Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,578   Posts: 1,545,719   Online: 830
      
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 26
  1. #11

    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Hudson, New York
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    171
    Do you contemplate quickly when the inspection light is on?
    Paul Hamann

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    6,242
    Quote Originally Posted by PaulH
    Do you contemplate quickly when the inspection light is on?
    Actually, Paul, the point of inspection serves two purposes. Those being 1. To see if the film is in fact in the developer tray and 2. To see if my naval is as I have been contemplating it.

    I have yet to have both considerations occur at the same time. Maybe it is because of the factor that Sandy described. But I keep hoping.
    Art is a step from what is obvious and well-known toward what is arcane and concealed.

    Visit my website at http://www.donaldmillerphotography.com

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Greenville, SC
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    4,813
    Images
    5
    With rotary processing I get very even development over every square millimeter of the film, and the chances of doing any damage to the film are virtually nil.

    Now seriously, why would one brush develop if there are no advantages over rotary processing? In other words, why in the world would you stand there brushing film in the dark when you could just watch it turn around in a drum in the light unless there is some advantage to be had on the final print?

    I can understand the logic of those who develp ULF film in trays, but there at least you have the advantag of being able to develop several sheets at a time instead of just one or two as I am able to do with 7X17 and 12X20 film. But the logic of brush develoment escapes me.


    Sandy

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    4,530
    Quote Originally Posted by sanking
    With rotary processing I get very even development over every square millimeter of the film, and the chances of doing any damage to the film are virtually nil.

    Now seriously, why would one brush develop if there are no advantages over rotary processing? In other words, why in the world would you stand there brushing film in the dark when you could just watch it turn around in a drum in the light unless there is some advantage to be had on the final print?

    I can understand the logic of those who develp ULF film in trays, but there at least you have the advantag of being able to develop several sheets at a time instead of just one or two as I am able to do with 7X17 and 12X20 film. But the logic of brush develoment escapes me.


    Sandy
    In my case Sandy, coupled with inspection I have found it to be a better solution for me. I have the Jobo expert drum which I used on a Beseler motor base and I have found that although time development is usually correct there have been times when inspection has allowed me to correct times to make up for mistakes in exposure.

    Since inspection is only possible, or at least far easier when done in trays then brush developing offers the most even developing one could get. As stated before as even as drum developing with the added control of inspection.

    Since I started doing this method I have never had the edge effect problems, no uneveness or streaks.

    SO to answer your question, if you want to do tray development and want the same even smoothness as drum developing then brushing is the best way to go. OTOH I was never good at doing multiple sheets in a tray, I just never liked the process and cannot imagine how you can keep even agitation while you shuffle sheets. I ruined more sheets by scratching them with the corners than I have ever done by brushing. I have ruined 5 sheets in about 12 years of doing it and that was my fault for using a brush which was dirty.

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Greenville, SC
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    4,813
    Images
    5
    Jorge,

    OK, what you say makes sense to me. You are doing brush development primarily as a way to get, 1) very even develoment, and 2) be able to inspect image formation during developoment.

    But then, what advantage does brush development have over standard development by inspection in trays using oversize trays? I don't develop this way but people who do tell me that you can get very even development with single sheet tray development, if done in oversize trays, say 8X10 film in 11X14 or 16X20 trays, etc. And even this method appears to be much less work intensive than brush development?

    Sandy

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    4,530
    Quote Originally Posted by sanking
    Jorge,

    OK, what you say makes sense to me. You are doing brush development primarily as a way to get, 1) very even develoment, and 2) be able to inspect image formation during developoment.

    But then, what advantage does brush development have over standard development by inspection in trays using oversize trays? I don't develop this way but people who do tell me that you can get very even development with single sheet tray development, if done in oversize trays, say 8X10 film in 11X14 or 16X20 trays, etc. And even this method appears to be much less work intensive than brush development?

    Sandy
    For one you use less developer. With Pyrocat or other staining developers this is not a big deal as they are very cheap, but imagine if you are using Xtol or something like Dixactol, which per gallon are more expensive than cognac...:P

    Another one is tray size, what would I need for 12x20? a 30x40 tray?...no thanks! As to the work, brushing is no more strenuous than lifting the tray corners, specially if you are using a lot of developer in those big trays, and it insures you have better development.

    Think about it, at this point you are doing one sheet per run, you are standing the same amount of time in the dark rocking the tray, isnt it worth it to insure you will get the best possible negative?

    One more thing, in my case I use the Zone VI compensating developer timer, I adjusted the timing to measure at 74º as well as the curve to increase or decrease 5% per degree, so I now have a system that provides me continuos agitation with very even development at any temperature my tap water happens to be. Essentially I have a poor mans Jobo.

    I`ll be honest with you, if I could afford a Jobo unit I would probably switch to rotary development, but for tray I think I have devised the best possible way to obtain consistent results and the best possible negatives. As you know the key is consistency, and the Jobo drum in the Besler motor bases was not cutting it, sometimes the drum rolled of the base, sometimes I took longer to pour the developer, I had no way to monitor temperature, so I had to cool or heat the developer, etc, etc.....Given enough money I would love to have an ATL 3000 with a water chiller hooked to the line like John Sexton has, but who wants to spend more than $15000 just for this?

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Greenville, SC
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    4,813
    Images
    5
    Jorge,

    Thanks for your comments. I see your point.

    Just for the record, I don't use a Jobo. These units simply take up too much space for my workroom. I use Beseler and Unicolor print drums on the Beseler and Unicolor motor bases built for these drums. This type of equipment is cheap as dirt on ebay these days so we are talking about tens of dollars as opposed to hundreds or thousands as with Jobo, and for my money the results are every bit as good, so long as you observe two precautions: 1) always pre-soak the film, and 2) take the drum off the motor base every 1-2 minutes and give it some vigorous sideways agitation to counter the one directin agitaiton it gets on the motor base.

    Sandy

  8. #18
    juan's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    St. Simons Island, Georgia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,641
    Images
    4
    What about times with brush development vs. tray development. If one developed film A in developer B for X minutes by the traditional tray method, what would be a guesstimate time for the same film and developer with brush development? I would assume somewhat less. Has anyone an approximate correlation?
    juan

  9. #19
    Silverpixels5's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    594
    Images
    15
    I have no basis for this comment since I've never done traditional tray development, but I also would think that the time may be slightly less. I say this because it's pretty much constant agitation with brush development, and I believe you shuffle with tray development every 30 secs or so.
    RL Foley

  10. #20

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    652
    Development with a brush is the most even development of all. (I know nothing about rotary development.) It is what astronomers use. Their negatives must be perfectly developed. If there is a streak, it could be mistaken for another galaxy.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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