Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,915   Posts: 1,584,712   Online: 807
      
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 22
  1. #11
    Donald Qualls's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    North Carolina, USA (transplanted from Seattle)
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,845
    I haven't done 35 mm cans yet, but I have a bunch of the nice black ones accumulated for future conversion. I've seen setups with either steel plates (for magnetic attachment) or 1/4-20 nuts expoxied on the bottom, film guides inside to simplify film positioning, and sliding or rotating sleeve shutters, which make them much easier to use. I don't know that I'd want to develop right in the can, because I'd have to fill and dump in the dark (at least through filling the fixer), but I wonder if I couldn't make a daylight fill cap for these cans.

    Oh, and they're not quite tall enough to use the 120 width, so you must be cutting the film the other direction, or both ways, to get it to fit. I'd be about as happy loading them with clips of 35 mm; the film (inserted endwise) will hold itself by tension and maintain a curve that's close to centering on the pinhole, so little or no distortion, and the frame size won't be far from the standard 24x36 mm.

    Say, I might have to make one from a 120 can -- those are long enough to give a panoramic angle with 35 mm film...
    Photography has always fascinated me -- as a child, simply for the magic of capturing an image onto glossy paper with a little box, but as an adult because of the unique juxtaposition of science and art -- the physics of optics, the mechanics of the camera, the chemistry of film and developer, alongside the art in seeing, composing, exposing, processing and printing.

  2. #12
    htmlguru4242's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Sandy Hook, CT
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    973
    Yes, I was cutting the film both ways, as its a bit too tall (cutting film in hte dark is not fun). I just did not hav enough 35mm film hanging around that i was willing to cut up (HIE in the camera, and a roll of Efke KB25 (too slow), and some Neopan 400 & TX400 (too expensive for initial testing)) so I cut up the 120 stuff. I like the idea of 120 cans, if I had any of them...

    I'm trying some 120 in an altoids tin as well.

  3. #13
    Donald Qualls's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    North Carolina, USA (transplanted from Seattle)
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,845
    The wisdom, for Altoids, is 2x3 sheet film; it's the *perfect* size to just hold itself in the tin by its corners, and no cutting in the dark. There's an article here on APUG showing how to process the film right in the tin, too, even in daylight. You'll need HC-110, rapid fixer concentrate, and a bottle of household clear ammonia. And you'll want/need to eat a bunch more Altoids to get more tins...

    And while you're at J&C ordering a box of Classic 200 2x3 for not much money, grab a dozen of the 25 cent 120 film cans and a few rolls of Classic 200 or 400 or Lucky SHD 100 or 400 in 35 mm to go in 'em (will you look at those prices?!)...
    Photography has always fascinated me -- as a child, simply for the magic of capturing an image onto glossy paper with a little box, but as an adult because of the unique juxtaposition of science and art -- the physics of optics, the mechanics of the camera, the chemistry of film and developer, alongside the art in seeing, composing, exposing, processing and printing.

  4. #14
    htmlguru4242's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Sandy Hook, CT
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    973
    The fact that you can pick up 35mm 36exp. rolls of ISO400 film that makes really good images is qure surprising. But it's good for experimentation as well. The $8.00 sheet film is quite cheap as well; I might just have to get some. I don't think that the tiny pinhole will cover the whole sheet. It's worth it for $0.32 per sheet, though, whatever happens.

    I'm assuming that with the Ammonia, HC-110 syrup a Rapid Fix., you're referring to a monobath developer, yes?

  5. #15
    Donald Qualls's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    North Carolina, USA (transplanted from Seattle)
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,845
    Yes. See the "Pintoid Processor" article here on APUG for the details -- pretty simple addition to a Pintoid that makes it almost a Pintoidaroid...
    Photography has always fascinated me -- as a child, simply for the magic of capturing an image onto glossy paper with a little box, but as an adult because of the unique juxtaposition of science and art -- the physics of optics, the mechanics of the camera, the chemistry of film and developer, alongside the art in seeing, composing, exposing, processing and printing.

  6. #16
    htmlguru4242's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Sandy Hook, CT
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    973
    "Pintoidaroid" - wow that's pretty bad....

    I'll try that out once I have a chance, though, becasue its quite a cool idea.

    I'm also going to give the monobath a try on some regular film, shot im my 35mm camera. Maybe there are some improvements that can be made.

  7. #17
    Donald Qualls's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    North Carolina, USA (transplanted from Seattle)
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,845
    By all means, the formula I put up was after two tries with 400TX, one with almost invisible negatives (too much fixer, not enough alkalinity = too slow development; halide fixed away before the image could be developed), the second with a pretty normal look except for loss of shadow detail. More fine tuning would have allowed determining the correct EI to preserve shadow detail and amount of ammonia (which tailors developer activity against the fixer working rate, which is constant) to get normal contrast at that EI -- and this is a process that ought to be done with each individual emulsion, anyway (and may vary considerably with temperature, since developer activity is affected a lot more than fixer working time).

    The point, at the time I announced that formula, was to show that a workable monobath could be made with stuff many/most photographers would have on hand and use for other things, rather than having to be mixed from scratch; also, that a monobath using rapid fixer was practical. The monobaths of the 1960s always used plain hypo added directly to a fairly normal developer formula, but were either mixed from raw chemicals or sold as a powder and mixed at time of use. Mine could be mixed ahead at HC-110 stock solution strength and stored for up to 2-3 months (just like stock solution), then diluted at time of use; storage could even be in premeasured vials, 2 ounces of stock to make 8 ounces of working monobath for a single roll of 35 mm film. Developing on the road? Throw a half dozen vials of monobath stock in the suitcase (in a zipper bag, just in case) along with the tank, and you're ready to go. Pretend you're a roving PJ from the pre-Viet Nam era...

    Er, you'd prefer "PolaPintoid"?
    Photography has always fascinated me -- as a child, simply for the magic of capturing an image onto glossy paper with a little box, but as an adult because of the unique juxtaposition of science and art -- the physics of optics, the mechanics of the camera, the chemistry of film and developer, alongside the art in seeing, composing, exposing, processing and printing.

  8. #18
    htmlguru4242's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Sandy Hook, CT
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    973
    I'm going to order some HC-110 and some 2x3 film to give this a try. I was playing with some of my developers yesterday, trying to see if it was possible to mix up a monobath from what I had (some D-76 and Koadafix, out of other developers as for now). I don't remember the exact proportions (didn't measure), but it was about 30ml water, 250ml D-76 (mixed at a high concentration), and a very small amount of fixer. The solution was made slightly more alkaline with some Sodium Carbonate. I tried it out with some RC paper, placed in my altoids tin with a pinhole, and exposed for about 2.5 minutes in bright sunlight. After 3min in the developer, the image appeared, but the contrast was REALLY poor, with tones ranging from a light grey to dark grey, nothing even close to black or white, though detail was good, and the grain wasn't noticeable at all. Film (lucky SHD 120, ISO 100), had terrible contrast, and were not clear at all, with very little detail. I have not tried to print them...

  9. #19
    Donald Qualls's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    North Carolina, USA (transplanted from Seattle)
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,845
    Monobaths need tweaking to match the film type. Low contrast and poor shadow detail (aka loss of speed) indicate either too much fixer or too low pH -- add a bit more carbonate, in this case, or add some vitamin C and carbonate (half a tsp. of carbonate per gram of ascorbic acid seems to work well). The problem is that the fixer is dissolving the halide even as the developer is developing the exposed grains, and it's a race -- if the fixer is too fast, you lose shadows or, in extreme case, contrast; if the developer is too fast you get excessive contrast. And the balance is different for each film.

    Given that D-76 stock solution normally works at 5 to 9 minutes, depending on the film, you'd want to use little enough fixer that you're close to capacity limits -- from film strength, you can probably use 1/6 to 1/8 the amount of fixer that would cover the film, and with hypo fixer rather than rapid should get decent results if you can manage the pH. If Kodafix is a rapid fixer (I don't recall), D-76 can't work fast enough to do the job -- try Dektol at about 1+4.
    Photography has always fascinated me -- as a child, simply for the magic of capturing an image onto glossy paper with a little box, but as an adult because of the unique juxtaposition of science and art -- the physics of optics, the mechanics of the camera, the chemistry of film and developer, alongside the art in seeing, composing, exposing, processing and printing.

  10. #20
    Donald Qualls's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    North Carolina, USA (transplanted from Seattle)
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,845
    BTW, I think I have an idea for how to make a light-trapped filler in the cap of a 35 mm film can; this would greatly facilitate developing in them. Gotta make a trip to the hardware store, hopefully when I'm out on Thursday...
    Photography has always fascinated me -- as a child, simply for the magic of capturing an image onto glossy paper with a little box, but as an adult because of the unique juxtaposition of science and art -- the physics of optics, the mechanics of the camera, the chemistry of film and developer, alongside the art in seeing, composing, exposing, processing and printing.

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