Originally Posted by David Brown
What a cool story. I wonder what happened to all those orphaned "real film" surveillance cameras...
You are correct.
Originally Posted by Andre R. de Avillez
I have used Diafine at 90 degrees at 3 mints with Tri X, Plu X and HP5 in the same tank standard 3mints per bath. Until I make a chiller I used Diafine every summer because my tap water is so warm.
My guess is that they are all long gone. (Although I did actually see one on Ebay a few years back.) Their usefulness would be marginal.
Originally Posted by BradS
They were big, metal boxes, about 8 x 8 x 16 inches. They had a generic 35mm (focal length) slr lens. The film was in a cartridge about the size of a cigar box. The rest of the space in the housing was the motor, which advanced the film and the shutter. The "focal plane" shutter was a rotating disk with a slit - only one shutter speed - I think (IIRC) circa 1/125th.
There was no (repeat, no) viewing or framing ability. We "aimed them" using a cardboard sportfinder thing that just sat on top of the camera. Then you took test pictures to see if you had aimed - and guess focused - well enough.
The camera was tripped by a momentary closure, such as a button under a teller cage, or by the alarm being tripped - which locked down and would run whatever was left of the 100' of film out.
Hey, it was a job ...
Cool, I just wanted to make sure.
Originally Posted by jim appleyard
Thom, Diafine is a 2 bath developer, with Hidroquinone and Phenidone in bath A, but the activating chemicals on bath B. That means that only so much developer can be present when the activators (or whatever you call them) come into to play.
Acufine, however, is a more traditional developer, with everything mixed in one bath. Therefore, overdeveloping is as possible as with D-76 or Rodinal, for example.
Hope this helps, and good luck with your work.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
I understand now that Diafine is the way to go. I usually have two different types of film going at once, most often FP4+, but will run Tri-X, APX100, Efke through the camera, and it would be a lot easier logistically if they could be mixed all in one developing tank.
I can't wait to see the results with various films.
"Often moments come looking for us". - Robert Frank
"Make good art!" - Neil Gaiman
"...the heart and mind are the true lens of the camera". - Yousuf Karsh
I suggest that you test each film for its true ASA with your camera. I rate Tri X at 1200, Tri X professional at 650. I also print higher contrast, grade 4, with negatives developed in Dinafine. My local photo shops no longer carry Dinafine so I have not used it in a few years. When I was a working photojournalist I always traveled with a 1 quart kit along with a can of fix, a SS tank and reel for emergancies.
The ratings published for Acufine represent a speed for each film which will produce the thinnest possible negative with good shadow detail. Such a negative will show the least amount of grain. However, the average user will likely be more comfortable with a denser negative and will want to expose at a lower EI.
Since Diafine is a two bath developer the film speed and contrast for a particular film are "built in" and cannot be adjusted. Attempting to pull a film in Bath A will not produce acceptable results. Neither will extending the time in Bath A cause much, if any, speed increase.