Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,502   Posts: 1,543,403   Online: 741
      
Page 6 of 9 FirstFirst 123456789 LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 88
  1. #51

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Sedona Az.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    123
    You do realize that's not helpful to the OP since he wants something different from FR tanks right?
    yes... but I couldn't help it... ... they work, are simple, and hold twelve negs,,

    Sometimes, are thoughts come around, and settle back at the beginning, after looking at all the other possibilities.. we find ourselves with a new attitude, about something we rejected, after seeing it in a new light and perhaps different perspective.

  2. #52
    cmacd123's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Stittsville, Ontario
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,025
    One On topic point, Paterson did change the length of the centre core in the Paterson tanks when they designed the "Super System 4" If you use the wrong one you will sometimes get a light leak where the top goes into the core. The Light trap does not have a light path that is as long on the super tanks as well, and works best if the funnel is down all the way and locked.

    Unfortunately the older series is no longer made.
    Charles MacDonald
    aa508@ncf.ca
    I still live just beyond the fringe in Stittsville

  3. #53

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    MA, USA
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    1,251
    Images
    19
    CatLABS of JP
    Darkroom resources and service

    www.catlabs.info | https://www.facebook.com/CatLABS.of.JP | www.jobo-usa.com

  4. #54
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    7,313
    Images
    225
    This would be great if it sealed... How come they don't make something like this now but for full inversion? Seems just like a JOBO / Paterson hand tank design (light baffle wise) with a better ability to hold the sheets than the MOD54.

    I've often wondered why the MOD54 doesn't have a top loading feature rather than putting it in from the side, it seems to me would make a lot more sense to sort of have it load similar to an FR tank, but still fit in a Paterson tank... Or am I the only one who doesn't see that that would make sense?
    ~Stone | "...of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong." ~Dennis Miller

  5. #55

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    MA, USA
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    1,251
    Images
    19
    The Jobo 2509 already does exactly that.
    CatLABS of JP
    Darkroom resources and service

    www.catlabs.info | https://www.facebook.com/CatLABS.of.JP | www.jobo-usa.com

  6. #56
    JohnRichard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Lexington, KY
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    262
    Images
    15
    So I tried again with the FR this morning, and a few things I discovered.

    First, I don't have the small plastic pieces that apparently come with it?
    Second, I had to do math because I was only doing two sheets, not 12. No need to ruin a whole day of shooting.
    Using Ilfosol 3, 1+14 would yield 100ml of developer use, which was dumb.
    So I guessed and used sort of .4+14.6 (math is hard).
    So dilution was not standard, but turned out to be ok for two sheets.
    Printing later this week.

    Spinning the box as opposed to lateral agitation seemed to produce OK results.
    - J. Richard
    4x5 Speed Graphic, Looking for another 8x10.

  7. #57

    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    US
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    2,060
    The small plastic pieces: The straight one with the slot in it is the loader. The U shaped one is theclamp that keeps the films pushed down from sliding upwards or flopping out of their slots. The square flat one is the light trap.
    It's a tough tank to use, but it does work if you don't load all 12 slots, causing inadequate agitation and mixing.

  8. #58
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    7,313
    Images
    225
    Quote Originally Posted by JohnRichard View Post
    So I tried again with the FR this morning, and a few things I discovered.

    First, I don't have the small plastic pieces that apparently come with it?
    Second, I had to do math because I was only doing two sheets, not 12. No need to ruin a whole day of shooting.
    Using Ilfosol 3, 1+14 would yield 100ml of developer use, which was dumb.
    So I guessed and used sort of .4+14.6 (math is hard).
    So dilution was not standard, but turned out to be ok for two sheets.
    Printing later this week.

    Spinning the box as opposed to lateral agitation seemed to produce OK results.
    No one kill me for saying this, but I've re-used Ilfsol 3 1+9 dilution up to 6 times with no ill effects, not sure how or why, but when I first started, I didn't like the idea of killing so much developer over just one roll, so I decided to test out re-using it, on the 6th run I started to notice some lessing of the overall development of the film, and higher grain, so I stopped there. I did this for a while until I switched to Rodinal which is so cheap and easy, who cares!

    Ilfsol 3 is an under appreciated developer, it's high quality results aren't DD-X, but certainly better than HC-110/Rodinal in sharpness, However the cost is high per roll compared to HC-110/Rodinal... then again, you get what you pay for. I'm satisfied with Rodinal as my main Dev and DD-X as my "pushing Dev" for D3200 or HP5+ sheet when pushing.

    Sorry got off track, anyway point is, if you're only developing 2 sheets and you keep the leftover Ilfsol 3 from last time (and it's only been about a week since you used that) then I wouldn't hesitate to use that again before dumping it. I wouldn't do this with other Dev's as I haven't tested that with other Dev's, and probably won't, I was young and foolish, but it works.
    ~Stone | "...of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong." ~Dennis Miller

  9. #59
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    7,313
    Images
    225
    Quote Originally Posted by Tom1956 View Post
    The small plastic pieces: The straight one with the slot in it is the loader. The U shaped one is theclamp that keeps the films pushed down from sliding upwards or flopping out of their slots. The square flat one is the light trap.
    It's a tough tank to use, but it does work if you don't load all 12 slots, causing inadequate agitation and mixing.

    I never had "trouble" developing with the FR, though I only did it briefly, I never had Dev issues, it's just that it takes SO much more developer than the MOD54 and the FR doesn't seal either, so the nasty fixer smell comes out in droves, and I couldn't take it... that was my main issue, it leaks when you agitate and smells bad when the fixer time comes around.
    ~Stone | "...of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong." ~Dennis Miller

  10. #60
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    7,313
    Images
    225
    Quote Originally Posted by CatLABS View Post
    The Jobo 2509 already does exactly that.
    Does that reel fit in the Paterson tanks, or is it too big?

    If so I would assume those jobo rotary tank sized things take more than 1L to develop by hand? or am I wrong?
    ~Stone | "...of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong." ~Dennis Miller



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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