the Type 55 developer was also a monobath in the form of a gel.

    It's not really much more complicated than putting a Type 55 neg into the clearing solution, but it does have to be done in the dark, and you need to agitate once per minute. It could be done in a changing tent or darkbox.
    flickr--http://www.flickr.com/photos/davidagoldfarb/
    Photography (not as up to date as the flickr site)--http://www.davidagoldfarb.com/photo
    Academic (Slavic and Comparative Literature)--http://www.davidagoldfarb.com

  6. #26
    keithwms's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Charlottesville, Virginia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,079
    Blog Entries
    20
    Images
    129
    Dumb question: how is it that type 55 didn't need to be agitated? That has always mystified me.

    We could make up the same goop...

    :rolleyes:
    "Only dead fish follow the stream"

    [APUG Portfolio] [APUG Blog] [Website]

  7. #27
    David A. Goldfarb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Honolulu, Hawai'i
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    17,232
    Images
    20
    We could make up the same goop, but there are probably a few exotic chemicals in there that would be hard or expensive to obtain. The monobath that I've been making uses fairly ordinary stuff.

    I think Type 55 didn't require agitation because it worked so fast--20 sec. Also, monobaths generally need less agitation, because agitation helps the fixer more than it does the developer, so if you agitate too much, it's like decreasing the development time.
    flickr--http://www.flickr.com/photos/davidagoldfarb/
    Photography (not as up to date as the flickr site)--http://www.davidagoldfarb.com/photo
    Academic (Slavic and Comparative Literature)--http://www.davidagoldfarb.com

  8. #28
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    22,972
    Images
    65
    The goo is carboxymethyl cellulose or the stuff in "natural" laxatives. The alkali is Sodium Hydroxide. The rest is just odds and ends.

    PE

  9. #29
    David A. Goldfarb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Honolulu, Hawai'i
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    17,232
    Images
    20
    Haist describes this goop from BP 987,764 assigned to Polaroid for a P/N instant film that sounds much like Type 55--

    Water--180cc

    Sodium carboxymethyl cellulose (high viscosity)--6 g

    Sodium hydroxide--9 g

    Sodium thiosulfate (penta)-- 10.8 g

    Amidol-- 7.2 g

    Ascorbic acid-- 1.8 g

    Sodium sulfite-- 6.5 g

    I'm sure there were a few extra tweaks in the final version, but it would be interesting to try this one. I suppose that if I didn't need it to be a gel, I could leave out the laxative.
    flickr--http://www.flickr.com/photos/davidagoldfarb/
    Photography (not as up to date as the flickr site)--http://www.davidagoldfarb.com/photo
    Academic (Slavic and Comparative Literature)--http://www.davidagoldfarb.com

  10. #30
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    22,972
    Images
    65
    The gel acts as a surfactant to spread the developer evenly and also as a 'glue' to hold the two parts together for a short time.

    PE

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin