Mod 54 opinions? [Archive] - Large Format Photography Forum

Light Guru

11-Nov-2014, 09:20

Im not a fan of it. Ive had too many sheets of film scratch or not completely processed because a chest comes loose and touches another during developing. It might work ok for your sheets of film are really thick but thinner films will come loose with barry little agitation.

I now develop in trays. I do use the mod54 for holding film while washing the developed film, but i won't use it for developing.

stradibarrius

11-Nov-2014, 09:28

Thanks for the info!

geekofnature

11-Nov-2014, 11:44

I have been using the Mod54 for about 6 months now and I have not had any sheets of film fall out of the holder or get scratched. I have used it with Ilford HP5 plus and FP4 plus.

Lachlan 717

11-Nov-2014, 12:20

Save up a bit longer and get a Jobo 3006/3010. It'll be worth the wait.

Steve Goldstein

11-Nov-2014, 12:25

There have been many previous discussions of the MOD54 on the forum. Go to Google and type in (without the quotes) "site:largeformatphotography.info mod54" and you'll find them all. It's much better than using the forum's built-in search function.

koh303

11-Nov-2014, 15:32

Save up a bit longer and get a Jobo 3006/3010. It'll be worth the wait.

+1

There have been MANY "whats the best 4x5 processing option", and there are several optilns out there!

Sazerac

11-Nov-2014, 20:40

I love mine!

Liquid Artist

11-Nov-2014, 23:42

Just my $0.02 worth, but if you have a darkroom a dip and dunk tank system will allow you to develop more sheets at once relatively cheap.
There is always one in the buy & sell section.

Rayt

12-Nov-2014, 18:32

I had trouble with mine in the beginning but 150 sheets later I love it so much I bought another one. I have not tried loading 6 sheets and only load 4 sheets at a time. I have not had a sheet jumping out and touching another one since gotten used to loading it. Foma is pretty thin and it doesn't happen if the loading is correct. Agitation must be very gentle to avoid scratches. This can affect contrast so need to adjust development.

Stoogley

13-Nov-2014, 07:16

I love mine.
Loading it did take some practice. But once you get used to the feel, it's easy to load the sheets securely.

StoneNYC

13-Nov-2014, 08:48

I used one for a very long time until I switch to rotary processing, and it works just fine, you just have to agitate very gently, very slowly rotating the tank, you can't go fast or you'll dislodge things, but as someone else said with testing for heavy agitation I was able to dislodge one of the sheets, but that was because I shook it like a soda can would if you want it to explode, this was a test, other than that I never had a single issue with development, if you have a very very very sensitive base material, you may notice a tiny bit of rubbing mark on the edge of the film where the foot touches the base material, but this does not enter the image area, just where the film holder lines are.

There are many threads about this, and as other said many opinions, if I had the money I would get a CPP3 and a 3010 tank, but the 2509n seems to work just fine for my film and it's a good second option if you have a rotary processor and want to get started with the rotary tank.

My opinion about dip dunk tanks is that they are a pain in the butt and a waste of chemical unless you own a lab and are processing all the time, they take too much developer and I've never exhausted my developer enough to want to use a system like that, however unfortunately that probably is the best way to get the best fine grain from your images, the most even development etc. but the rotary works just fine and so does the MOD54 and I would just go with that and start shooting already!

HMG

13-Nov-2014, 15:27

... My opinion about dip dunk tanks is that they are a pain in the butt and a waste of chemical unless you own a lab and are processing all the time, they take too much developer and I've never exhausted my developer enough to want to use a system like that, however unfortunately that probably is the best way to get the best fine grain from your images, the most even development etc. but the rotary works just fine and so does the MOD54 and I would just go with that and start shooting already!

I agree that, in general, dip tanks don't work well for low volume use. I thought about building some small tanks out of acrylic. However, I picked up a clear plastic container at Ikea that holds 4 4x5 film hangers and requires 1 qt of chemistry (with a spacer at bottom to raise the level of liquid). It has a tight sealing top.

I haven't tested it, but here's my "bright" idea. 1 qt of D-76 will process 8 4x5s at 1:1. So with 6-8 sheets per fill, little or no waste. Might need to add a bit of time to the second set (again, haven't tested). Comments welcome.

AlexGard

14-Nov-2014, 02:49

Michael Cienfuegos

14-Nov-2014, 10:23

A guy on another forum suggested only loading 4 sheets into the mod54 As opposed to six, leaving the two inside slots empty. This removed all my issues with those pesky uneven development fingers. Slower, but I haven't had any issues since doing this.

With the Mod-54 I am about as coordinated as a three-legged giraffe with a trick knee. I just can't seem to get it right, so it sits in its box on the shelf. For four negatives I use a Unicolor print drum. I have been able to successfully process my 4x5 films with no problems, using a lot less chemistry.

m

brucetaylor

14-Nov-2014, 18:17

Yea, I thought the MOD-54 seemed fiddly too, I bought one a couple of years ago but have never used it. I acquired an HP Combi Plan tank with a darkroom lot, and now I know why they are liked so much. Dead simple, well designed, easy to load, small, requires a minimum of chemistry. I see them on the 'Bay for about $80.

koraks

15-Nov-2014, 03:25

I struggled through the first dozen sheets or so, but over a hundred sheets down the line, I have gotten the hang of it and have no real issues with it. Occasionally, a sheet tends to dislodge a bit but it always happens during the final wash and it has never affected the image. I use the rotary type of agitation with the little spindle; I find that does away with virtually any of the dislocation issues. All considered, I think it's a wonderfully effective and efficient solution, albeit a tad pricy for what it is, which is just a plastic insert and nothing more. Then again, I admire the simplicity of this solution.

12pmc

15-Nov-2014, 10:45

Hi - I use a mod54 with tri x , no problem with film touching, but I never load it with more than 4 sheets at a time.

Peter

tenderobject

17-Nov-2014, 21:12

What kind of agitation are you doing? Invertion or using the stick? I sold my Mod54 to buy the new version. Sometimes i get uneven developing when using it.. Hopefully the new version is better...

I had trouble with mine in the beginning but 150 sheets later I love it so much I bought another one. I have not tried loading 6 sheets and only load 4 sheets at a time. I have not had a sheet jumping out and touching another one since gotten used to loading it. Foma is pretty thin and it doesn't happen if the loading is correct. Agitation must be very gentle to avoid scratches. This can affect contrast so need to adjust development.

Rayt

17-Nov-2014, 21:51

I do very gentle and slow inversions probably two rotations in ten seconds.

koraks

18-Nov-2014, 05:25

What kind of agitation are you doing? Invertion or using the stick? I sold my Mod54 to buy the new version. Sometimes i get uneven developing when using it.. Hopefully the new version is better...

Stick. I don't have issues with uneven development. Previously I did gentle inversions and that worked equally well, but the stick method is less work and I'm quite lazy ;) Also, it works better for color development which I do in a water bath. I don't have to lift out the tank every 30 seconds and put it back again, which helps a lot with temperature control and general messiness.

Stoogley

18-Nov-2014, 06:34

Koraks, I hear ya on the lazy part. Lately, I've gotten so that I only develop the blacks. Too tired to do the whites.

Will try taking a stick to it.

Rayt

22-Dec-2014, 08:12

I finally got the nerve up to load 6 sheets. Success! I highly recommend it.

scheinfluger_77

22-Dec-2014, 17:34

are any of you not using your Mod54 interested in parting with it?

Gem Singer

22-Dec-2014, 18:24

I bought new model MOD54, as well as the proper Paterson tank for developing 4x5 film.

Never got around to using the outfit. Willing to sell for $80, incl. shipping..

If you are interested, Send me a PM, and we'll exchange shipping info.

andre

9-Jan-2015, 05:13

I like mine but it's not a huge improvement over the 'taco method' if you only develop 4 sheets at the time.
In retrospect I could have saved the money maybe.

stradibarrius

13-Jan-2015, 17:43

128031128032Well, after asking this question and being basically happy with the "Taco" method for a couple of years, the last three times I have developed 4x5 film I have had uneven development. I am wondering if the semi-cone shaped top is somehow doing this/ But why now and not in times past?

Kirk Gittings

13-Jan-2015, 18:16

Koraks, I hear ya on the lazy part. Lately, I've gotten so that I only develop the blacks. Too tired to do the whites.

Will try taking a stick to it.

:)

gbogatko

15-Jan-2015, 09:34

I tried using one for C41 and E6. In both cases, the inside sheets were ruined -- C41 developed green and E6 developed red. I havn't had the courage to try B/W yet.

koraks

15-Jan-2015, 09:51

Koraks, I hear ya on the lazy part. Lately, I've gotten so that I only develop the blacks. Too tired to do the whites.

Will try taking a stick to it.

Totally missed this comment - LOL! I should introduce that practice into carbon printing.

koraks

15-Jan-2015, 09:54

I tried using one for C41 and E6. In both cases, the inside sheets were ruined -- C41 developed green and E6 developed red. I havn't had the courage to try B/W yet.
I do C41 regularly in the MOD54 and I have noticed no differences in color rendition between the sheets, regardless of position. But I keep the chemicals as well as the developing tank in a temperature controlled bath throughout the development process and I do the in-between washes with water of the right temperature as well. to make temperature control easier, I do C41 at 25C, which the Rollei kit permits (it just takes longer than at 38C). Do you wash in between process steps? How do you control the temperature?

Zndrson

15-Jan-2015, 12:34

I've been shooting mostly E6 recently and developing using the taco method. Tacos work well, but will bend Ektachrome quite badly. Velvia seems to bounce back rather easily. I've never had any issues with Ilford FP4 or HP5 bending.

This is the first I've heard of the Mod 54 and I'm sold. Just put my Yankee 4x5 daylight and Patterson 2 reel and 5 reel tanks on craigslist to get a 3 reel and Mod54. Once I get everything together I'll post results.

Thanks for the thread!

gbogatko

16-Jan-2015, 17:18

I followed the Tetenal/Jobo instructions as to time and temp. Same with the Arista E6 kit.
In a CombiPlan tank, everything works out as expected.
I asked the inventor for advice and he suggested a longer initial presoak -- like 5 minutes (or more?).
What's the possibility of the plastic being a bad batch and outgassing something bad for color film?
I suppose I'll have to sacrifice some sheets to figure out if it's me or the MOD54, ugh.

Zndrson

1-Feb-2015, 15:16

Kirk Gittings

1-Feb-2015, 17:04

BTZS Tubes are also an option:http://www.viewcamerastore.com/btzs-4x5-b-w-film-tube-kit/

koh303

1-Feb-2015, 20:55

BTZS Tubes are also an option:http://www.viewcamerastore.com/btzs-4x5-b-w-film-tube-kit/

how do you use these with the MOD54?
They are also almost X2 as expensive.

Light Guru

1-Feb-2015, 21:37

how do you use these with the MOD54?
They are also almost X2 as expensive.

You don't use them with the mod54 they were posted as a alternative option.

Michael W

2-Feb-2015, 05:12

Just wanted to post here my first Mod 54 results. Film is still drying, but everything worked beautifully. Negs are thin b/c of underexposure, but are even. I did have one sheet pop out or was loaded incorrectly. First time, though. Will get better with use.

Very excited to have this as an alternative to the taco method which scratched my negatives to hell and back and left them permanently (at least so far) curled. Would a Jobo be better? Of course, but for the price its hard to beat. Photos later
I'm sure the Jobo expert tanks would be better, but so big and expensive. I'm glad to read someone else saying that taco method scratches the film. Drives me mad how many people recommend it when the sheet corners will obviously be scratching the emulsion.

chrism

6-Feb-2015, 12:53

I was wary of spending the money on a Mod54, when I knew about the taco method. But when the taco method didn't work out well for me, I ended up making my own compromise with a contraption made from a coat hanger—see here (http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?119106-Gadget-for-use-of-steel-tank-with-4x5-film), and later modified that with another W-shaped piece of the same coat hanger to prevent the negatives from rising up in the tank. Last week, boredom being what it is, and possibly out of denial of what this week's chemo would bring, I ordered up a Mod54 from B&H. I survived the chemo (so far) and the box from B&H arrived. I carefully cut three sheets of thin flexible cardboard to 4x5" size to load in daylight and tried it out. No matter how I did it, with the sheets this way up or the other way up, they always ended up touching. But since I usually develop just two 4x5 negatives at a time, why should I worry? It will work as well as the coat hanger trick with one negative on each side, although it takes a bigger volume of chemicals to use the three reel Paterson tank with the Mod54 than it does with the steel tank and my coat hangers (only 1000ml versus 900ml). My inclination is to try it out in practice next time I'm using a developer where I don't care about the volume poured in (yes, that means Diafine!). The only reason I can see for preferring two negatives in the Mod54 over two in my steel tank with the coat-hanger contraption would be if they ended up with less risk of scratches on the reverse/non-emulsion side of the film.

Chris

stradibarrius

6-Feb-2015, 16:12

Well, being the OP I got a Mod 54 for my birthday. I have had good results with the Taco method for several years. But the Mod 54 worked great for me. It didn't do anything for my photographic vision though. No sheets coming out of their slots, the development was even and everything was fine. I did find the loading technique to be a little fiddly. Hopefully I will find like most new things it's just different.

Light Guru

6-Feb-2015, 17:45

I carefully cut three sheets of thin flexible cardboard to 4x5" size to load in daylight and tried it out. No matter how I did it, with the sheets this way up or the other way up, they always ended up touching.

I'm guessing you cut then to be literally 4x5 inches. 4x5 film is actually a little smaller.

The problem with the mod54 is not the loading it's that the negative come loose and touch or the holder scratches them.

StoneNYC

6-Feb-2015, 19:01

I'm guessing you cut then to be literally 4x5 inches. 4x5 film is actually a little smaller.

The problem with the mod54 is not the loading it's that the negative come loose and touch or the holder scratches them.

It only comes loose of you shake it like you're trying to explode a soda can, if you in we slowly it's just fine.

chrism

7-Feb-2015, 04:16

You're right, I cut them to 4x5. I'll try it again with some actual negatives. If I ever finish shovelling snow I will try the device for real!

Chris

Light Guru

7-Feb-2015, 10:07

It only comes loose of you shake it like you're trying to explode a soda can, if you in we slowly it's just fine.

Nope I've had them come loose even with minimal slow agitation. And I know the film was properly loaded.

Thicker films like from illford work much better worth the mod54 but thinner films will definitely come loose. I've had mixed results of dislodging with tmx, arista edu will definitely come loose and don't even think of trying to use rolli IR film with the mod54

I've had it ruin too many sheets of film so I switched to tray processing. Instill use the mod54 for washing film though and might use it for stand development. For those things it's fine.

Shootar401

7-Feb-2015, 10:17

BTZS Tubes are also an option:http://www.viewcamerastore.com/btzs-4x5-b-w-film-tube-kit/

I've used the BTZS tubes, actually bought a set on eBay used. I tried them once and they couldn't be thrown in the trash fast enough. I decided to stay with the Mod 54. I just recently bought two Nikor 4x5 tanks and have been using them recently with great results.

Kirk Gittings

7-Feb-2015, 11:08

You should have thrown them my way-one of the best LF tools ever invented. BTZS tubes are a very well established method of development used successfully for decades by serious workers that produces perfectly even negatives and no scratches-plus you can run different films/developers/times in the same batch. Its pretty foolproof. I am about 3/4 of my way through my annual run of about 400 sheets. Probably have run 5K negatives with them since I switched from trays. Having tried most methods out there since 1978 (and having worked with hundreds of students learning LF) I have found the two best methods for sheet film evenness are BTZS Tubes and Jobos (I don't have the room for a Jobo anyway and don't need the complexity)-ie continuous rotary processing gives the most even results.

geekofnature

7-Feb-2015, 13:18

Nope I've had them come loose even with minimal slow agitation. And I know the film was properly loaded.

Thicker films like from illford work much better worth the mod54 but thinner films will definitely come loose. I've had mixed results of dislodging with tmx, arista edu will definitely come loose and don't even think of trying to use rolli IR film with the mod54

I've had it ruin too many sheets of film so I switched to tray processing. Instill use the mod54 for washing film though and might use it for stand development. For those things it's fine.

The creator of the MOD54 has a video on youtube showing his technique for developing Rollei Infrared Film. This could also be used for other thin films.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n0ohfGrCB6w

Will Frostmill

7-Feb-2015, 13:55

Light Guru

7-Feb-2015, 17:12

The creator of the MOD54 has a video on youtube showing his technique for developing Rollei Infrared Film. This could also be used for other thin films.

I've seen it before and still would not try it. Rollie IR also scratches easily and the claws on the mod54 will easily scratch them.

Light Guru

7-Feb-2015, 17:14

That's really interesting! Have you ever tried x-ray film in it? Does it prevent the double sided emulsion from getting scratched?

Xray film scratches really really easily so I'm sure it would scratch when being put into a btsz tube. Xray film scratches so easily that some people have reported it scratches with tray development unless they put glass at the bottom of the tray.

The tube would also prevent one side from developing.

Will Frostmill

7-Feb-2015, 20:43

Thanks, Light Guru

Kirk Gittings

7-Feb-2015, 23:32

That's really interesting! Have you ever tried x-ray film in it? Does it prevent the double sided emulsion from getting scratched?

I have not tried it, AAMOF never used xray film of any kind, but would guess that it would get some fine scratches.

StoneNYC

8-Feb-2015, 01:52

I've seen it before and still would not try it. Rollie IR also scratches easily and the claws on the mod54 will easily scratch them.

The "claws" are outside of the image area, and only affect the edge markings, and so little of significance that for regular film it's no problem, if it were a double-sided emulsion like x-ray, yes you would not be able to do a contact print without seeing the scratching on one side but only on the black part where the holder frame lines are...

I would also like to point out the people who did not try the things that they are claiming wouldn't work actually don't know what they're talking about because they haven't actually tried it, the best thing to do is to not listen to people on a forum like this and just try it yourself, because a lot of times people are all talk and don't actually know from experience (armchair warriors).

welly

8-Feb-2015, 03:16

Xray film scratches really really easily so I'm sure it would scratch when being put into a btsz tube. Xray film scratches so easily that some people have reported it scratches with tray development unless they put glass at the bottom of the tray.

The tube would also prevent one side from developing.

But yet people who own them have been successful in developing their negatives with a MOD 54! Who'da thunk it, despite your theories?

Will Frostmill

8-Feb-2015, 07:17

I have not tried it, AAMOF never used xray film of any kind, but would guess that it would get some fine scratches.
Thanks Kirk! You are always helpful!

Light Guru

8-Feb-2015, 11:12

The "claws" are outside of the image area, and only affect the edge markings, and so little of significance that for regular film it's no problem, if it were a double-sided emulsion like x-ray, yes you would not be able to do a contact print without seeing the scratching on one side but only on the black part where the holder frame lines are...

I would also like to point out the people who did not try the things that they are claiming wouldn't work actually don't know what they're talking about because they haven't actually tried it, the best thing to do is to not listen to people on a forum like this and just try it yourself, because a lot of times people are all talk and don't actually know from experience (armchair warriors).

I have 2 mod54 developers and the claws stick out about 1/2 inch so that's well into the image area. I have had issues with then scratching regular film even with minimum slow and easy agitation just like is shown in the mod54 videos.

Light Guru

8-Feb-2015, 11:16

But yet people who own them have been successful in developing their negatives with a MOD 54! Who'da thunk it, despite your theories?

I have 2 mod54 developers so I speak from experience. When I used them ti did slow agitation just like in the mod54 videos. The inky film I have not had issues developing with the mod54 is Ilford film and that's because it is thicker then other films.

StoneNYC

8-Feb-2015, 14:22

I have 2 mod54 developers and the claws stick out about 1/2 inch so that's well into the image area. I have had issues with then scratching regular film even with minimum slow and easy agitation just like is shown in the mod54 videos.

Do you have version one or two? I have the second version and the claw on the side that would actually be scratching the emulsion only comes into the image circle by... 0.192 inches... Or 4.95mm hardly half an inch... And because I'm really tired of arguing with people who make stuff up instead of doing the work.

129038

And yes that is certainly deeper than just the edge markings

129039

but you are also going to put it into a carrier who's edges are deeper than the film holder lines...

129040

And no I didn't cheat it's centered.

129041

So as you can see through actual research the distance the claws come out are essentially the same as a standard 4x5 film carrier edge (omega in this case) so any scratches won't even matter unless you are contact printing as I initially said.

Light Guru

8-Feb-2015, 14:57

I stopped using it for developing before version 2 came out.

Your image of the caliper and the film edge clearly shows that the holder will come into the frame on he other side of your negative. Your negative shows a big space on the right and a really small space on the left.

Also the claw for the next negative protrudes even farther into the negative. That's the one that I was referring to. I have had that one scratch the negative in front of it.

If it was just some scratches I would not mind much those I can fix in Photoshop. I've just had too many sheets dislodge and touch another sheet causing both to not develop properly for me to trust developing film with it. I still use it for washing negatives and have had no issues there.

koh303

8-Feb-2015, 16:23

Jobo 2509n reels do not have claws.

chrism

10-Feb-2015, 12:02

I got to use the Mod 54 today, for the first time. I thank posters above for their stimulation to get on and do it, rather than theorise. It was more awkward to load than my steel tank with the wire insert, but the two sheets of film were not displaced by developing. I did choose to use a stand development regime, and to use the Paterson swizzle-stick for agitation since others have found negatives become loose with inversion. One of the resulting negatives is in the still life thread here (http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?118998-Still-Life-Images-2015&p=1216339&viewfull=1#post1216339).

I used the same 7ml of Rodinal in 1000ml of water that I would have used in 900ml in the steel tank. My other main developer is Diafine, and that gets re-used endlessly, so I can't find any reason of expense to prefer one tank/film-holder over the other. I'll go on with it and see if I get better at loading the negatives and more confident that I have done it properly. It's rather nice to go back a few decades and use the swizzle-stick again!

Chris

jnantz

10-Feb-2015, 18:47

i would also like to point out the people who did not try the things that they are claiming wouldn't work actually don't know what they're talking about because they haven't actually tried it, the best thing to do is to not listen to people on a forum like this and just try it yourself, because a lot of times people are all talk and don't actually know from experience (armchair warriors).

you can say that again!

kenj8246

15-Feb-2015, 09:35

I have a Mod 54 that I got when I originally started with LF not long ago. Used it a couple times with color film and the little twirly stick because I was afraid of sheets jumping the slots and sticking together. When I tried b&w sheet film I adopted the taco method. I actually prefer that method for its' ease in getting the sheets into the tank. I do four at a time with the pony tail bands and have yet to have any problems with uneven development. All that said, I've recently started shooting more and went back to the Mod 54. I find that if I ease up on the quickness of agitation and don't do complete 180 degree rotation of the can, I have yet--said with fingers crossed and knocking wood--to have any of the six sheets dislodge. Mod 54? Money well spent IMO.

Kenny

Toyon

15-Feb-2015, 09:42

I would also like to point out the people who did not try the things that they are claiming wouldn't work actually don't know what they're talking about because they haven't actually tried it, the best thing to do is to not listen to people on a forum like this and just try it yourself, because a lot of times people are all talk and don't actually know from experience (armchair warriors).

Not owning an armchair, I am not familiar with the conundrum you are not remiss in noting here. Is it not possible that that experience you have not failed to outline here, could not have the perceived unintended effect of not delimiting the discourse, and indeed, not actually forwarding the not inconsiderable gist of this - not insignificant discourse on a topic that none of us is unaware of?

StoneNYC

15-Feb-2015, 09:48

Not owning an armchair, I am not familiar with the conundrum you are not remiss in noting here. Is it not possible that that experience you have not failed to outline here, could not have the perceived unintended effect of not delimiting the discourse, and indeed, not actually forwarding the not inconsiderable gist of this - not insignificant discourse on a topic that none of us is unaware of?

Too many double negatives...

chrism

15-Feb-2015, 10:45

I used the MOD54 for four Ilford negatives in one batch last week. I placed them in the inner two positions of the MOD54, to reduce any chance of scratching against the tank wall. No problems, developmentally, with swizzle-stick agitation (Rodinal 7ml in 1000ml water, for 40 minutes total. Swizzled for ~15 seconds at the start, then for ten seconds at the halfway mark). Results available here. (http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?119923-February-2015-Portraits&p=1217415&viewfull=1#post1217415)

Of course, since I don't own an armchair (only a couple of comfy sofas), all this should be ignored! :)

Chris

jnantz

15-Feb-2015, 23:07

shucks adrian says it all

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PKIoEr2ZXD8

thanks marko

kenj8246

16-Feb-2015, 06:45

Too many double negatives...

Amen to that. :)

Toyon

22-Feb-2015, 14:04

Too many double negatives...

You don't say!

Zndrson

22-Feb-2015, 14:30

After a few weeks of use I'll resubmit my opinion about the Mod.

Used it to develop both E6 and bw. There is a bit of a learning curve with loading, but I've only had film pop out once. The last time I used it I forgot about agitating gently a couple times, but everything still came out fine. I would submit that stand development is probably the safest bet with BW, but results can definitely be achieved with normal agitation.

Highly recommended product. Scratch free, evenly developed negatives are such a luxury!