Interest in 8x10 film processing system; take our poll

[tim48v]

Since our SP-457 film system for 5x7 has died a quiet death, we're re-evaluating the interest in an 8x10 version.

Please take a minute to answer our poll questions below. Note: the 8x10 version would probably process 2 sheets of 8x10 or 4 sheets of 5x7 in around 1 liter.

BTW, in case you missed it, here's the video explaining why we did the 5x7 first: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-XCFJcoO6Sc&t=12s

[Len Middleton]

Let me qualify my selection...

I currently have the Jobo 3005 Expert tank for 8x10, and to save the stress on the motor (do have a spare Jobo CPP2 unit), load only two sheets given the amount of developer I use.

For 4x5 development, I use the Jobo 2500 series tank and spool for 6 sheets, and manually invert / process without using the Jobo CPP2.

Any 8x10 tank system I would be interested in would need to accommodate the developer volume required i.e. 250ml per 80 square inches of film (i.e. each 8x10 sheet).

Good luck with your survey

[williaty]

For me, it has to be considerably cheaper than a Jobo tank. I can roll a Jobo tank on the floor to save money now and then later use that tank on a processor that I buy at some future time. For a solution like one of your tanks that can't ever be put on a temperature controlled, agitation controlled processor in the future, I would have trouble seeing the value in something that cost even half what a used Jobo tank would.

What happened to the 5x7 version?

[John Layton]

I would seriously consider a 5x7 version of this tank if it could accommodate at least six sheets.

Even better would be a version which would hold either four 8x10's or eight 5x7's.

Given the design of your tank...would there be problems with scaling up to accommodate these (greater) numbers?

[MAubrey]

Ah...I'm still sad that the 5x7 model didn't make it. I don't shoot 8x10.

[jose angel]

IMHO a tank for a couple shots is not worth it. Any tray will do it better.
I like to develop 4x5" in tanks, 5x7" either in tank or trays (a divided 8x10" sized tray can develop two sheets at a time) and 8x10" exclusively in trays. Although I have a Jobo setup, I tend to dislike rotary results. I prefer the good old "classic" manual processing. Maybe, a one liter, 5x7" version of an improved MOD54 would call my attention.
I always thought I`d like to have a real light tight tray. Just a black tray with a single, cheap, easy to remove, easy to clean, non necessarily hermetically sealed kind of cover. I simply turn off the light, open the cover and take the sheet to the next tray and cover it again. This way I can switch on the light during the process for whatever. Just my honest opinion.

[williaty]

Trays require absolute darkness and a place to work in it. That's not realistic for many people who travel or live in a situation where they can't significantly alter the structure to provide the level of darkness required for tray processing. It requires a MUCH darker environment to leave film exposed in a tray for 10+ minutes than it does to expose film for a few seconds as you move it from the holder to the processing tank.

I absolutely think that the ability to process film in the light is worth money to a lot of people. I just think that this tank the manufacturer is asking about in this thread has to cost a LOT less than a Jobo drum for 8x10 to make it worth while.

[stawastawa]

I think the willingness to use and get set up to use trays also brings a greater level of commitment to standardized processing which leads to successful repeatable processing. With a tank system it is easier to get sloppy, and lazy, and be disappointed by sub par results.
For those who are set up and need to travel or keep processing in a new environment tanks are great!
Another factor to mention is that film changing tents which can allow tray processing can be had for around $250.

[Graham Patterson]

As someone who has just started dabbling with 8x10, I would likely have been a customer. Except I have a couple of Jobo CPU units and 2830/2840 print tanks that work well enough for me, especially as the current majority of film is 5x4 or 120. For those that like intermittent or low agitation development in daylight this sort of unit will be attractive. All depends on what else has to be processed.

[Jody_S]

I like the idea but only if it will do 2x 5x7 or 4x 4x5 as well as 8x10.

[Mick Fagan]

I have been using my Jobo processor for all of my film processing since I bought it new almost 30 years ago, with rare the exception of when I am overseas and process film using one of the Jobo tanks in the inversion mode wherever and whenever I can. In short, I love my Jobo system and processors (I have a spare gifted processor).

I was one of the purchasers of your SP-445 tanks and I have to say I am more than impressed at how it does its job. It is pretty close to perfection for 4x5” film and I have standardised on 460ml of developer for 4 sheets and one shot processing. In short, this is the first tank I have used in preference to using my Jobo tanks and processor.

For me a good day is 4 sheets, perhaps 5 or 6 tops, but generally 3-4 sheets is where I’m at, so when I come home I fire up the mixing jugs, measure the solutions and am usually away within 20 minutes from entering the darkroom.

This is certainly quicker than waiting for the Jobo water bath to stabilise, which is the good news. The bad news is, the temperature consistency isn’t as good with the SP-445. However, with extremely precise temperature measurements and developer time adjustments, I am obtaining negatives that are excellent and perfect for what I am doing. Which is B&W negatives. For colour I will continue use the Jobo, especially for C41 with its extremely short processing time.

I had thought about the 5x7” system you were proposing, but I wondered if it would get going. Seems it didn’t, that’s life. Your proposal for an 8x10” tank for two 8x10” sheets using 1 litre of chemistry sounds about right to me. Having the ability to run four 5x7” sheets (presumably in landscape mode) would certainly be the icing on the cake and open your (system) tank to a greater range of photographers.

I currently don’t have any camera bigger than 4x5”, which doesn’t mean I won’t go larger. Tray processing to me is a pain, and yes I have done it, but I don’t like it. I do have the ability to process 5x7” and 8x10” in my Jobo and have done so in the past. But having a single, portable, processing tank for both of these larger than 4x5” formats available, would be a very enticing proposition for myself.

I agree with your linked video clip, about the lid being a possible Achilles heel. Film holders for 8x10” won’t be a walk in the park either.

Mick.

[locutus]

It seems to me 8x10 is far more popular then 5x7, as such i kind of expect that a kickstarter for a 8x10 tank has a higher chance of success.

Which brings up the interesting proposition if a stretch goal for 5x7 inserts for a 8x10 tank would be a more viable and lower risk option.

Less ideal then a true 5x7 tank but i'm sure a lot of 5x7 shooters could live with it.

[koraks]

I'd be very interested, even if it held just one sheet! However, I'd only be interested if it allowed even development of souble-sided xray film. If not, I would not consider purchasing it at all. With the current design of the sp445, it seems that this particular requirement would be a challenge. Still, it's worthwhile to think about it given the popularity of xray film in 8x10" size.