</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (glbeas @ Apr 12 2003, 07:16 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
I was getting a bit leery of the fill times for the tall tank as compared to the 3:15 developing time. Didn&#39;t leave much leeway. </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>
I guess I&#39;ll have to take my place with the "odd" crowd again.

I&#39;ve made my share of mistakes when it comes to processing ... wrong temperature, wrong time ... needless to say, a *host* of others. I&#39;ve come to view these "excursions" as "interesting experiments" in alternative processing rather than "disasters."

I would submit - prepare for sacrilege - that color processing .. both C-41 and RA-4 is nowhere near as sensitive as the film producers would have us believe. My theory is that, if the results out of the darkroom are not up to the expectations of the "small operator" - imagined or real - the manufacturers can always fall back to, "Well, you didn&#39;t maintain a developer tolerance of +/- 1/4 degree F&#33;&#33;" Saves them a lot of time in technical service calls.

JOBO did a *lot* of investigation into the "uneven development" idea - the operation of filling their tanks allows the developer to reach the outer film on the reel before that on the inner - and after knocking themselves out trying different film/developer/fill times with *many* densitometer readings, concluded that, for all intents and purposes - even among the "pickiest" - there wasn&#39;t diddly-dit of difference. I think the greatest variation was something on the order of 0.01, which could be caused by a LOT of other factors.

I remember reading - both from Ilford and Agfa - that pre-wetting was to be avoided - something to do with water "swelling" the emulsion and causing image degradation - without adding anything to "even-ness". For a time, the idea of adding a wetting agent - dilute Photo-Flo, or my choice for wetting, the Edwal stuff - to the developer was in vogue - but that sort of "faded".

I have been wondering about the "No less than a five minute devloping time" proscription for some time now. I&#39;ve done a *bunch* of 3 minute and 15 seconds C-41 processing over the years with *no* "uneven development" problem that I could see.

As a matter of fact, Irving Penn in his book "Worlds in a Small Room" states that most of his photography was done on "Tri-X , exposed at 160 ASA, or 80 to 125 for very dark skins. Development was usually in (Ethol) UFG , 3 to 5 minutes at 68F." Note the "three".

Considering Penn&#39;s work in this book, I&#39;d have no problem doing the same. If my work could only be half as good...