If you have to do this in a holder, it might be wiser to find an old DDS which leaks light, then modify it to be your 'wet' holder. Transfer the film from the normal DDS to the 'wet' one inside a changing bag.
Possibly you can modify the 'wet' holder to put the film in the darkslide slot and drill the backplate to allow some chemical circulation. Or perhaps remove most of the backplate and dev one sheet at a time, for further improvements in evenness. At this point one might think that some sort of small Combiplan might be easier, or just curl the sheet round inside a normal daylight rollfilm dev-tank and use rotation to circulate the developer (roll the tank on a couple of bits of wood on top of your workbox).
Assuming you find the perfect shot on your field-developed sheet, the negative has to be perfect enough to use, else what is the point in cutting too many corners ?
Polaroid Type 55 made some nice negatives if you exposed for it properly. If I remember correctly, if you wanted good "keeper" instant prints, you exposed at EI 50. If you wanted good negatives to print later, you exposed at EI 25. I've personally examined some Type 55 negatives and resulting darkroom prints. It was a quality product, no doubt about it.
Originally Posted by sun of sand
With Polaroid all but out of the picture, Fuji's 4x5 instant print films will do just fine for checking exposures. But honestly, I can't see doing that either. For me, the main purpose of these films is to check the look of lighting ratios. For that I can haul out a Canon G9 or G10 and accomplish the same thing with no film costs.
What happens if you take 10 shots which are still a crapshoot
Take 20 minutes to check em over and not a single one
Every 10 shots has to be like 30+ minutes total time
Not even taking into account the probablitly that some won't be perfect physically coming out of this process
Seems much safer to shoot and pray
than shoot and pray and pray ..and pray for dancers not minding they may have to dance even longer -if even possible
Not keeping you from experimenting with the idea though ..just doesn't seem practical for this situation where even if everything else being fine you're still limited to human stamina ..dancers as well as yours
Fuji should seize the opportunity from the perpetual whinging here about the demise of Polaroid T-55 to devise a monobath paste for one of their films (say Acros 100) and package it in a pod within a special envelope similar to the ones they already manufacture for instant black and white or color prints . Forget trying to produce a print at the same time (this wasn't something Polaroid ever did successfully). Fuji has all the technology for instant prints, and negatives shouldn't be that different, as long as the paste is optimized for a particular sensitized material.
An alternative do-it-yourself option could be as simple as a changing bag and a special single sheet tank, with a reservoir in the bottom for a small volume of a monobath. Once the film has been loaded, the tank could be sealed with light tight lid, and then tipped over so the monobath flows over the film. After the completion of development-fixing, the film could be stored in water, awaiting washing, Photo-Flo and drying until you get home. I always used to store my T-55 negatives in water in the field after I had a sodium sulphite spill which dried to a white powder in the carpet in my car.
Monobaths can also be formulated as a thickened gel, so another option might be to spread it across the bottom of a plastic container and then slap the sheet of film face down on it inside the changing bag. I'm not sure, however, whether this would clear the anti-halation backing. Rinsing off the gel afterwards in water could also potentially be a bit messier (remember how caustic the Polaroid stuff was).
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
The reason I don't want to use a change bag is because it's slow, it's a pain in the ass, you can't do it with dirty hands, you can get dirt on the film, I don't want to mess with pouring developers, fixers, water in and out. The crazy idea was that I keep shooting while a few sheets are developing by themselves. Hey, I did say it was a crazy thought. I'll think about it some more.
Maybe I'll design a film holder specifically made to be water proof, even though machining plastic is not very appealing The other thought I just has was to use a Grafmatic holder and just place the septums in specifically designed slots in the "developing device". Of course, now we're back to some changing bag of sorts.
"Truth and love are my law and worship. Form and conscience are my manifestation and guide. Nature and peace are my shelter and companions. Order is my attitude. Beauty and perfection are my attack."
- Rob Tyner (1944 - 1991)
Polaroid did do something like this back in the 80's in 35mm format. The kit was called an autoprocessor.
Originally Posted by Philip Jackson
Flickr picture here
"Flatter Me, and I May Not Believe You. Criticize Me, and I May Not like You. Ignore Me, and I May Not Forgive You. Encourage Me, and I Will Not Forget You."
Did I dream it or are there/were there 35mm films that we sold in a kit to develop them in the canister? I've got this vague idea I heard about such a thing (possibly sold in Japan) but I'm genuinely not sure if it's just a figment of my imagination!
Originally Posted by Aurum
Another day goes under; a little bourbon will take the strain...
Hey, you might be onto something. I'm wondering if you might not leach some of the carbon black out of the plastic in the film holder and get a redeposition onto the film thereby obtaining something we could call a carbon negative. Something like the Pyro effect of staining. Maybe Sandy King should investigate this.
Nate Potter, Austin TX.