Acrylic film washer photos/plans?

[vinny]

I've been washing my film for 10+years either in hangers or in my expert drums. I don't have any $$ but I do have plenty of 3/8" and 1/4" acrylic sheeting and happen to be good at making things. I'd like to make one that holds 10 sheets and can sit outside my sink. I've looked at the Alistair Crossjet and others that shoot water across each sheet but can't make sense of the designs from photos I've found online. Where does the water drain from? Anyone have good pics/plans that would make it's workings clear?

[Ari]

I have two CrossJets, but they are both for in-sink use.
You might look at something like the Kostiner archival print washer (or similar print washers) for inspiration.
The overflow is to the top, to one side of the tank and into a separate channel, which has a drain of its own, and you attach a hose to that drain and the water ends up in your sink.
Search for "archival print washer plans".

[vinny]

Ari, what makes the "in sink use" style different? Does the water just run over the side?
Anybody have a pdf of the plans which were at this site that no longer exists?http://www.darkroomsource.net/printwasher.shtml

[adelorenzo]

Try this link, it was the last time the site was crawled in late 2011. I'm getting some problems with pop-ups on this page but you should be able to find a way to save the information.

https://web.archive.org/web/20111005141806/http://www.darkroomsource.net/printwasher.shtml

[Cletus]

Vinny -

I made an acrylic 4x5 film washer years ago, at the time could neither find, nor afford the Inglis washer. I'm not sure how practical it would be to try to use a small washer like this out of the sink, so mine is in sink.

It's very simple and very effective too. First, I made a five-sided box with an open top. There are some 1/2" spacers in the bottom that support another smaller "box", which is really just a bottom and eleven dividers and fits tightly into the outer box and sits on the 1/2" spacers. The inner box is a hair over 5" long and about 3 1/2" deep and holds 12 sheets of 4x5 film. The inner box fits well below the top of the outer box, so the film is submerged but still easy to grab hold of.

The inner box has twelve rows of twenty or so 1/16" holes drilled through the bottom, using a guide to keep the rows straight and even. I made eleven dividers for the inner box, evenly spaced between the rows of 1/16" holes, using 1/4" square acrylic rod between each divider on each end (using the 1/4" spacers was much easier than trying to cut slots in the sides to support the dividers, as in a traditional print washer). There's a water inlet (connected to a hose) drilled into the 1/2" space under the inner box.

Water flows into the 1/2" space in the bottom box, through the holes in the inner box, which are neatly centered along the bottom of each of twelve film slots, and out the top of the box. Cost me the price of the acrylic cement and the little 1/4" hose barb for the inlet hose (I had the acrylic material too) total about $9 give or take.

Here's a few pictures if you're interested in trying this design. It's not the most beautiful thing, as I'd never worked with acrylic before this, so made a bit of a mess. It does work brilliantly though, regardless of its humble looks and design. You're welcome to use this idea if you are so inclined.

108265 108266 108267 108268

[Doremus Scudder]

I've made a washer somewhat like the one Cletus shows above, but with small rods to separate the film instead of sheets of acrylic.

I have since purchased a couple Gravity Works film washers. The basket for the 4x5" film washer is just under four inches across and has grooves milled into the sides to hold the edges of the film. I like this because the film is always exposed to water on both sides. I am leery of flat sheet dividers that film or paper can stick to and prevent the washing of one side. Some print washers are terrible in this regard. A quick search of Google images on "Gravity Works film washer" turns up lots of info.

Best,

Doremus

[Ari]

Ari, what makes the "in sink use" style different? Does the water just run over the side?
Anybody have a pdf of the plans which were at this site that no longer exists?http://www.darkroomsource.net/printwasher.shtml

I think what makes the in-sink different is that there is no provision for catching the overflow.
The water runs out of both in the same manner, but the out-of-sink has an extra, wider slot to pool the water.

Basically, you need to figure out how to catch the overflow, then how to drain it, and you have an out-of-sink washer

[KennyMark]

Vinny,
If you subscribe to the opinionated Mr. Picker's writings and research, he made several claims about archival washing based on his tests.
1) because hypo is denser than water, it will pool at the bottom of the tank unless the chambers drain through the bottom. I believe that he claimed this is the case even with bottom feeding designs based on testing residual hypo in the print.
2) panels separating prints and negatives prevent cross contamination of neighboring sheets if added to the tank at different times.
3) in order to control the rate of outflow and thereby the rate of fresh water needed to keep the tank filled, he made his bottom draining washers with a trap on the sides (that are also connected by tubes). This also allows one to keep it full when the water supply is shut off.

If you're only looking to wash film, then I guess archival washing is probably different than for prints.

Please document your process to share, or at least invite me over to see your finished product!

[rfesk]

To use "in sink" washer out of the sink just install a drain line in a pan that is large enough to hold the "in sink" washer. Then the drain line can be directed to the sink.

[vinny]

Vinny,
If you subscribe to the opinionated Mr. Picker's writings and research, he made several claims about archival washing based on his tests.
1) because hypo is denser than water, it will pool at the bottom of the tank unless the chambers drain through the bottom. I believe that he claimed this is the case even with bottom feeding designs based on testing residual hypo in the print.
2) panels separating prints and negatives prevent cross contamination of neighboring sheets if added to the tank at different times.
3) in order to control the rate of outflow and thereby the rate of fresh water needed to keep the tank filled, he made his bottom draining washers with a trap on the sides (that are also connected by tubes). This also allows one to keep it full when the water supply is shut off.

If you're only looking to wash film, then I guess archival washing is probably different than for prints.

Please document your process to share, or at least invite me over to see your finished product!

I've heard that too, Kenny so I made my print washer with the outlet on the bottom which also is handy for draining that heavy monster. BUT.........see what others have to say about hypo being denser than water: http://photo.net/columns/mjohnston/photography-assumptions/

[Drew Wiley]

I've made a number of these washers and use them all the time. You just need standard acrylic fabrication tools and skills. It takes about an afternoon to make one.

[vinny]

I've made a number of these washers and use them all the time. You just need standard acrylic fabrication tools and skills. It takes about an afternoon to make one.

Drew, how does that help ME?
If you're able to send me some pics or drawings, I'd be grateful. I only want to do this once and I'd like to use the best possible design. I have the tools and skills.

[Drew Wiley]

Sorry... but technically, I can't send you plans, since my own washers are semi-copied from commercially available patented devices. It's perfectly legal to make
something for your own use that way, but otherwise ...? Just look at any of em, whether Salthill, or Zone VI, or Calumet, or whatever. All these siphon and gravity
type washers work analogously and have published pictures or diagrams somewhere in their old ads. I don't know if we have a digital camera laying around anywhere so I could take a shot of mine... I recently bought my wife an underwater digital, but I can't figure out how to use it on land. One personal tweak I did on my own washers was to add little hemispherical silicone cabinet bumpers to each side of the septums. These last forever (done confuse them with vinyl bumpers) and keep the paper from sticking to the plastic, much like the dimple bottoms of some developing trays. I saved a lot of money by buying scratched odd lots of acrylic from the plastics dealer, rather than the pristine sheets I use for picture framing. You'll need 1/4 inch plastic for the outside tank, but 1/8 inch is
fine for everything else. This seems to work for up to a 20x24 print washer. Anything bigger needs a different design.... gotta go... but might chime back in later
to explain a few more things.

[KennyMark]

Hi Vinny,
Yes, dear old Fred does still have his detractors doesn't he.
Johnston is correct (in a manner of speaking) when he says that fixer dissolves in water after it leaches out of the print. In fact it simply becomes more dilute (or a lower molar concentration if you prefer) than it was when absorbed by the paper. What he doesn't acknowledge is the effect of agitation on the diffusion of the hypo in the water. One of the goals of most archival print washers is to minimize water use for reasons both economical and environmental. So presuming then a low energy environment in the wash tank, there will be incomplete diffusion, and variation in density within the fluid body. The effects of variation in density will remain in these lower energy washers. So the cynic in me next asks, "So what? So there's a little fixer that remains in the tank, even if it is in the bottom? How much difference can that make?" Here's where I need to pull out my newsletters to make sure of what I'm talking about before I speak. I will stick my neck about to tell you what I'm going to verify: I believe that Picker and his minions tested how much hypo was not leached out of the various positions within the prints at various replenishment rates and with various water entry and exit configurations. Stand by and within the next few days as I am able I will seek out what he claimed to find and report back here.


I've heard that too, Kenny so I made my print washer with the outlet on the bottom which also is handy for draining that heavy monster. BUT.........see what others have to say about hypo being denser than water: http://photo.net/columns/mjohnston/photography-assumptions/

[Ian Gordon Bilson]

The anomaly,to me ,is the desire is to stand a large sheet of waterlogged paper, on edge,
for a long period of time, while moving a body of water across it, in an even and uniform fashion.
So - no dead/stagnant areas, and perfect diffusion.
Having built a 20x 24in vertical washer, of my own design,and borrowing shamelessly from commercial designs, I abandoned it in favor of a dump and replace tray system. Less wear and tear on the print, and,apart from the labor component, at least as efficient.

[vinny]

The anomaly,to me ,is the desire is to stand a large sheet of waterlogged paper, on edge,
for a long period of time, while moving a body of water across it, in an even and uniform fashion.
So - no dead/stagnant areas, and perfect diffusion.
Having built a 20x 24in vertical washer, of my own design,and borrowing shamelessly from commercial designs, I abandoned it in favor of a dump and replace tray system. Less wear and tear on the print, and,apart from the labor component, at least as efficient.

that's nice. I've yet to see a fiber print complain of wear and tear.
I'm building a 4x5 and 8x10 FILM washer, as the title of the thread says.

[KennyMark]

Vinny,
Point we'll taken regarding your intent to build a film washer. In my mind, as long as I'm going to the trouble to build a washer for a given format, I'd like to be able to use it for washing film and prints. That's just me.
What is significant about the difference (if I may put on my Captain Obvious cap for a moment) is that this discussion is academic if not moot with regards to washing film as it doesn't soak up an amount of hypo that is anything close to what a non RC paper does. Leaching hypo from the emulsion and washing it away from the surfaces of the film must take much less time and water than is required for doing the same for prints. I have not tested this so I cannot say this with any authority but am confident enough to operate as if this is true until I take the time to test it. So many of the issues that we've been discussing here are not as critical for washing film and if you will only ever use it for film, I'd suggest just building a box, put vertical septa in it, a large spigot near the bottom of a side wall, connect a hose, and use the still-water fill and drain routine several times. It will be as effective if not more so, and a lot easier to construct. I did find a reference to hypo density and washing in the Zone VI newsletters, although not the one I was hoping for. For the benefit of the discussion regarding print washing, I will address it in my next post. This one is too long already

[KennyMark]

From the September 1987 edition of Zone VI Newsletter, Number 52, page 8 by Fred Picker

"Although everyone agrees that hypo is heavier than water, some insist that it doesn't sink. (They must think it floats; there are no other possibilities.)
Rather than discussing it archivally, (forever) why don't they try this simple test: Take a print out of the fixer, cut off one corner and place it in a stand up washer like ours or an East Street or just stand it up in a bucket of clean water. Put the cut corner at the top. Don't agitate it or bother it. Take it out in an hour and place a drop of HT-2 at the top (cut) corner and quickly put another drop at the bottom. (HT-2 grows darker with time goes by.) in two minutes you will see some stain at the top and more stain at the bottom. Hypo sinks.
Years ago, when there was not much choice in print washers, most of the serious print makers used East Street Gallery washers. They looked something like ours except that they didn't have the double wall ends and the print partitions were so narrow that East Street included a a stick for fishing out the prints. The water gushed in at the bottom, sucking in a lot of air through a pipe. The visual effect was impressive. Bubbles rose in clouds and you would think a lot was happening. It was; the washer was endlessly circulating fixer. The only water that was replaced was relatively uncontaminated water that slopped over the top of the tank.
A few smart photographers discovered that they could get a better wash in an East Street Washer in less time if they just soaked the prints in it for a few hours. (Leica says that film is well washed by transferring it from one clean water bath to another every few minutes.) this procedure became universal after the publication of a magazine article by an outstanding West Coast printer. He described his museum dictated processing procedures for a large number of Dorothea Lange prints. He used the still water system in an East Street washer but he also drained and refilled it every half hour. If you have an East Street or Gravity Works or Kostiner washer (similar in operation to East Street) soak the prints in still water for three hours with the occasional complete drain and refill. You'll not only get a better wash, you'll use less water. Soaking prints lying down in a tray doesn't work; what fixer leaches out just lays between the sheets.
The East Street people were aware of the problem. They deserve a lot of credit because, realizing its shortcomings, they withdrew it from the market. Unfortunately, this was ultimately their undoing; during the time required to design and get a new washer into production, they ran out of capital and were forced out of business."

Not the piece I am looking for but close to the mark.

[Drew Wiley]

A vertical slot washer takes up a lot less space in the darkroom, and I'm fully confident mine does an excellent job in fully washing the prints. I have NEVER had a
fiber-based print torn or damaged due to this method. I use my 20x24 slot washer for both 20x24 and 16x20 prints (though I have a dedicated 16x20 washer too,
which takes up less sink space). Then I have a smaller washer for 8x10 and 11x14 prints, though I more frequently use it for washing sheet film. Then I have a big
30x40 horizontal washer, but mainly use that for color prints, though that task per se can just as easily be done with a Koday tray siphon and big tray (color prints
don't need to be washed very long, and I do most of it in drum anyway first).

[vinny]

Kenny,
Since I rarely print 8x10's and never 4x5's, I don't need a print washer that small. I do need one for 16x20 and up but that'll come later. I got your message amd will be in touch when I get going on this.

[KennyMark]

To bring closure to the subject of print washing here which Vinny, the O.P., never even intended to discuss, let me summarize what I found.
In the July, 1974, issue #4 of Zone VI Newsletter, Fred Picker devotes several pages to the new Zone VI washer. In essence (because it is longer than I wish to retype verbatim on my tablet), he says that their testing shows that the best wash (meaning shortest time with no hypo detected in the paper in a test using HT-2) for a (non RC) print is 1 hour in an isolated chamber with the print held vertically 1 1/2" above the bottom of the bottom-draining chamber that is 1" wide at a rate of 1 gallon/minute with new water entering across the top of a 15 chamber tank for 11x14 prints. Agitation had no effect on the efficacy of the process. Furthermore, a 2 1/2 hour bath in unreplenished still water produced the same results if the print was suspended 1 1/2" above the bottom of the tank. A Calumet 11x14 washer holds about 3 gallons of water so that means that a 2 1/2 hour vertical bath in approximately a quart of water is sufficient to remove all fixer from the print. This time can be reduced to 1 hour by adding a total of four gallons to the top of that chamber slowly while the water departs at the same rate from the bottom of the chamber.
YMMV so run your own tests to be certain. I'm only reporting the results of the most exhaustive testing that I am privy to and aware of.
This writing in 1974 was only the first time that Picker wrote about print washing in the newsletters. He continued to beat people up about it now and then over the years.

[Ginette]

Hello Vinny,

I don't know how big is your print washer but maybe you could use it and make a basket like the Gravity Works Archival Film Washer basket.
Just make slots on a table saw or on the router table. 3/8" plexiglas will be great to do theses slots and it will do a very solid frame.
Router table will do a better finition but I think that even on the table saw you will be able to flame polish (with a little propane torch) the grooves pretty nicely .
As you work in both 4x5 and 8x10 you can even do a 2 sizes basket (instead of 2 baskets), every walls will be slotted, the smaller side of the basket for the 4x5 film and the long side for the 8x10 film say basket will be internally near 4" x 10" x 9" high with some mechanisms to hang it in your print washer. If you do an open design (like the Gravity works basket), I think washing will be correctly done.

Here below the Gravity Works film basket (for 4x5 only)

[jeroldharter]

Are you talking about 4x5 film?

[vinny]

Are you talking about 4x5 film?

both 4x5 and 8x10. Do the inglis washers have two walls? I can't figure out from the pics how they fill/empty with the spigots right on top of each other.

[jeroldharter]

Yes, they have two walls. I am not sure, but I think the basic design is a two-walled U-shape, with water entering the bottom, exiting the perforations in the tank walls, and then overflowing the top where one side is slightly lower than the other.

[Keith Pitman]

Here's a link to a film washer I made several years ago: http://www.apug.org/forums/forum187/47616-7x17-custom-film-washer.html

It uses the siphon concept used in Versa-Lab print washers.

[vinny]

I saw that while looking this stuff up. how do you start the siphon up? I didn't like mouthfuls of water when I had my old aquarium washer set up this way.
Nice work, Keith and thanks for your measurements on the camera project, it turned out even better than I had hoped.

[Erik Larsen]

I saw that while looking this stuff up. how do you start the siphon up? I didn't like mouthfuls of water when I had my old aquarium washer set up this way.
Nice work, Keith and thanks for your measurements on the camera project, it turned out even better than I had hoped.

It should start by itself if you put the outlet tube below the siphon inlet. At least that's how my versalab works. It would be simple to make compared to some of the more elaborate types I would think...

[Keith Pitman]

I saw that while looking this stuff up. how do you start the siphon up? I didn't like mouthfuls of water when I had my old aquarium washer set up this way.
Nice work, Keith and thanks for your measurements on the camera project, it turned out even better than I had hoped.

Yes. It starts on its own.