</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Jeremy Moore @ May 9 2003, 07:36 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>a further question for those advocating a pre-soak... is this necessary? I ask as I use diafine for my developer and it states not to use a pre-soak... but as this is a 2-part develper I may just extend the first part by a minute or 2 to allow it to fully soak in... looks like I have some testing to do&#33;</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
I fully expect there will be more opinons pro and con than there are opinions of the "proper" way to agitate.

I don&#39;t advocate pre-soak, so this question my not be for me, but ... as a rule, I NEVER pre-soak.
This is a result of many visits to the AGFA and Ilford web sites, the instructions with color developing kits, and a few others. The common rationale was that pre-soaking has an undesirable "swelling" effect on the emulsion, causing non-uniform developer penetration and a resulting degredation of edge boundaries - and therefore defintition. AGFA was especially specific in advising *against* pre-soaking in the processing of color film.

The one exception I know of (note that I do not mean to imply "universal truth") is MACO 820 IR. MACO strongly recommends a one minute water pre-soak to remove the anti-halation layer - and, having done that and observing the shocking blue water draining from the JOBO, I think I understand why.

But - hey ... whatever crumles your cookie....