Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,974   Posts: 1,523,627   Online: 1067
      
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 23 of 23
  1. #21
    Donald Qualls's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    North Carolina, USA (transplanted from Seattle)
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,845
    Quote Originally Posted by Daniel Grenier
    Can one expect the same results if the tubes be "stood up" rather than laid down? I want to set this up for my newly acquired 7x17 but my sink space is rather limited and small area required for vertical processing would be more practical.
    I'm not Sandy, but my tubes are made to be used vertically, with the tube full of developer and agitated by inversion (they have daylight fill tubes and liquid tight inversion caps). I've had good results with semi-stand and stand development in this kind of tube. Vertical tubes with open ends, for use in a deep tank, should work well, but ABS is the wrong stuff in this case; ABS pipe is "cellular core" which means it's foam with a solid surface inside and out; as such, it floats in liquid. If you use PVC instead, the plastic itself might float (especially in solute-rich developers like D-76 stock), but not to anything like the extent the cellular core ABS does.

    Of course, for 7x17 (inches, LF panoramic, right?) you'd need 17-18 inches of 3" diameter pipe (I haven't seen 2.5 inch, and two inch would be too small), which comes to a LOT of developer per sheet -- or 7-8 inches of 6" diameter, which I'm pretty sure is hard to come by (and would be prone to the film unseating from fluid motion due to agitation). A single 16x20 tray, with chemicals poured in and out as you go, would be much more practical in terms of chemical volume per square inch of film (except that pouring out of that size tray in the dark promises to be Too Much Fun). The down side, as always, with this kind of tube-in-tray process is that you're limited to constant agitation, and can't use reduced agitation to control contrast and compensation.
    Photography has always fascinated me -- as a child, simply for the magic of capturing an image onto glossy paper with a little box, but as an adult because of the unique juxtaposition of science and art -- the physics of optics, the mechanics of the camera, the chemistry of film and developer, alongside the art in seeing, composing, exposing, processing and printing.

  2. #22

    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Greenville, SC
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    4,813
    Images
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by Donald Qualls
    Of course, for 7x17 (inches, LF panoramic, right?) you'd need 17-18 inches of 3" diameter pipe (I haven't seen 2.5 inch, and two inch would be too small), which comes to a LOT of developer per sheet -- or 7-8 inches of 6" diameter, which I'm pretty sure is hard to come by (and would be prone to the film unseating from fluid motion due to agitation). A single 16x20 tray, with chemicals poured in and out as you go, would be much more practical in terms of chemical volume per square inch of film (except that pouring out of that size tray in the dark promises to be Too Much Fun). The down side, as always, with this kind of tube-in-tray process is that you're limited to constant agitation, and can't use reduced agitation to control contrast and compensation.
    In fact I do indeed use reduced agitation in horizontal orientation with the tube-in-tray method that I described at the beginning of this thread. I am of course using the special light-fast container that was pictured in one of my messages on this thread that was specfically construced to accept four 7X17" tubes. It does take quite a bit of developer to completely cover the tubes as you need for reduced agitation, but since we are using a very dilute solution of Pyrocat-HD (1:1:150-200) the total cost per gallon of developer is not all that much more than if using a regular dilution. And of course, per gallon Pyrocat-HD is very inexpensive, even if purchased in kit form.

    The specific gravity of PVC tubes is just a tad more than water so they will sink to the bottom of the container in the very dilute Pyrocat-HD solution. I can not say for other developers.

    Sandy

  3. #23
    juan's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    St. Simons Island, Georgia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,637
    Images
    4
    My PVC tubes stay submerged with no problem.

    For pouring solutions out of the tray, I cut another piece of PVC the approximate length of the inside of the tray. I hold the tubes down with the PVC and tip the tray to dump the solution. The tubes stay in place with no problem.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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