Tank vs. Tube processing ?

[Calamity Jane]

I haven't done any LF format yet - just getting into it - but with 30+ years of 35mm and MF, I have a question about processing with tank/frame versus tube.

Tube looks attractive - it's inexpensive - but tank developing allows multiple sheets at one time with exactly the same characteristics and a tank would seem to ensure good (better?) solution contact.

I'd appreciate comments from those who have used both.

Thanks

[Bob Fowler]

I've done tray, deep tank, Yankee type tank (yuck), Jobo and Unidrum processing of sheet films. For ease of use and economy, I'll stick with a Unidrum. It's easy to do multiple sheets of 4X5 or 5X7 in an 8X10 Unidrum.

[Brian Ellis]

I've been using BTZS 4x5 tubes for about ten years. I process six negatives at a time by rolling them simultaneously in a water jacket, 10 times in one direction 10 times in the other for the duration of the development. Most of what I've read about tanks hasn't been very good but I've never used one so I can't make a direct comparison.

[Gem Singer]

Hi Calamity,

Take a look at my article on this web site. Go to Large Format Photography Home Page, at the top of this page. Scroll down to Processing and Printing. Click on "Developing 4X5 sheet film, an Alternative Method". I'm describing dip-and-dunk processing of 4X5 sheet film, but the same principles apply to larger size films. If I were processing 5X7 or 8X10 sheets, I would probably use tray development. Also, a good book for anyone who developes their own B&W film is the Anchell and Troop, " Film Developing Cookbook".

[bob moulton]

The BTZS tubes are great as long as you have few images to process at a time, assuming you buy only 6 tubes. I recommend the Jobo 2500 drum plus the LF reels that Jobo makes. Place the unit on a uniroller and you are in business. This will work for b/w perfectly; for color it is not good, as there is no ability for very close temperature control. I have used this system, a jobo processor, and the tubes over the years and there is no difference in image processing, once you run the necessary EI and development time tests. Hope this helps, Bob

[Larry Gebhardt]

I have tried tray, tubes, Combi-Plan, and Jobo 2500 tanks on a Jobo processor. I will stick with the Jobo as I get even development, no scratches, and can process 12 sheets at a time. It is also economical for chemicals. The only downside for me is that it is harder to do N- or N+ development of just a few sheets.

[John Kasaian]

One more vote for the Unicolor!

[Darin Cozine]

If you have the money for a Jobo, that is the ideal method. Otherwise, a Unicolor drum method is definately the way to go. It takes a little work to prepare the drum for 4x5 sheet film. Once that is done, it is extremely easy.

I've used trays, tanks, and dip-n-dunk methods also.

[tor kviljo]

I think it's very difficult to improve upon the better JOBO sheet-film tanks when it comes to uniform developement. Added benifits is ease of use, possibility of automation of process etc. I have used various JOBO's for E6 & B&W for many years, now using a ATL 3000. Jobo tanks on a unicolor roller is a inexpensive approach. Using hangers, one often think this gives the best agitation etc. due to each sheet freely in a single dev. frame. However, using aggressive developers (strong Rodinal mix), developement using sheet film hangers is more prone to uneven developement for the home developer due to uneven agitation around the rims of the hanger & surrounding the vent-holes along the sides & bottom of hangers. The JOBO expert drums but also the 2509N is superior here. I agrre with other posters that unicolor tank + roller is a inexpensive & good attempt. Just note that this tank do tend not to give a thorough washing of the base side of the film, giving uneven results with films that have a backing to be removed during developement. Mostly of concern using E6 films I think (Kodak ektachrome in 8"x10" requires extensive chemistry -contact on base side to remove anti halo layer - giving pink discoloration if not remover properly) . Another important issue for some of the poor among us, is that the rotating tank developement is much lower on chemistry usage (less than 0.5l for 6 sheets 4"x5") than doing the same using sheet film hangers. Even the economical Combi-Plan requires over 1 liter (1.125 I belive) for 6 sheets 4"x5". However, for compensating developement - using 1:150 Rodinal e.l. both the agitation-issue using hangers & total dev. economy is OK and hangers is practical to use for this agitate-only-every-5-minute development

[Philippe Bedfert]

Dear Calamity,

I used to develop my sheet film in HP Combiplan tank until I discover BTZS tube. I prefer the tube because you can have a more consistent development process. The tube are floating in a water tray so the temperature is constant during the treatment. You need only 60ml of solution per tube vs 1 liter for th tank. It is more economical. My development process is : Development in tube Then I put the open tube in a stop bath tray Then I put the sheet in the tank for fixing and washing. The film are nice, even development, no trace of halation layer.