Jobo edge density film problem

[John Powers]

I am getting overdevelopment or high edge density on the film edge opposite the notch. This is the 7 inch side of 7x17 film. The other three edges are fine. Can you offer suggestions how to eliminate this problem?

I am using 7x17 HP5+ film, Rollo Pyro developer from Bostick & Sullivan. I develop two sheets at a time of the same image bracketed 2 stops. The notched edge is always loaded at the top or lid end of either of two 2800 series drums. Emulsion faces to the center of the tank. The problem happens in either drum. I have ten film holders and the problem exists which ever film holder I use so I doubt it is a light leak. The higher density is roughly ¼ inch to 3/16ths”. Some times I can burn it out in printing with approximately 100% burning time or twice what it takes for the rest of the print.

I have been using Rollo Pyro for at least five years, but this seems to be a recent problem.

I am using a Jobo CPP-2 serial # 13391. I use a five minute prewash with the sodium metabolite that comes in the Rollo Pyro kit. This is ¼ teaspoon in 500 ml water. The water is 70 degrees F or 21.1 C. Development time is 6 minutes. In an experiment to reduce agitation I have been decreasing the rotation speed from 4, to 3, to F to the first notch beyond F. This seems to have made the problem worse.

Any help appreciated. Ask if you have questions.

Thanks,

John Powers

[keith schreiber]

Hi John,

If I read your description correctly, the area where you are getting higher edge density is the edge closest to the bottom of the drum i.e. farthest from the lid. Is it possible that you are inserting the film all the way to the bottom? If so, there might be a bit more rotational turbulence at the end of the drum than elsewhere. If your drum is a 2850, there is about 21 inches inside from end to end. If you are not already doing so, try positioning the film so that it is centered rather than inserted all the way.

~ Keith

[John Powers]

Hi John,

If I read your description correctly, the area where you are getting higher edge density is the edge closest to the bottom of the drum i.e. farthest from the lid. Is it possible that you are inserting the film all the way to the bottom? If so, there might be a bit more rotational turbulence at the end of the drum than elsewhere. If your drum is a 2850, there is about 21 inches inside from end to end. If you are not already doing so, try positioning the film so that it is centered rather than inserted all the way.

~ Keith

Thank you Keith. You are correct. I insert the film all the way to the bottom of the tank. That is where the problem is on the film. I will try the next batch with the bottom edge off the bottom of the tank by centering the film in the tank.

Thanks,

John

[Larry Gebhardt]

You might try flipping the film around (notches to the bottom). That would let you see if it's a light leak in your camera. My money is still on turbulence however.

[John Powers]

You might try flipping the film around (notches to the bottom). That would let you see if it's a light leak in your camera. My money is still on turbulence however.

Good thought. I can combine both ideas in one development.

Thank you.

John

[Lachlan 717]

I develop 7x17 in Jobo 2xxx drums as well and don't have this issue (using Tetenal Ultrafin 1:20).

FWIW, I make sure that the film is centred, not bottomed.

[sanking]

I don't know the exact cause of your edge density problem but I have spent a lot of time trouble shooting this issue with ULF film developed both in Jobo print drums and in other print drums, like Unicolor and Beseler. The most likely cause is some type of rotational turbulence around the edges, as Keith Schreiber suggested, most likely introduced by a rib, dividers or uneven spots inside the drum, .

What I have found to be the Number 1, Number 2, and Number 3 solutions to this problem are, 1) weaker dilution and longer development time, and 2) slower rotation, and 3) lift the drum very early in development and rotate it up and down, and repeat this every two or three minutes.

The three solutions have worked for me with both Pyro staining developers like Rollo Pyro and Pyrocat-HD as well as traditional developers like D76.

Sandy

[Lachlan 717]

Just to add a little more to my earlier post, I prewash (3 minutes and then another 2 in clean water), and set my Jobo to "F" speed.

[Andrew®]

Hi John,

I've also had the same issue. As Sandy has mentioned, lifting the drum off every 3-4 minutes and inverting a couple of times has resolved the issue.

Andrew

[John Powers]

Thank you all I plan to try these suggestions in my next developing probably tomorrow. I will report back.

John

[John Powers]

In hopes of drawing answers from all who might have encountered this problem, I posted the same question on the Apug.org. Different people and different answers have appeared. If interested you might want to read:

http://www.apug.org/forums/forum37/128225-jobo-edge-density-film-problem.html

John

[John Powers]

Thank you all for your suggestions. Some contradicted others so I did my best guess of what to try first. Ideally I would make one change at a time, but there were simply too many, so I took a chance. Since my last post I developed the film in four holders and got significantly better results. By that I mean the edge density is still there, but much less in size and tone. Following are the things I tried. Please give me your thoughts as to how I can improve the process.

Level tank: grhamp ….”make sure it is level and rotating on-axis.” The 2800 series tanks are two cylinders with a rib joining them together at midpoint. I made sure the water level of the Jobo was lowered so the tank rested on the rollers. The rollers hold the tank on axis. The 9” level I use for setting up the camera is perfect for testing this because it fits either side of the central rib. Good idea, but the tank was level and aligned, so no improvement here.

Fill water at 68 degrees F, 20C. PE suggested this instead of the 70 degrees F I was using. Arbitrarily I increased development time from 6 minutes to 6:30. This later proved too long and I reduced it to 6:15 minutes.

Sal Santamaura gave this link to his posting on new and old Jobo speed settings. http://www.apug.org/forums/viewpost.php?p=1610856
Prior to reading his post I had been experimenting with reducing the speed from “4” to the first notch to the right of “F”. In doing so the problem became larger and darker. I returned to “4” and with these other changes things got better. Sandy King suggested reducing speed as far as possible, so I still have experiments to do there.

Sandy wrote, “What I have found to be the Number 1, Number 2, and Number 3 solutions to this problem are, 1) weaker dilution and longer development time, and 2) slower rotation, and 3) lift the drum very early in development and rotate it up and down, and repeat this every two or three minutes.” I started by trying #3 every 3 minutes. After the first two batches with the speed set at “4” I tried two batches set a “3” speed and noticed an improvement.

PE suggested a stop bath after development. Bostick & Sullivan’s instructions for Rollo Pyro say “At the end of development dump the solution and do two quick water rinses in a period of one minute.” I used water.

keith schreiber suggested, “If your drum is a 2850, there is about 21 inches inside from end to end. If you are not already doing so, try positioning the film so that it is centered rather than inserted all the way.” I did try this. Unfortunately after the rotations Sandy suggested the film worked its way back to the bottom of the tank. Perhaps because the film was at midpoint for some part of the development this helped, but my first rotation was at one minute.

Larry Gebhardt suggested, “You might try flipping the film around (notches to the bottom). That would let you see if it's a light leak in your camera.” I did this on every other sheet and found that the increase density was always on the bottom of the tank edge regardless of where the notches were. This was very helpful because I had gotten several suggestions that the problem was either in the film holders or the camera.

In the original post I said, “I have ten film holders and the problem exists which ever film holder I use so I doubt it is a light leak.” I have since realized that I was only using four holders from one bag. This test batch of development was done with the same holders reloaded with the same type film, HP5+. There has been a significant improvement. Thank you all for your help. Based on this newer data what next steps would you suggest?

John

[sanking]

"In the original post I said, “I have ten film holders and the problem exists which ever film holder I use so I doubt it is a light leak.” I have since realized that I was only using four holders from one bag. This test batch of development was done with the same holders reloaded with the same type film, HP5+. There has been a significant improvement. Thank you all for your help. Based on this newer data what next steps would you suggest?"

Have you eliminated the possibility of a camera light leak? There could be a light leak that would fog the end of the film on every holder.

Sandy

[John Powers]

"

Have you eliminated the possibility of a camera light leak? There could be a light leak that would fog the end of the film on every holder.

Sandy

Thank you Sandy. How would you do that?

One reason I don’t think that is the cause is that in three of the last four development tests I remembered to turn around one of the two sheets so that the notch was toward the bottom of the tank. Regardless of the orientation there was an equal amount of higher density on the edge of the film closest to the bottom of the tank. This density lightened as the test progressed. Of course the problem with changing multiple factors is I don’t know if one or multiple changes caused the improvements.

I plan to try your other two suggestions as soon as we have some sun in Cleveland and I can shoot some more images.

Thank you.

John

[John Powers]

One of the suggestions was to center the 17” side of the film in the 22” tank so the film rested above the bottom of the tank. In my recent tests the film slid to the bottom of the tank during development, probably because I tried Sandy’s suggestion of rotating the tank.

I thought of a way to make these two ideas work and would appreciate feedback your opinions. I have some scrap developed film. I thought of cutting two 2x7” sections and feeding them into the tank to the bottom and then feeding in the undeveloped sheets. If the larger sheet jumps over the smaller I can try two smaller overlapping sections in the future. Does anyone know enough about flow dynamics to anticipate what effect this will have? Will I create different agitation?

We are supposed to have some sun Monday and Tuesday. Perhaps I will be able to make some new or replacement images to try. Your thoughts will be appreciated.

John

[sanking]

To check on possible light leaks from the camera, insert a holder in the camera as you normally do, put a light inside the camera, and close off the lens board. Now turn off all lights and, in total darkness, walk all around the camera to see if there is any light coming out, either through the bellows, around the back where the holder is inserted, around the area where the bellows attaches too the camera, around the lens board, etc. Allow your eyes 10 minutes or so to adjust to total darkness. If there is any light coming out of the camera, it could get in to the film.

If there are no problems with light leaks I would recommend using a dilution and temperature that would allow you to develop your film to the desired CI in about 12-16 minutes instead of your current 6-7 minutes. Shorter development times can amplify any issues caused by turbulence or agitation procedures. Years ago someone I know taught a workshop with ULF cameras and several of the participants were experiencing uneven development in drum processing. He mentioned that the one change that solved all of the problems was changing from the use of D76 straight to a 1+4 dilution of D76. It was necessary of course to increase time of development significantly, but the dilution itself eliminated nearly all of the problems.

Sandy

[Larry Gebhardt]

Sounds like it's almost certainly a turbulence issue from the end of the tank. I think Jobo made clips to hold film or paper in place in the 2800 series drums, but I haven't see or used them. I did try making some out of cut plastic years ago and they popped off every time. If you can't find any of the Jobo clips you could make a stop for each side out of Sugru. It's a moldable silicone product that air hardens and is then dishwasher safe, so it should hold up to processing. I imagine a small blob of it at the bottom of each side of the drum (in the middle) would keep the film from slipping, and if molded over the ribs should stay put. Try to keep it low profiled so it doesn't create much turbulence. It's a shame there isn't an expert drum you could use for that film size.

[John Powers]

To check on possible light leaks from the camera, insert a holder in the camera as you normally do, put a light inside the camera, and close off the lens board. Now turn off all lights and, in total darkness, walk all around the camera to see if there is any light coming out, either through the bellows, around the back where the holder is inserted, around the area where the bellows attaches too the camera, around the lens board, etc. Allow your eyes 10 minutes or so to adjust to total darkness. If there is any light coming out of the camera, it could get in to the film.

If there are no problems with light leaks I would recommend using a dilution and temperature that would allow you to develop your film to the desired CI in about 12-16 minutes instead of your current 6-7 minutes. Shorter development times can amplify any issues caused by turbulence or agitation procedures. Years ago someone I know taught a workshop with ULF cameras and several of the participants were experiencing uneven development in drum processing. He mentioned that the one change that solved all of the problems was changing from the use of D76 straight to a 1+4 dilution of D76. It was necessary of course to increase time of development significantly, but the dilution itself eliminated nearly all of the problems.

Sandy

Sandy,

Thank you. I tried the flashlight in the bellows. After about seven minutes I found the slightest sliver of light. There is a rectangular wooden stop for the film holder that is fastened in place by a screw at top and bottom. Both screws were loose after several years of knocking about. That eliminated about half the light.

For the time being I have used a strip of gaffer tape to seal the crack. I will talk to Dick Phillips about a more appropriate fix. I am guessing remove the rectangular piece and add some padding. All that will show then will be an edge rather than the tape.

I tried the fix with one of your holders and one from Lotus, the two brands I had been using when I discovered the problem. After ten minutes in the dark, no sliver of light. Thanks for taking the time to share your expertise.

Next I will talk to Dana at Bostick & Sullivan about diluting Rollo Pyro and how much to increase the development time. There is still the question of why I got edge density on the notch side when it was turned to the bottom of the tank.

Thank you.

John

[John Powers]

Now that winter and Cleveland’s grey skies are behind us I have been out shooting, developing and printing 7x17.

“One of the suggestions was to center the 17” side of the film in the 22” tank so the film rested above the bottom of the tank. In my recent tests the film slid to the bottom of the tank during development, probably because I tried Sandy’s suggestion of rotating the tank.”

The Jobo clips and the mesh bags that Jobo in Ann Arbor made do not seem to exist for 7x17. There are some for sale for 11x14 on eBay from Israel, but nothing for 7x17. The idea of trying to insert in those and then the tank in the dark is not really attractive to me.

Several ideas of ways to hold the film off the bottom of the tank involved restraints that might have made their own turbulence. I had an idea that is simple, free and involves no modification to the tank or difficult loading. I cut two inches off the end of a failed 7x17 sheet of film ( I had quite a few of those) and inserted it in the drum before the undeveloped sheet. In 12 developments of 2 sheets at a time, 8 times the 2”stips have stayed in place even after the rotations. When the strips have popped out during development, the 7x17 sheets have stayed in place, two inches off the bottom.

The true test was printing. Each negative developed with the two inch strip in place has printed evenly, ie: without a lighter edge on the side of the negative near the bottom of the tank.

I am really happy with this result and wanted to offer it to anyone suffering with the same problem. Thank you all for your suggestions and especially Sandy King for the detailed instructions.

John