Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 75,678   Posts: 1,669,222   Online: 1135
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 31 to 32 of 32
  1. #31
    DAP is offline

    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    35mm RF
    Quote Originally Posted by Jon Shiu View Post
    Would it help to mark the tank and invert in line with the edge of the film only?

    I have a very similar insert that was apparently made in the 70's. It holds the film sheets in a very similar fashion to the MOD (3 sheets bowed out on each side of the insert). I had problems with sheets popping off of the holder during agitation. I solved it by doing just what you recommended. I placed a piece of tape on each side of my tank and line that tape up with the center plane of the insert that runs parallel to the film sheets. I only agitate along a plane inline with the tape. It solved my problems so I assume it would work with MOD users as well.

  2. #32

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    San Clemente, California
    Multi Format
    Quote Originally Posted by michaelbsc View Post
    ...As noted in the old photo.net posting I had not tried it in a Patterson tank at that time. I can now say for sure that it does work in a Patterson tank just fine. And frankly it is less finicky than the mod processor since it holds the film much more securely...
    Quote Originally Posted by Sal Santamaura View Post
    ...I just ordered a Phototherm 4x5 adapter to try out...I've had a hankering to develop some FP4 Plus in ID-11 1+3, which requires 1 liter of working solution per 80 square inches...
    Quote Originally Posted by michaelbsc View Post
    One difference you will find between Morgan's insert and the Phototherm insert is the degree of difficulty in loading.

    The Phototherm unit is more difficult to manipulate in the dark, especially at first. But it isn't hard once you get used to it. The more secure film handling buys you more secure holding during agitation...
    OK, time for an update. The Phototherm insert is assembled from a number of injection-molded parts. The first thing necessary upon receipt and examination was to file/sand the flashing from some of those parts so it wouldn't scratch film.

    Next I had to file/sand the end of a few film channel pieces so film would load smoothly, since they hadn't been glued to the top in proper alignment.

    Upon completing those finishing steps, I practiced loading scrap, undeveloped film in room light for quite some time. Fortunately, FP4 Plus, my reason for buying the insert, was the easiest of three different emulsions I tried, which varied in flexibility. HP5 Plus bends much more readily, while 320TXP is very stiff. Although not a breeze in the dark like loading a Jobo Expert drum, getting four sheets of FP4 Plus into the insert was relatively straightforward after my practice.

    The Phototherm insert with a 3-reel Paterson tank is the best system I've tried for inversion processing of 4x5. I've also tested a Jobo 2509n reel in 2521 tank as well as the MOD insert in Paterson; neither of those comes close. The only Phototherm downside is that there are small strips of spots / higher density on the long edges of each sheet where film was inside the insert's channels. This reduces usable image width to 92 mm. That seems a small price to pay for otherwise extremely even results. I've not used a CombiPlan T, however, and would appreciate anyone who has commenting on whether film developed in it is equally even or has similar channel issues.

    By the way, FP4 Plus in ID-11 1+3 gives very fine grain and high acutance. I haven't printed the negatives yet, but examination of them under a loupe makes me think this will be an excellent combination.

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234



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