Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,773   Posts: 1,516,586   Online: 1014
      
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 43
  1. #21

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Daventry, Northamptonshire, England
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    6,836
    The OP must do what he must do as John Wayne said but all I can say is that I have used the Tetenal C41(liquid), the Nova C41 press kit(powder) and the Speedibrews C41 kit(powder). With all three I have followed the Jobo volumes and have found no problem. There might be problems with the kind of very large dilutions(1:100 or more) that are found with Rodinal in a 35mm tank which for rotary processing needs only 140mls but I have found no such problems with C41.

    pentaxuser

  2. #22

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    309
    Guyjr, I looked at a Jobo 1530 tank. The numbers printed on it is 330 ml for 2 rolls of 220. Kodak's tech pub Z-119 (for E-6) says the minimum volume of First Developer required for rotary processing is 250 ml per square foot (the area of a 220 roll). That means it required 500 ml for two rolls. That's very different from 330 ml Jobo says. I don't think Jobo knows more about E-6 chemicals thank Kodak. I am certain the result will be a disaster if I process two rolls of 220 C-41 with 330 ml of developer.

  3. #23
    MikeSeb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Prospect (Louisville), KY, USA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,062
    So the issue seems to be whether the solution volumes listed by Jobo are sufficient both to physically submerge the film loaded on its reels within the dev tanks, and to chemically process that amount of emulsion area. The solution bottles hold 750mL, but no process run by the Jobo requires more than 660mL of solution. Well, I located and dragged out the manual for my ATL-1000/1500 (they are identical except for the control head) to try to bring some (further) clarity to this thread. I don't have a digital version, nor the capability at present to scan and post it. So bear with me through a tedious post.

    Section 4.3, "Determining Chemical Amount in Solution Bottles", talks about two ways to determine required solution volume:

    • a more precise method of measured amounts of chemistry, by reference to a table on page 24 in the manual, based on the desired number of rolls or sheets. Looking at your beloved 220 rolls, the table indicates that to process three rolls of 220 (the most you can do in one batch) requires the larger tank and 660mL of measured solution, while to do three 120 rolls requires the larger tank and 330mL solution. This works out to about 110mL per 120 roll "equivalent". So this is what Jobo says it will take to submerge and to process a 120 roll equivalent (two 120 = one 220.)

    • a quicker method using one of three standardized solution volumes: 170mL, 300mL, or 640mL, determined by looking at a sight glass in each chem bottle that darkens as it is filled. Half dark = 170mL, all dark = 300mL, filled to 1 inch below the bottle neck = 640mL. These three amounts will cover every permutation of film and tank size. The quick method is what is referenced by the illustration printed on a sticker atop the machine itself. This sticker lists fewer permutations of tank and film as befits its simpler orientation. The quick method may require slightly more solution for a given roll/tank combo than the measurement method in certain instances, but is easier and quicker to use.

    I've always used the quick method, and it's never failed me with either C-41 or E-6. The simplified sticker table lists nothing for for 220 film, but does list something for six 120's, which when loaded on the three reels is exactly the same thing (two 120 per reel = one 220 per reel, identical.) For this, you need the maximum-full setting of 640mL, while for three rolls of 120 you need the large tank and 300mL solution (sight glass all dark, ie, intermediate fill capacity.) So by either method of filling, Jobo says you need 100-110 mL solution to physically cover, and to chemically process, a 120 roll equivalent. Pretty close.

    The question seems to be, then, whether this 100-110 mL of solution is enough solution to actually process the film, even if it's enough to submerge/cover the film.

    Enter Kodak Publication J-83 and TI2443 for E-6, and Z-131 for C-41. For E-6, there are different solution capacities listed between the two publications, and depending on which kit (5L or 3.8L) you use, so it gets quite confusing. Depending on which set of numbers you use, they work out to between 125-250mL solution per roll to process the film (issues of submerging it aside) without time compensation, ie, using a first dev time 6:00 in a rotary processor.

    You can stretch this by increasing the first dev time to 6:30, such that you effectively require less solution per roll. Interestingly, the Jobo's default E-6 first dev time is 6:30, so it's preconfigured to stretch the solution capacity via time compensation. That calculation works out to about 115-170mL per roll, depending on which set of numbers you use. Given that there's more than a 100% variance in the times listed, there must be a lot of wiggle room built into E-6 solution capacities. In any case, it's evident that Jobo has pushed the efficiency of chemistry use to its absolute maximum. But at least for E-6, there's sufficient overlap between Kodak's and Jobo's numbers to accept that it all works.

    The situation is somewhat wierder for C-41. Z-131 seems to indicate that a liter will do only up to about three 120 rolls, which implies around 330 mL per roll. This is significantly more solution to chemically develop than the Jobo calls for, yet it all seems to work beautifully. I regularly process a 120 roll with less than 150mL of solution, with perfect results. I've come across web discussion threads calling into question the accuracy of Kodak's capacity information in z-131; evidently stated capacities have decreased since earlier versions of the information. Further, the Tetenal "press" kits for C-41 require only about 120mL per roll, roughly three times the capacity of the Kodak chems. So not entirely clear what's afoot here.

    Bottom line, despite all the uncertainties, processing either C-41 or E-6 in a Jobo ATL-1000/1500 yields flawless results using the chemical volumes Jobo calls for. It seems safe to say that those are enough, but that 220 rolls require about twice the chemistry to do the job. I don't have any further explanation to offer.
    Michael Sebastian
    Website | Blog

  4. #24

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    84
    So here's what I'm gonna do;

    Shoot two identical rolls. Send one to the lab, and develop the other one in 125mL in my JOBO. If they are on par; fine! Otherwise I'll have to start experimenting with larger volumes to get better results.

    Also, I've developed two rolls of C41 in 250mL of Tetenal C41 and the result wasn't great. Color casts, like seen in this picture; http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2078/...653494f0_o.jpg From that point on I always ran two rolls in at least 500mL, and re-used the chemicals, with better result.

    Using Kodaks single-use E6 kit I've had to set the first developer to 7:30 when developing two rolls of Fuji Astia in 250mL, and they still come out on the dark side.

  5. #25

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    84
    Developed two (ISO 160) rolls in 250mL of chemicals.

    The negatives turned out thin, and the colors are off. (blue turned mangenta, white is too cyan)

  6. #26

    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    uk, the shire's
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    20
    I cant quite understand why your having so many problems working this one out. In my instructions for the fuji hunt kit it says max amount of rolls for 120 in 5 liters is 32, so in 1 ltr 6.4 rolls in 250ml 1.6 rolls. But the times are based on reusing and extending the times to suit. So 8 rolls in 5 ltrs before adjusting times or 1.6 rolls in 1 ltr. Hence 2 rolls in 250ml would be over the recommened limit but even 2 rolls in 500ml of fresh chemical might need a time adjustment. Personaly with my limited experience with this kit it's possible to get more out than recommened by extending the times, So if you went for what would be 5x use rather than 4 on the chart that would give total 40 rolls per 5 ltr or 2 in every 250ml and a time extened to around 4 mins.

  7. #27

    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    South Norfolk, United Kingdom
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,859
    Images
    62
    Quote Originally Posted by jrydberg View Post
    Developed two (ISO 160) rolls in 250mL of chemicals.

    The negatives turned out thin, and the colors are off. (blue turned mangenta, white is too cyan)
    Have you printed the negatives with the RA-4 process?

    Tom

  8. #28

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    84
    benOM: That sounds sane.

    What got me confused was people stating that they get perfect result with running two rolls in 250mL without any time adjustments.

  9. #29

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    84
    Quote Originally Posted by Tom Kershaw View Post
    Have you printed the negatives with the RA-4 process?
    No, I have not! I just did a quick scan. With the same settings as for a lab-developed roll (same kind of film).

    But by just looking at the negatives you can tell that they are not fully developed. The brand name and the other frame information is really faded.

  10. #30

    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    South Norfolk, United Kingdom
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,859
    Images
    62
    Have you checked the temperature of the solutions and / or water bath in the Jobo?

    Tom

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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