gainer: my gut tells me that wouldn't be enough to fix the problem, but i don't know until i've tried! so i will give a try. thanks!
rick: thanks, i'll give the semi-stand development a try. less agitation is the key i think, whether semi or full. i appreciate having some starting numbers to work with.
dave: i agree, it's not worth modifying to any major extent. but i'm a big fan of working with what i have (or what someone's given me for free, which in this case i've got two of these things from two different people...hmm, that should tell me something?).
tray development is inconvenient for film, for me. the taco method works but is limited. i got some (free, of course!) cibachrome tubes and a motor base from someone recently, and was all excited...but they don't have any ridges inside to secure film, so it's probably a bust. the motor base is cheap and will no doubt fail as soon as i spend money on a jobo tube.
i suppose i should break down and try tray dev, just to say i have. but it takes 1/2 hr to convert the laundry room into a darkroom, so i only do that for printing. which means i'd be doing it on the floor of the bathroom...
first, i'll try the tips above.
well rats. i tried stand development in HC-110 tonight, and still got 'burn marks' from the ridges of the film holders in the Fr tank. 1:185 HC-110, agitate for 30 seconds and let it sit for an hour. film was Arista.edu Ultra 100, 2x3 format. i even put the film in with the emulsion side going the other way, as it appeared to keep the edge of the film away from the ridge more.
so far the only success with this tank has been with a two-bath developer (Anchell/Troop TD-201). looks like i'll have to make up a full 2 liters, and deal with some film-speed loss. or is it just flat negs, i don't know. or not use the darn thing and continue with the taco method for now.
I kinda like D-76 cheap can get it everywhere and is a solid all a round developer.
You need to forget the tank, with 2x3 film use tubes 2 1/2 inches long, 1 inch dia. with caps on the end, you will use 75-80 cc of 1:100 of HC-110 for 60 minutes, you can't mix methods. Pat
Originally Posted by rippo
I have a tank somewhat similar to that, and have found it almost completely worthless.
Only "almost", because I have used it successfully with half-strength FX-2:
Pour out water, pour in developer
Pour out developer, then pour it back in
Repeat developer pouring twice more
Let sit for 90 minutes or so
Pour out developer
Pour in water (or stop), do the out/in a couple of times
Then do the same with the fixer.
For any other purpose I would rather use just about anything else. I believe even a black plastic bag would give more even development.
-- Ole Tjugen, Luddite Elitist
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
Nobody has mentioned this, but it is quite relevant. "Some" films seem to be more prone to developing streaks and marks than "Other" films. Now I can't give you a list, but just from my personal experience..Forte 200 seems to always develop streak free in hangars in my deep tank with only minimal agitation, whereas Fomapan 200 requires almost constant agitation to develop streak free. I know this from experience. If you are using a "difficult" to manage tank like the FR, then not only the developer, but your film choices will affect your success.
While over the years I have tried most small, and large sheet film tanks, the knowledge I have gained tells me this: There is probably some combination of film and developer that will give you good results with the FR tank. I would consider developers that would give you a long processing time as being the most appropriate choices.
what do you mean by "you can't mix methods"?
Originally Posted by pkrentz
i'm doing stand development in the tank...finding a use for the free tank (rather than buying something else) is the goal.
hmm...tubes. perhaps i should try cutting some pvc pipe, open ended, and then use these as film sleeves inside the tank. it's a good sized tank, so i could out a few sheets in there. not the 12 that the tank was designed for. then i could do stand development. must look into that.
hey Ole. perhaps my 30 second initial agitation is too much for this combo?
Originally Posted by Ole
i wanted to try FX2, but i didn't have the ingredients for it lying around, and ordering chemicals for something that might not work seemed like 'plan B'.
i don't think i did a pre-soak on this one, thinking it was going to be sitting long enough that it didn't matter. perhaps that was a bad idea.
phototone: that's why i was thinking stand development. for film, i've tried two kinds so far: Arista.edu Ultra (aka Fomapan), and Tri-X 320. i've only tried the Artista with stand development so far.
Originally Posted by PHOTOTONE
at some point, testing this tank will become more expensive than buying something else. i should probably give up before then!
You may want to try a divided developer such as Dinafine, Divided D23
or D76. Dinafine try 4 mints A and B, a quick bang or two on the counter to dislodge any air bubbles, one or two gentle tilts to start and then 1 tilt every mint. 4 mints rather than 3 will give even development.
thanks Paul. that's sort of what started all this. i tried the tank using TD-201 from the Anchell/Troop formula. it seemed to work and not leave over-development marks. however i didn't have enough solution made up for this large tank, so i haven't been able to do a definitive test. divided developer leaves my negs looking a little flat...i may need to mix up a double dose and give it some proper testing. i needed reminding that i might be getting too far off course here, with this developer experiment.