Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,557   Posts: 1,545,136   Online: 1060
      
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 25
  1. #11
    Steve Smith's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Ryde, Isle of Wight
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    8,597
    Images
    122
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Searust View Post
    IWhile you are stressing over seconds, the rest of the class is done, has good looking film, and is moving onto the next step.
    Absolutely.

    My normal development times are between ten and fifteen minutes. I don't think the five seconds it takes to fill the tank is going to give me negatives with more density at the bottom.


    Steve.
    "People who say things won't work are a dime a dozen. People who figure out how to make things work are worth a fortune" - Dave Rat.

  2. #12
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    7,337
    Images
    225
    I can see stressing over dev times when it's short like 5 minutes or less, some of the dev times can be about 4 minutes or you have to adjust the dilution (HC-110 & Ifsol 3 come to mind) and pouring in a 2 reel (120) tank takes me 22 seconds with a 3 reel (120) tank it takes 36 seconds which is significant in a 5 minute window, that said... I've honestly never had an issue with uneven development even at fast times.

  3. #13
    Mick Fagan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Melbourne Australia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,841
    Images
    29
    On the commercial dip-n-dunk E6 and C41 machines I have used, the time between baths was 15 seconds. C41 with a developing time of 3'15" was always the hardest one as the film was usually in the first developer for 3'35" which is getting close to a ½ stop push.

    The thing is, if you wish to develop your dip-n-dunk machine, you don't have to alter much from what I can see, just ensure consistency and temperature stability.

    One thing our commercial dip-n-dunk machines did have, were blasts of Nitrogen every 10 seconds for agitation.

    Perhaps you can have a little lift of the film reel or holder by pulling it up say 4cm then it just drops back in and hits the bottom where there is a small glass marble on one side making the reel go sideways a bit, then immediately it starts pulling up 4cm again. This may be a way of getting some simple agitation happening.

    Mick.

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Chicago, Western Suburbs
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    1,438
    Dear Jan,

    Thanks for sharing. I look forward to seeing more.

    Neal Wydra

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    NYC
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,186
    hahahahhahha now I have seen it all!

    So cool n a wonderful imagination.. that is waht we need more of in this world.
    Anyone can make a Digital print, but only a photographer can make a photograph.

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    277
    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Smith View Post
    Absolutely.

    My normal development times are between ten and fifteen minutes. I don't think the five seconds it takes to fill the tank is going to give me negatives with more density at the bottom.


    Steve.
    My problem is I use XTOL and TMAX film a lot these days. Kodak recommends at most a 1:1 dilution so my times are never in the 15 minute range. XTOL straight up might be wonderful but I never tried it because I worried developing times would be too short. Anyway you point is well taken.

    Quote Originally Posted by StoneNYC View Post
    I can see stressing over dev times when it's short like 5 minutes or less, some of the dev times can be about 4 minutes or you have to adjust the dilution (HC-110 & Ifsol 3 come to mind) and pouring in a 2 reel (120) tank takes me 22 seconds with a 3 reel (120) tank it takes 36 seconds which is significant in a 5 minute window, that said... I've honestly never had an issue with uneven development even at fast times.
    Thank you. I was considering getting a 2 reel 120 tank and I was afraid of things like air bells and uneven development.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mick Fagan View Post
    On the commercial dip-n-dunk E6 and C41 machines I have used, the time between baths was 15 seconds. C41 with a developing time of 3'15" was always the hardest one as the film was usually in the first developer for 3'35" which is getting close to a ½ stop push.
    Good to know.

    Thanks for the real world (no pun intended) examples. They are comforting.

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    47
    No more slow than using a dip and dunk machine that has to lift a 120 film out of one tank and lower it into the next.
    I never noticed any problems with the negatives produced like that.

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    NE Ohio
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    476
    A pre-soak has helped me w/air bubbles.

  9. #19

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    47
    I remember I had to add a presoak when processing C41 with a Jobo CPE2 to prevent the occasional air bubble.

  10. #20

    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    277
    Quote Originally Posted by yellowcatt View Post
    No more slow than using a dip and dunk machine that has to lift a 120 film out of one tank and lower it into the next.
    I never noticed any problems with the negatives produced like that.
    The dip and dunk machines I've seen don't use reels. One of the big problem areas I was having with uneven development was with 120 film on the outer edges. It looked like if I wasn't quick and vigorous about getting the developer off the part of the film that came in contact with the reel it would slightly over develop in places. At least that's what it looked like to me. Eliminating the reel would solve that issue. It really didn't show up in 35mm negatives. I think it's because the image area is further away from the reel lip.

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