Mod 54

[giacomo marchetti]

I would suggest to users of the MOD 54 a little trick.When you have loaded the sheets,you must sorround it with a little rubber band.
This help to keep the sheets in correct position also with vigorous agitation.I remove the band for washing.Elementary Watson!

[ScottPhotoCo]

The secret, for me anyway, is to use even, non-aggressive agitation and MOST IMPORTANTLY, pour liquids out evenly and not super quick. Never had problems using these methods.

Tim
www.ScottPhoto.co

[StoneNYC]

The secret, for me anyway, is to use even, non-aggressive agitation and MOST IMPORTANTLY, pour liquids out evenly and not super quick. Never had problems using these methods.

Tim
www.ScottPhoto.co

+1

[smithdoor]

I use today Yankee works great but it takes 64 oz to fill the tank. I am thinking of making a film holder for a 30 oz tank so do not have make a 1/2 gal of Chemicals

Dave

[StoneNYC]

I use today Yankee works great but it takes 64 oz to fill the tank. I am thinking of making a film holder for a 30 oz tank so do not have make a 1/2 gal of Chemicals

Dave

If the Yankee had a good seal on the top I would use it and simply fill the space with a weight so I could use less developer. I have one too, but those lids leak like a sieve

[AtlantaTerry]

I use an HP Combi that I found at a camera swap meet. It only uses 30+ ounces of chemistry to process up to 6 sheets of 4x5. I really like it for small processing runs.

When I want to process 12 sheets of film or so, I use Kodak #4A stainless steel racks. For processing tanks I use 106 ounce plastic tubs that I found at the dollar store. To keep the racks from splaying out I use a large rubber band with no problems at all.

[smithdoor]

The seal is a down side but the big one for me is I do not take a lot of 4x5 I have to make 1/2 gal developer. Most of the time I have 32 oz mix.
Yes I may try to fill the space.

Dave


If the Yankee had a good seal on the top I would use it and simply fill the space with a weight so I could use less developer. I have one too, but those lids leak like a sieve

[StoneNYC]

The seal is a down side but the big one for me is I do not take a lot of 4x5 I have to make 1/2 gal developer. Most of the time I have 32 oz mix.
Yes I may try to fill the space.

Dave

Ahhh I had to pull out my conversion app haha,

Why aren't you working in metric numbers?

Anyway so you're saying you need to mix 2 packets at a time to make the half gallon? Hmm yes that could be annoying, I only used my Yankee tank about 2 times and said "forget this!" And went and got a MOD54. Someday I hope to buy an expert drum from JOBO and be done with it.

[smithdoor]

They both work for me
1 qt is just over 1 lt
1 gal is just over 4 lt or 3.784 lt
Try this for rule of thumb 1 meter is almost 40" or 39.37"
and 1" is 25.4mm
I have had to work with both all my life and most here uses the US standard FYI I think USA and may one other country uses this system.

Dave


Ahhh I had to pull out my conversion app haha,

Why aren't you working in metric numbers?

Anyway so you're saying you need to mix 2 packets at a time to make the half gallon? Hmm yes that could be annoying, I only used my Yankee tank about 2 times and said "forget this!" And went and got a MOD54. Someday I hope to buy an expert drum from JOBO and be done with it.

[StoneNYC]

They both work for me
1 qt is just over 1 lt
1 gal is just over 4 lt or 3.784 lt
Try this for rule of thumb 1 meter is almost 40" or 39.37"
and 1" is 25.4mm
I have had to work with both all my life and most here uses the US standard FYI I think USA and may one other country uses this system.

Dave

I live in CT, USA and I have never understood the American system, but with chemistry it's universally been the metric system, even in America, and this is chemistry, only kodak seems to have not quite gotten that right away but most other chemistry amounts are in metric. I guess since I don't use kodak chemicals (except HC-110 I've used) I never bothered to think in American measures, maybe that's why I get confused and don't want to try D-76 becsuse it's not really convertible to metric without watering down the mixture to 4L but that makes the developer significantly weaker.

Anyway thanks for the info.

[koh303]

They both work for me
1 qt is just over 1 lt
1 gal is just over 4 lt or 3.784 lt
Try this for rule of thumb 1 meter is almost 40" or 39.37"
and 1" is 25.4mm
I have had to work with both all my life and most here uses the US standard FYI I think USA and may one other country uses this system.

Dave


This is only true in the US. In the UK all those numbers mean something else - but a Meter and a Liter are always the same, no matter where on earth you are.

[StoneNYC]

This is only true in the US. In the UK all those numbers mean something else - but a Meter and a Liter are always the same, no matter where on earth you are.

True, Troy oz right?

[Michael Cienfuegos]

True, Troy oz right?

RONG! Avoirdupois.

[StoneNYC]

RONG! Avoirdupois.

Neither of those letter combinations translate to words I am familiar with...

[koh303]

True, Troy oz right?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_the_imperial_and_US_customary_measurement_systems
and if you must:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gallon

The endless amounts of nonsense and non round non universal measurments in those articles makes it a good thing to remember that if you want exact measurements, use the metric system.

[Michael Cienfuegos]

Avoirdupois is another oz/lb system of measurement. one troy oz One troy ounce is equivalent to approximately 1.09714 avoirdupois ounces. (from Wikipedia) there are 12 troy oz in a troy lb. Troy ounces are used in weighing precious metals.

[Michael Cienfuegos]

It would be so much easier for all of us if we went over to the metric system, :(

[Lachlan 717]

1 qt is just over 1 lt

Actually, under 1 litre; 946ml

[StoneNYC]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_the_imperial_and_US_customary_measurement_systems
and if you must:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gallon

The endless amounts of nonsense and non round non universal measurments in those articles makes it a good thing to remember that if you want exact measurements, use the metric system.

Well I learned that I'm underweight... Or they got it wrong, "14 Stone" is only 150lbs ... Not 196lbs, or my bathroom scale is broken...

Come to think of it, there's only 1 of me, so that would mean I'm severely under weight at 14lbs... Eek! :whistling:

[StoneNYC]

Avoirdupois is another oz/lb system of measurement. one troy oz One troy ounce is equivalent to approximately 1.09714 avoirdupois ounces. (from Wikipedia) there are 12 troy oz in a troy lb. Troy ounces are used in weighing precious metals.

Thanks, I had never heard of that word before.

[StoneNYC]

It would be so much easier for all of us if we went over to the metric system, :(

I totally agree we should all just move to the metric system, the US is just stupid, I think part of it is about money, by manufactures having two different measurements for things, they're able to sell two different sets of tools to anyone who wants to make any adjustments to anything. And also because the mass production of goods now would mean retooling all of the machines that make everything and that's just too costly in this day and age, if they had done it sooner it wouldn't be so bad.

The US is stagnating and I don't understand why they can't just figure it out...

[Lachlan 717]

This is only true in the US. In the UK all those numbers mean something else - but a Meter and a Liter are always the same, no matter where on earth you are.

A meter is not the same as a metre in the UK, nor the rest of the world. It is either a measuring device or a reference to music/poetry. It is not a distance/length.

And a liter does not exist outside the US. It is a litre.

[StoneNYC]

A meter is not the same as a metre in the UK, nor the rest of the world. It is either a measuring device or a reference to music/poetry. It is not a distance/length.

And a liter does not exist outside the US. It is a litre.

Hah! We can't even spell...

[Michael Cienfuegos]

Hah! We can't even spell...

Yes we can, all those extra vowels and trailing "e"s were dropped after the Revolution. I have enough Canadian friends to remind me that there are different ways to spell things. When communicating with them I just add the proper letters to keep everyone happy (other than my spell checker). :)


btw, I would weigh even more than I do if I had to put up with imperial weights. It's bad enough I'm at 240# av. still over a hundred kg. only 5'6 tall . I suffer from a severely overactive fork.

[StoneNYC]

Yes we can, all those extra vowels and trailing "e"s were dropped after the Revolution. I have enough Canadian friends to remind me that there are different ways to spell things. When communicating with them I just add the proper letters to keep everyone happy (other than my spell checker). :)


btw, I would weigh even more than I do if I had to put up with imperial weights. It's bad enough I'm at 240# av. still over a hundred kg. only 5'6 tall . I suffer from a severely overactive fork.

If you're saying litre and other words lost their ending vowels, then you can't spell either...

Cause then it would be litr....

[Ian Gordon Bilson]

Winston Churchill (who all babies resemble, somewhat ) described the US and Britain as "two countries divided by a common language".
I expect Mr Denny (I didn't get where I am today by...) will shove this sideways into some Lounge type oblivion, but, we Colonials derive endless amusement from the worlds most powerful democracy tied up in niceties like 1/16 of an inch.
P'shaw.

[mihag]

And a liter does not exist outside the US. It is a litre.

It certainly exists in my country. Germans say liter too (Liter, actually), so do Slovaks, etc.

[Rollinhofuji]

It certainly exists in my country. Germans say liter too (Liter, actually), so do Slovaks, etc.
I can confirm that (Liter).

[Rafal Lukawiecki]

They both work for me
1 qt is just over 1 lt
1 gal is just over 4 lt or 3.784 lt


For what it is worth, in UK 1 qt is 1.14 l, and 1 gal is 4.55 l. Have you ever wondered why British cars have higher mpg than US ones?

[soeren]

I can confirm that (Liter).

Pronounced Litter? :rolleyes:

[Rollinhofuji]

Pronounced Litter? :rolleyes:

Quite close ;-)

[smithdoor]

Most of the time I just use the rule of thumb 1 gal is around 4 lt and 1 qt is around 1 lt
If I am a mix I find a container the size I need to mix (find most containers and the grocery store in the size I need less than $2.00 note it has some else in the container just use and go). It keeps it simple.
Yes some the measurements in the UK is not the same is the USA.

Dave


For what it is worth, in UK 1 qt is 1.14 l, and 1 gal is 4.55 l. Have you ever wondered why British cars have higher mpg than US ones?

[StoneNYC]

Most of the time I just use the rule of thumb 1 gal is around 4 lt and 1 qt is around 1 lt
If I am a mix I find a container the size I need to mix (find most containers and the grocery store in the size I need less than $2.00 note it has some else in the container just use and go). It keeps it simple.
Yes some the measurements in the UK is not the same is the USA.

Dave

I just use the metric system with everything except cooking (even though I want to change that too but haven't found a good metric cookbook.

I'm trying to learn to judge distance by the eye in metric but that's harder, I'll get it.

[smithdoor]

Cook in USA good luck ever thing here is in cups and qt
The distance is simple just estimate in feet or yards then if it is feed just 3 x plus a little (one meter = 3.28 feet) for yards to meters it almost the same as meter is one meter = 1.09 yards)
So if you estimate is 20 yards then you will know it just under 20 meters {around 20 -2= 18 meter} (Real dimension is 18.35 meters)

Dave


I just use the metric system with everything except cooking (even though I want to change that too but haven't found a good metric cookbook.

I'm trying to learn to judge distance by the eye in metric but that's harder, I'll get it.

[StoneNYC]

Cook in USA good luck ever thing here is in cups and qt
The distance is simple just estimate in feet or yards then if it is feed just 3 x plus a little (one meter = 3.28 feet) for yards to meters it almost the same as meter is one meter = 1.09 yards)
So if you estimate is 20 yards then you will know it just under 20 meters {around 20 -2= 18 meter} (Real dimension is 18.35 meters)

Dave

Thanks, I get that, but I mean sort of like when people learn a new language, I want to get to the point where I'm not "translating" in my head, when it just comes naturally.

:)

[Salem Salem]

The Mod 54 (or Mod 1310 if you wish) is my only method of processing 5x4 film. When I first used it I agitated very very gently and as a result ended up with uneven development and one of the sheets had moved and touched the one above it. The next trial I agitated even more gently and the unevenness was worse. That lead to a trial where I got six sheets of undeveloped no-good film and loaded them in daylight making sure that every sheet is well seated in place. Then I filled the tank with one litre of water and agitated the hell out of that tank before opening it to see how many sheets has moved, which was none. So I concluded that the movement of film happens before even closing the tank. Either the initial seating is wrong or during the placing of the insert inside the tank the outer sheet touches the side of the tank and moves or something. Since then I'm agitating just like I do with smaller tanks and I have no issues whatsoever with uneveness or displaced sheets.

[StoneNYC]

The Mod 54 (or Mod 1310 if you wish) is my only method of processing 5x4 film. When I first used it I agitated very very gently and as a result ended up with uneven development and one of the sheets had moved and touched the one above it. The next trial I agitated even more gently and the unevenness was worse. That lead to a trial where I got six sheets of undeveloped no-good film and loaded them in daylight making sure that every sheet is well seated in place. Then I filled the tank with one litre of water and agitated the hell out of that tank before opening it to see how many sheets has moved, which was none. So I concluded that the movement of film happens before even closing the tank. Either the initial seating is wrong or during the placing of the insert inside the tank the outer sheet touches the side of the tank and moves or something. Since then I'm agitating just like I do with smaller tanks and I have no issues whatsoever with uneveness or displaced sheets.

Your description is really strange, I always agitate very slowly and gently, only one agitation over 10 seconds. I've only used DD-X and Rodinal in my MOD54

Perhaps you're using something like HC-110 in under 5 minutes? That might cause uneven development anyway. Glad you found a way that works.

[Salem Salem]

Perhaps you're using something like HC-110 in under 5 minutes?

It's around 7 minutes for E-6 (tetenal 3-bath kit) and about the same for BW with ilfosol3. I'm planning to use ilford ID-11 only because it can be reused. 1 litre of one shot ilfosol3 at 1+14 is not cheap.

[StoneNYC]

Believe it or not, at 1+9 Ilfsol 3 I've used it up to 5 times with no adverse affects, but then I'm probably less particular than you. Either way DD-X is way expensive. If you want something similar look at HC-110(B) or Rodinal. Much cheaper.

Even I wouldn't do color with the MOD54 but I'm sure it's possible just that I feel I lack the skills.

[Rafal Lukawiecki]

Your description is really strange, I always agitate very slowly and gently, only one agitation over 10 seconds. I've only used DD-X and Rodinal in my MOD54

Is that 1 every 10 seconds, or 1 inversion so slow that it takes 10 seconds? If the latter, you're in or very close to uneven development territory. One thing I've observed from other, more advanced photographers, is that they tend to agitate quite vigorously, or use constant one, like Jobo.

[ScottPhotoCo]

I agitate 8 times in 10 seconds in a very even, non aggressive manner and have never had problems with development or film moving. I do make sure that all of the sheets are seated well and properly in the holder before I put it in the processing tank.

Tim
www.ScottPhoto.co

[StoneNYC]

Is that 1 every 10 seconds, or 1 inversion so slow that it takes 10 seconds? If the latter, you're in or very close to uneven development territory. One thing I've observed from other, more advanced photographers, is that they tend to agitate quite vigorously, or use constant one, like Jobo.

Latter, but you have to know your dev/film, I wouldn't do it with HC-110, but Rodinal is fine, heck with TMY-2 I COULD do an inversion every 2 minutes and be ok, I don't though, it's about the tones I'm after.

Anyway I'm preventing grain, heavy agitation causes more grain.

[koh303]

heavy agitation causes more grain.

Don't you mean larger grain?

[StoneNYC]

Don't you mean larger grain?

Yes, sorry, larger, heavier looking

[Salem Salem]

Believe it or not, at 1+9 Ilfsol 3 I've used it up to 5 times with no adverse affects, but then I'm probably less particular than you. Either way DD-X is way expensive. If you want something similar look at HC-110(B) or Rodinal. Much cheaper.

Even I wouldn't do color with the MOD54 but I'm sure it's possible just that I feel I lack the skills.

I don't know about the DD-x but ilford's Id11 is very cheap. A packet that makes one litre costs around five bucks and would do ten rolls or 40 sheets of 4x5. As for colour processing, I've never had any problems processing Fuji chromes in the Mod, but you really need to agitate faster than you currently do or the tank would go cold on you and you would end up with more than just unevenness.

[kazzam]

Is that 1 every 10 seconds, or 1 inversion so slow that it takes 10 seconds? If the latter, you're in or very close to uneven development territory. One thing I've observed from other, more advanced photographers, is that they tend to agitate quite vigorously, or use constant one, like Jobo.

What works for me is:
B&W - 4 inversions every minute - takes approx 10-14 secs using ilfosol. Don't get any problems.
Slide & Colour neg (tetenal 3 bath) Invert tank slowly for 20 secs in first min. 1 inversion every 15 secs thereafter. No unevenness. I do get the occasional couple of sheets in the same grooves. My main problem is curled sheets that won't flatten out after drying. See my other thread about this. Very annoying.

[StoneNYC]

I'm not sure how agitation affects the temperature of the tank.

Anyway if you want cheap, HC-110 at (B) will do 100+ rolls for $35 (give or take, they recently changed the size and price of the bottle so I haven't calculate the new one, and Rodinal will do 100 for $13

Good luck!

DD-X is the best, but you get what you pay for. (Except Rodinal which is way under priced for it's awesomeness haha and let's hope it stays that way).

[StoneNYC]

What works for me is:
B&W - 4 inversions every minute - takes approx 10-14 secs using ilfosol. Don't get any problems.
Slide & Colour neg (tetenal 3 bath) Invert tank slowly for 20 secs in first min. 1 inversion every 15 secs thereafter. No unevenness. I do get the occasional couple of sheets in the same grooves. My main problem is curled sheets that won't flatten out after drying. See my other thread about this. Very annoying.

You must be doing something wrong, I saw your post before, have NEVER had that issue.

[kazzam]

You must be doing something wrong, I saw your post before, have NEVER had that issue.

If you can figure out what then please let me know. If you read the thread you'll see I posted an image of the curled sheets. In this batch I processed some fuji trannies together with some ektachrome. The fuji sheets are curled. The Ektachrome sheets are perfectly flat - same process. Temps measured with 3 separate thermometers. Thermorstatic controlled bath, precisely tempered water for the washes. Not sure what I'm doing wrong.

[StoneNYC]

If you can figure out what then please let me know. If you read the thread you'll see I posted an image of the curled sheets. In this batch I processed some fuji trannies together with some ektachrome. The fuji sheets are curled. The Ektachrome sheets are perfectly flat - same process. Temps measured with 3 separate thermometers. Thermorstatic controlled bath, precisely tempered water for the washes. Not sure what I'm doing wrong.

If I knew I would tell you, either the Fuji was stored strangely or there's something in the water that affected it, I can't say, again never had the issue.

Good luck!

[Salem Salem]

I'm not sure how agitation affects the temperature of the tank.


The agitation itself doesn't change the temperature. What changes the temperature is taking the tank out of the water bath and keeping it out for more than few seconds. For BW, no problem because the whole process is done at room temperature, but with colour at 38C the temperature difference is big enough to cause a drop in the developers temperature if you keep the tank out of the bath unnecessarily for several seconds. In that case, rapid agitation is desirable if not required.

[koh303]

What works for me is:
B&W - 4 inversions every minute - takes approx 10-14 secs using ilfosol. Don't get any problems.
Slide & Colour neg (tetenal 3 bath) Invert tank slowly for 20 secs in first min. 1 inversion every 15 secs thereafter. No unevenness. I do get the occasional couple of sheets in the same grooves. My main problem is curled sheets that won't flatten out after drying. See my other thread about this. Very annoying.


Curled sheets - not enough wash time/not enough hypo clear (which are essentially the same).
In some cases high moisture and high heat drying environment can also cause this but to a lesser extent.

Stone - the fact you get different results, does not mean someone else is doing something wrong.

[StoneNYC]

Curled sheets - not enough wash time/not enough hypo clear (which are essentially the same).
In some cases high moisture and high heat drying environment can also cause this but to a lesser extent.

Stone - the fact you get different results, does not mean someone else is doing something wrong.

I didn't mean the poster was purposefully doing something wrong, but something is wrong, bad water, bad film, bad storage, it's not just random, it's something...

[koh303]

You must be doing something wrong, I saw your post before, have NEVER had that issue.

You said he "must be doing something wrong", because your experience was not the same.
I guess this can be interpreted in some other non radacting way.

[StoneNYC]

You said he "must be doing something wrong", because your experience was not the same.
I guess this can be interpreted in some other non radacting way.

Calm down man, stop making a mountain out of a mole hill. None of my terrible use of the English language matters, what matters is getting to the root of the problem, by mentioning possible issues in the process, one can slowly help identify a problem area.