Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 68,708   Posts: 1,482,881   Online: 1041
      
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 33
  1. #11

    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    6,242
    Ron, That is correct.

    Quote Originally Posted by Silverpixels5
    Don:

    Thank you very much for your help! I'm assuming these times are at 70F, is that correct?

    Ron

  2. #12
    Jim Moore's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Iowa
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    885
    Images
    16
    Quote Originally Posted by Francesco
    Jim, there must be enough developer in the tube so that the film will be totally immersed in it when the tube is left standing. I allow an extra centimeter or so over the edge of the film just to be certain it stays under "water" even if some slight movement or shifting of the film might occur.
    Thanks Francesco...

    Ron, the tubes Don built for me are fantastic! I used to own some Darkroom Innovations type tubes but Don's 3-piece design is superior in every way - especially in protecting the film during insertion and most importantly during removal. As per his recommendation, I have now standardised on using a fiberglass mesh screen backing for my negs each time I use the tubes.
    Don,

    Do you have the plans for your tubes posted anywhere? I would be interested in them.

    Thanks!!

    Jim

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    6,242
    Jim, I had some photographs posted months ago. Unfortunately in the interim my computer crashed and I lost all of those images. My tubes are built from ABS (black) plastic componants. The sizes are 3" for 8X10 and 1 1/2" for 4X5.

    The tubes for 8 X10 consist of a length of 3 inch tubing to which one end is capped with a 3 inch glue cap and the other end has a 3 inch male pipe adapter. The length of this assembly is 1/2 inch shorter then the long dimension of the 8X10 negative.

    The next componant is a short adapter used for minimal agitation. This adapter consists of a 3 inch female adapter glued to a 3 inch male waste adapter.

    The third componant consists of a 3 inch female waste adapter glued to a 3 inch glue cap.

    Componants one and three are used for conventional development. Componants one, two and three are used when one does minimal agitation. The purpose of componant two is to allow full immersion of the negative in developer when the tube is placed on end for the "rest periods" for minimal agitation.

    I also use fiberglass window screen material on the base side of the negative to allow the presoak water to access the antihalation layer of the film. This precludes the necessity of moving the negative in and out of the tube during the presoak portion of the procedure.

    For 4 X 5 negatives the assembly is the same except for a reduction to 1 1/2 inch materials.

    Hope this explains this to you. Good luck.

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Texas
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,576
    Images
    27
    Since I have some Pyrocat-HD to mix up, and have thought about using Rodinal 1:100 also - does semi-stand development work well with roll film (120)? Was considering initial agitation for 30 sec, then 10 sec every three minutes (using FP4+) for 30 minutes at 20 deg. - does that sound reasonable?

    Would these times hold up for Pyrocat-HD as well?

    Thanks,
    Mike
    Mike C

    Rambles

  5. #15
    Jim Moore's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Iowa
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    885
    Images
    16
    Quote Originally Posted by Donald Miller
    Hope this explains this to you. Good luck.
    Yes it does and thank you!

    Jim

  6. #16
    roy
    roy is offline
    roy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    West Sussex
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,301
    [QUOTE=photomc] also - does semi-stand development work well with roll film

    In my experience, it does. In the thread "FP4+ grain in Rodinal" of a few weeks ago, I mentioned that I had successfully developed an out of date film in several years old developer. I did not give it 30 minutes, more like 20 but the whole thing was an experiment and, although there was nothing on the film that was of major importance, the whole film was good and each shot was a bonus. Shoot off a spare film and try it.
    Roy Groombridge.

    Cogito, ergo sum.
    (Descartes)

  7. #17
    gma
    gma is offline
    gma's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Texas
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    793
    Images
    9
    Is the stand method or some minimal agitation method suitable for 35mm film as well as for sheet film? If so does anyone have experience with 35mm? Also I think that some films must respond better than others. Any comments?

  8. #18
    Silverpixels5's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    594
    Images
    15
    Quote Originally Posted by gma
    Is the stand method or some minimal agitation method suitable for 35mm film as well as for sheet film? If so does anyone have experience with 35mm? Also I think that some films must respond better than others. Any comments?

    I've used it with excellent results on 35mm. Mostly it has been with PCat HD, but I've done it with rodinal as well. My negatives have always turned out great.
    RL Foley

  9. #19
    Les McLean's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Northern England on the Scottish border
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,610
    Quote Originally Posted by gma
    Is the stand method or some minimal agitation method suitable for 35mm film as well as for sheet film? If so does anyone have experience with 35mm? Also I think that some films must respond better than others. Any comments?

    35mm TriX in D76 diluted 1 to 20 agitate for the first 3 minutes and leave the tank in a water bath at 24c for up to 3 hours, stop and fix as normal. The negatives will be grainy but IMO will produce quite nice gritty prints. A variation of this is the DD/FF techniques used by press photographers in the days when Tri X was the fastest fim available. Sometimes when the light was fading fast and flash was not an option they rated TriX from 400 to 1600 on the same roll and diluted D76 at 1 to 50 and left it in the developer for 6 hours. I've tried this and every negative was printable and the combination produced the most beautiful grain. If you don't like grain don't try it.

  10. #20
    gma
    gma is offline
    gma's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Texas
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    793
    Images
    9
    Thanks, Les. I do not mind grain in Tri-X. Actually I was thinking about some of the slower films such as EFKE 50 or Ilford Pan F. Does shadow detail increase in slow films as it does with a fast emulsion?

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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