Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 68,768   Posts: 1,484,186   Online: 819
      
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 19
  1. #1
    ZoneIII's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Illinois
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    247
    Images
    35

    E6 processor recommendations.

    OK, my tests today tell me that I have to get an E6 processor. I won't go into all that but I am convinced that, for my purposes, my only good option is to get an E6 processor. I suppose I could try Jobo expert drums in a water bath, though, because I do have precise temperature control but I'm getting a processor instead.

    A little quick research tells me that the Jobo CPP-2 would be a good option. The CPA-2 would probably be OK too but the former appears to be more what I need.

    However, I also ran across the neat little ATL500 and ATL800 processors and they seem like they would be great for my needs. The only problem is that I am not sure if you really get the best results with the 3-step chemistry that those processors use. (I used to use 3-step chemisty for color prints with excellent results but I have no experience with it for film.) Does anyone have any experience with 3-step chemistry? Advantages? Disadvantages? How are the results compared to regular six-step processing?

    What processor do you use/recommend?

    Thanks in advance.

  2. #2
    ZoneIII's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Illinois
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    247
    Images
    35
    Well, I now see that Jobo also makes at least two compact 6-step processores (ATL1000 and ATL1500). Any experience or suggestions with those?

  3. #3
    Kevin Caulfield's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,075
    Blog Entries
    5
    Images
    52
    I've only ever used a Paterson Auto Colortherm. It keeps the temperature very constant, but all processing is done manually.

  4. #4
    ZoneIII's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Illinois
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    247
    Images
    35
    Thanks, Kevin. I never heard of that. I will check it out.

  5. #5
    ZoneIII's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Illinois
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    247
    Images
    35
    From what I can tell, the Patterson Auto Colotherm only comes in versions for roll film... at least, that's all I could find at their website.

    I think I am mistaken about the Jobo 3010 Expert drum. I assumed that it could be rolled in a water bath but I think I was wrong about that. Does anyone know of a good drum for 4x5" film that can be rolled in a water bath? I still want to go with a processor but I would give manual processing with a drum a try if there is a good one out there to do the job. It might at least tide me over till I find the processor I am looking for.

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,730
    I have a ATL 2300 and 3000 -- lovely machines, very precise and rugged.

    Sell the 3000 to you CHEAP, but you had better have some room for it!

  7. #7
    ZoneIII's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Illinois
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    247
    Images
    35
    Kino,

    I'm not sure what the 3000 machine is but I think I can assume it's one of those monsters that can handle commercial work. I'll have to look it up. My darkroom is pretty crammed right now but I can always find a place to put something else. The one requirement I have is that the processor be suited for one-shot and occasional use. There are a lot of commercial E6 processors out there to be had for next to nothing but, unfortunately, they are usually not suited for occasional use. I want a processor that lets me mix only the chemicals I need for a run. It seems there are so many different models. I'll have to look the 3000 up. There is a big ATL on eBay right now. I'm not sure what model it is but it's a floor model.

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Eastern Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    41

    E6 processor recommendations

    The Jobos are pretty good machines and can be found used at decent prices. The only problem is that parts may be getting hard to come by and Omega Satter is not doing a very good job taking over for Jobo USA. Anyway, that's another story for another day.

    The CPP is the best manual processor but the CPA will do nicely as well and will allow you to use the expert drums. The main benefit of a Jobo is the lift which allows you to drain and fill the tanks without ever having to handle the chemicals. In regards to the ATL processors, they're nice but not necessary and are better suited for volume work. The disadvantage with the ATLs is that they're quite a bit more complicated and there's more things that can go wrong. Another issue is that they require a temperate regulating faucet since they don't temper the rinse water directly.

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,730
    Quote Originally Posted by ZoneIII View Post
    Kino,

    I'm not sure what the 3000 machine is but I think I can assume it's one of those monsters that can handle commercial work. I'll have to look it up. My darkroom is pretty crammed right now but I can always find a place to put something else. The one requirement I have is that the processor be suited for one-shot and occasional use. There are a lot of commercial E6 processors out there to be had for next to nothing but, unfortunately, they are usually not suited for occasional use. I want a processor that lets me mix only the chemicals I need for a run. It seems there are so many different models. I'll have to look the 3000 up. There is a big ATL on eBay right now. I'm not sure what model it is but it's a floor model.
    That is the ATL 3, mine is the ATL 3000, which is almost identical except the head on my machine is newer generation (like the current 2300) and mine has the optional replenishment tanks under the stand.

    Remember, the ATL machines don't need to be located in the darkroom; you only have to load the tanks in the dark.

    I am also closer in Ohio... PM me if interested. I need to get the 3000 out of my garage; I don't need 2 Jobos!

  10. #10

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Northern Aquitaine
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    4,913
    Quote Originally Posted by Kino View Post
    That is the ATL 3, mine is the ATL 3000, which is almost identical except the head on my machine is newer generation (like the current 2300) and mine has the optional replenishment tanks under the stand.

    Remember, the ATL machines don't need to be located in the darkroom; you only have to load the tanks in the dark.

    I am also closer in Ohio... PM me if interested. I need to get the 3000 out of my garage; I don't need 2 Jobos!
    If I were closer I'd certainly be interested!

    But as I indicated elsewhere, a hand line is another possibility, and with floating lids, the chemicals last at least a couple of weeks, so a lot depends on your definition of 'occasional' and 'small volume'. A Nova hand line uses 1200ml per bath, which equates to 60 sheets (in Tetenal chemicals, which are what I prefer) if used to the limit. I've never put more than about 40 sheets through.

    I've found Tetenal 3-bath (well, 4-bath if you include the stabilizer) entirely adequate, though you do have to adjust the pH with NaOH or acid (sulphuric, I think, but I've never had to go in that direction) to fine-tune the colour.

    I've had varying reports about the advantages/disadvantages of 3-bath. Some say the only advantage of 6-bath is replenishment in a commercial environment; others that 6-bath gives more stable trannies. As I have equal respect for the people who have given that advice, I can't recommend either way, but I will say that I've had plenty of home-processed trannies published and that all bar my earliest (pre-E6) efforts show no signs of deterioration. Nor do the pre-E6 ones, but they were so bad that they couldn't deteriorate much anyway: this was a Ferrania process in the early 70s.

    Overall, though, I think I'd be more inclined to go for a machine, even though you get far less bang for the buck in terms of sheets per litre (6 sheets max in 270 ml, so 18 sheets max to a litre kit or 24 sheets in 1080ml), UNLESS you're shooting enough to justify the hand line.
    Last edited by Roger Hicks; 08-20-2007 at 11:04 AM. Click to view previous post history. Reason: Afterthoughts
    Free Photography Information on My Website
    http://www.rogerandfrances.com

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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