Loading a sheet-film hanger??

[Gene McCluney]

I have been processing sheet film for 30 years on hangers, but I may have been doing it wrong.

I was cleaning some 8x10 hangers I acquired recently, and I studied them. They are the standard Kodak Stainless-steel film hangers. You slide the film in, and flip over a spring-loaded channel on top that keeps the film in.

I have always loaded emulsion-side towards me, slide down into hanger, then flip over towards me the top channel to secure the film.

However I noticed the hanger has holes-on the other side of the framework-for solution entry. Now I have from time-to-time had "issues" with the edges of my film having some developing marks, and it got me to wondering-should I insert the film emulsion down, facing the side of the hanger that has the holes drilled? The holes are drilled on the outside edges and the "back" side of the film hangers, but not on the side I always load the emulsion facing.

I inspected my 5x7 and 4x5 hangers and they are the same.

Does anyone know?

[Frank Bagbey]

I have never been able to tell any difference in how I loaded the hangers. As long as your agitation actions are consistent, per Kodak instructions for sheet film processing, you should not see any difference or any defects in your films. I lift all the hangers and rotate to the right at the first 30 seconds for 5 seconds, then after reinserting the hangers into the tank, rotate to the left after the next 30 seconds for 5 seconds. Unlike some, I keep up this process the whole developing time. Some recommend after the first half of the processing time, to only rotate on the full minute. Doing an adequate pre-soak with wetting agent and having wetting agent in your developer should eliminate any developing problems. These methods have proven great for 4x5, 5x7, and 8x10 sheet film developing.

[Jim Fitzgerald]

Gene, I've done it the way you describe and I have never had any problems. I do my 4x5 and 8x10"s and soon my 11x14's this way. I just developed 18 sheets of 8x10 in hangers and they all came out great. They were loaded just as you describe.

Jim

[Don Dudenbostel]

Gene young doing it the correct way.

[Lynn Jones]

It doesn't matter because you will get hanger marks, regardless. Just don't fill the film image completely, you'll probably not be able to use the last 1/4". Actually, Kodak made the hangers for glass plates, not film.

The PPI hangers were designed for film and worked well for either hand agitation or gas burst. That Detroit area company went out of business some years ago. The Carr SS hangers (California) were not much better than the Kodak and they are out of business also.

Your choices are hangers, tray, or drum (probably the best if you can learn how to use drums properly).

Lynn

[Gene McCluney]

Your choices are hangers, tray, or drum (probably the best if you can learn how to use drums properly).

Lynn

I have to smile when you suggest drums. I shoot up to 80 sheets of 5x7 in a days outing, I would grow old in the darkroom if I had to process a few sheets at a time in drums.

[Jim Fitzgerald]

I do not understand how people have trouble with tanks? When I started several years ago I did not have any problems. You just need to follow directions, as with anything we do. I love my minimal agitation negs in tanks!

Jim

[Gene McCluney]

I do not understand how people have trouble with tanks? When I started several years ago I did not have any problems. You just need to follow directions, as with anything we do. I love my minimal agitation negs in tanks!

Jim

I don't "have any problem" with tanks. I was just inquiring about the correct orientation of the film in the hanger. I have primarily processed in deep-tanks for over 30 years.

[Jim Fitzgerald]

I don't "have any problem" with tanks. I was just inquiring about the correct orientation of the film in the hanger. I have primarily processed in deep-tanks for over 30 years.

Gene, I understood your question from your original post and I agree with you. Trying to change to something else when it has been working all this time does not make any sense. Tanks are great.

Jim

[Gene McCluney]

Gene, I've done it the way you describe and I have never had any problems. I do my 4x5 and 8x10"s and soon my 11x14's this way. I just developed 18 sheets of 8x10 in hangers and they all came out great. They were loaded just as you describe.

Jim

I would be VERY INTERESTED in knowing your arrangement for doing 11x14 in Tanks. What are you using for film hangers, and what tanks are you devising for the 11x14 size? I have 11x14 and shoot a little with it, but so-far it is the only size I have to tray process.

[Michael Kadillak]

It doesn't matter because you will get hanger marks, regardless. Just don't fill the film image completely, you'll probably not be able to use the last 1/4". Actually, Kodak made the hangers for glass plates, not film.

The PPI hangers were designed for film and worked well for either hand agitation or gas burst. That Detroit area company went out of business some years ago. The Carr SS hangers (California) were not much better than the Kodak and they are out of business also.

Your choices are hangers, tray, or drum (probably the best if you can learn how to use drums properly).

Lynn

With all due respect Lynn, your statement that Kodak made hangers for glass plates is simply a convenient off the cuff comment and is 100% wrong. And NO you do not always get surge marks. And PPI holders are no better at this than hangers plus they have been unavailable for years. Gordon Hutchings in his Pyro book recommends custom PPI hangers which is a complete waste of time and money because hangers work perfectly. Cripes - that makes a lot of sense to frame an image to accommodate the fact that the edge of your image is unusable? That makes absolutely no sense to me at all to purposefully shoot yourself in the foot. I detest inefficiency in all forms and this takes the cake.

How can I arrive at this conclusion?

I have several Kodak technical publications showing clearly metal hangers with sheet film in them and articulating multiple times both with photographs and in print explicit instructions on how to obtain perfect results (ie no surge marks) with this combination. I have the proof in numerous negatives I have processed in hangers that you will not get surge marks every time if you know what you are doing. My results are absolutely perfect 100% of the time and the Carr hangers are actually better than the Kodak hangers. I wrote an article in View Camera on this subject while I could still tolerate Steve Simmons.

It is important that we take the time to use factual information and not opinion on these venues for the sake of credibility of the reviewing audience.

[Jim Fitzgerald]

Michael, well put.

Jim

[Jim Fitzgerald]

I would be VERY INTERESTED in knowing your arrangement for doing 11x14 in Tanks. What are you using for film hangers, and what tanks are you devising for the 11x14 size? I have 11x14 and shoot a little with it, but so-far it is the only size I have to tray process.

Gene, I have the hanger system that my friend Gordon Chapple used. Gordon and his wife Katherine tragically lost their lives in Escalante canyon in September of last year and his kids kindly gave me Gordon's tanks that he made out of plexi. He fabricated some hangers to use in the tanks and I have not used them yet but I intend to shortly. The tanks hold 11,000 ml. of chemical ( yes that is right) and since I develop in pyrocat-hd with minimal agitation things will be cheap. I need to mix a couple of gallons of fix and get to work. I will let you know how it goes. When I get my digital camera up and running I'll send you some pictures. Gordon used these hangers with his nitrogen burst system. Amazing what he did with plexi!

Jim

[Michael Kadillak]

Michael, well put.

Jim

Thanks Jim. As is always the case I will always share any information I have on this subject (or any subject where I decide to make a position) with anyone that expresses an interest in it so you can work with facts and properly advance in your photographic objectives.