Paper Chemicals for Mural Printing?

[AnselAvedon]

Hey there I just got an enlarger for my 8x10 a few rolls of paper and even the space needed to produce mural prints. My new concern is the amount of chemicals needed to process these 30"Arista, 48"Foma, and 56"Kodak Polycontrast rolls.
I have never got to play at this size so just looking for some tips and any knowledge on what results I can expect from different chemicals.
I normally have just done contact prints as 8X10 enlargers are not easy to find let alone use. I have processed the film in a jobo and the paper in trays.
The first person I spoke with offered the idea they said they have used including a rain gutter and two people on each side to lift and drop the paper through the chemicals.
The next person I spoke with mentioned that especially at these larger sizes what I need to worry about the most is getting a wrinkle in the paper. Suddenly moving it up and down sounded like a excessively frustrating situation. He mentioned when he created these he would roll the paper in a large stainless steel sink and that I might be able to construct one with acrylic and acrylic glue. Thats still a bit much.
My new idea is where the summer season and needing lots of chemicals comes into play. Inflatable pools are relatively cheap. But would need around 50 gallons. sooooooo just need some 55 gallon water barrels.
Im hoping that this is not a 100% pay for what you get situation.
The prices I saw on bulk Marathon Chemicals are far more appealing than any other option so far. I have also been searching for expired Dektol lot deals on Ebay and am not seeing anything nearly as affordable.
All these papers that I have obtained are all slightly expired by 2 to 5 years so I understand my contrast won't be perfect but I am hoping that if I use the Marathon chemicals that it will not add a further significant loss of contrast.
If anyone has any experience in creating analog mural prints I would love to hear any advise you have to offer. Am I moderately level headed with this idea? My main fear of using the pools is if they spring a leak. It wouldn't be the worst but a bit activating to clean up.

[koraks]

The rain gutter guy is on the right track. You can roll up the print, put it into the developer, then re-roll it in the bath into a new roll and repeat until development is complete. Same for stop/fix. A fellow Dutchman recently posted about it on here iirc; works quite well for him it seems.

[interneg]

Take a look at the DeVille Bobinoir roller system & how it works - it uses 20 litres or less to run up to 48-50" wide roll paper. I like it a lot & it's far easier to handle big pieces of roll paper with it than just about any of the manual processing methods.

[Willie]

Wall Paper trays can work.

Build a flat bottom tray with a gate opening so you can dump chemistry without lifting. Lay paper in and dump chemistry on it, agitate chemistry over the face of the print and when ready for the next step you open the gate and dump the chemistry into a bucket. Let it flow out - maybe tray lifted higher on the other end to help with fast emptying. Then close the gate and dump the next chemical or rinse water onto the print. Have aeen this used by an excellent photographer - but the name escapes me. Probably will remember later.

Doing this no need to move the paper at all - no wrinkles or kinks and you get chemical onto the paper surface fast.

[LFLarry]

You didn't share the size of your prints, so that could be helpful in getting some ideas.

If you want to make 30x40 type prints, a 12 inch PVC gray air duct tube works very well and if you want to step up to 40x50, you will need a 14" tube. The air duct tubes are much thinner and lighter than the schedule 80 pvc used in plumbing.

To calculate the circumference of your pipe, just multiply the diameter by the value of pi (3.14). For example, the 12" pipe has a circumference of about 37 inches. For a 30 inch prints that leaves a 7 inch gap between the ends of the paper. I leave that gap at the bottom of the tube when I load chemicals.

You can easily build a manual roller base out of 6 wheels on a small sheet of plywood and roll the drum. I have done this method and it works very well. It saves a lot of chemicals and therefore a lot of money and also a much smaller amount of space to process your prints. For a 30x40, I only need 2 liters (1/2 gal) of chemical which is a huge savings and better for the environment too.

End caps for the 12 inch tube are easy to get, but when you get to 14" and above, that starts to get more difficult and more expensive. You just need one end of the tube to be blocked at all times and the other end needs a hole in it so that you can enter and exit the chemicals.

Hope this helps.

Larry

[Tin Can]

That's a great tip.

I found that pipe cheap, but not cheap caps. (https://flexpvc.com/cart/agora.cgi?p_id=DUCT12&name=Gray%2012%20inch%20duct%20pipe%20Custom%20Length%20BTF&xm=on&ppinc=detail&gclid=CjwKCAjw-dXaBRAEEiwAbwCi5lmTE8Lvptkj7YxEeeEjXpzkZWr-Jm4Y1keAB5CV83drLEIpGliG0RoC3XkQAvD_BwE)

Any ideas? Wood plugs epoxy covered?




You didn't share the size of your prints, so that could be helpful in getting some ideas.

If you want to make 30x40 type prints, a 12 inch PVC gray air duct tube works very well and if you want to step up to 40x50, you will need a 14" tube. The air duct tubes are much thinner and lighter than the schedule 80 pvc used in plumbing.

To calculate the circumference of your pipe, just multiply the diameter by the value of pi (3.14). For example, the 12" pipe has a circumference of about 37 inches. For a 30 inch prints that leaves a 7 inch gap between the ends of the paper. I leave that gap at the bottom of the tube when I load chemicals.

You can easily build a manual roller base out of 6 wheels on a small sheet of plywood and roll the drum. I have done this method and it works very well. It saves a lot of chemicals and therefore a lot of money and also a much smaller amount of space to process your prints. For a 30x40, I only need 2 liters (1/2 gal) of chemical which is a huge savings and better for the environment too.

End caps for the 12 inch tube are easy to get, but when you get to 14" and above, that starts to get more difficult and more expensive. You just need one end of the tube to be blocked at all times and the other end needs a hole in it so that you can enter and exit the chemicals.

Hope this helps.

Larry

[jamesaz]

Long ago I used a sheet of stainless on a 55gal drum and swabbed dektol on mural paper using a sponge in each hand. All these suggestions sound so much cleaner.

[LFLarry]

That is where I got my 12" pipe.

For the 12" pipe I used rubber quick caps. They are light weight and work perfectly.

Fernco Rubber Quick Cap - QC-112 12"
https://flexpvc.com/cart/agora.cgi?p=Fernco-Rubber-Caps&p_id=QC112&xm=on&ppinc=detail

Finding caps that don't weigh more than you do is a real challenge for the 14" pipe. Finding an alternate solution for the bigger 14" pipe is the key and what is needed.

I will do some more digging and see if I can find anything and if anyone else can find a solution, post it here so we can all learn.

Larry





That's a great tip.

I found that pipe cheap, but not cheap caps. (https://flexpvc.com/cart/agora.cgi?p_id=DUCT12&name=Gray%2012%20inch%20duct%20pipe%20Custom%20Length%20BTF&xm=on&ppinc=detail&gclid=CjwKCAjw-dXaBRAEEiwAbwCi5lmTE8Lvptkj7YxEeeEjXpzkZWr-Jm4Y1keAB5CV83drLEIpGliG0RoC3XkQAvD_BwE)

Any ideas? Wood plugs epoxy covered?

[Vaughn]

At the volume you seem to be thinking of, perhaps raw chemicals and making your own paper developer might be the cheapest way to go and worth considering. Fixer -- might find it cheap in drums from a pool supply company.

[Tin Can]

Thanks!


That is where I got my 12" pipe.

For the 12" pipe I used rubber quick caps. They are light weight and work perfectly.

Fernco Rubber Quick Cap - QC-112 12"
https://flexpvc.com/cart/agora.cgi?p=Fernco-Rubber-Caps&p_id=QC112&xm=on&ppinc=detail

Finding caps that don't weigh more than you do is a real challenge for the 14" pipe. Finding an alternate solution for the bigger 14" pipe is the key and what is needed.

I will do some more digging and see if I can find anything and if anyone else can find a solution, post it here so we can all learn.

Larry

[MMELVIS]

Thanks!

Look up 14" duct end cap plug , should work and save a bit of money

[LFLarry]

That is a really good idea.

Quick question: Based on my searches, I could only find metal end caps. Do you think this would be a problem with all the darkroom chemicals?



Look up 14" duct end cap plug , should work and save a bit of money

[koraks]

They may start to rust eventually. You could coat/paint them to prevent this, or routinely clean off any nascent rust pits, but plastic caps seems like a more elegant solution.

[Tin Can]

https://www.completeplumbingsource.com/12-fernco-qc-112-qwik-cap-reusable-test-cap

[bob carnie]

From thousands of mural print experience I will say the most difficult part of Mural processing is getting the flow of chemicals quickly on the print surface to reduce flow marks... I use a lot of chemicals
in open trays and in troughs when I work to avoid this problem. Like film processing the first 15 seconds of development is critical.

Trying to save money with low amounts of chemicals in Mural printing is a bad idea IMHO as a full sheet of paper wasted is quite expensive.. A 100ft roll of Ilford Warmtone can run over $700 at B&H .

[AnselAvedon]

Hey there LFLarry you might have missed that I am using 30"Arista, 48"Foma, and 56"Kodak Polycontrast rolls. Those are going to be some big tubes.

[LFLarry]

Hi, you really only have a few options which I suspect you already know.

1 - Tray development. The biggest trays you can find to buy are 30x40 now, so that only covers 1 of your three sizes.
2 - Tube development. You would need a 12" tube that I described above for 30x40, 14" tube for 40x50, and anything beyond that in a tube isn't really practical.
3 - Trough development. You will have to come with with some DIY type solution for this and your milage my vary.
4 - Misc... other options would include using rollers or brushes if you have concrete floor and other more obscure options.

If you are printing with 56" roll paper then you have a pretty heft investment to even be in that ballpark and anything above 40x50 isn't very practical for 99% of photographers is my guess, but I may be wrong. I print big because I have collectors and clients that are willing to make the investment, otherwise, I couldn't justify the massive expenses associated with printing this big. The paper and chemical fees alone are a car payment for most people.

I have personally done all of the above and my preference is tray development. I designed and built custom darkroom trays for my largest size print that I make which is a 24x72 pano.

What are you doing for your big prints right now and what is the largest size you have printed?


Hey there LFLarry you might have missed that I am using 30"Arista, 48"Foma, and 56"Kodak Polycontrast rolls. Those are going to be some big tubes.

[chris77]

+1 for tray development.
5 litres of developer in 2 buckets, splash and move with hands (gloves) or large brushes/wipes/sponges. works better with a helper.
bob carnie is right, flow marks are the enemy. prewetting the paper helps a bit (might decrease contrast though). diluting developer and cooling helps even more (increased developing time). practice by moving up in size before doing really big ones.
put on some groovy music.
enjoy.

[John Layton]

My approach to printing 30x40's is to use a single, elevated (on 2x4 "stretchers") tray (34x48") which I built from 3/4" birch plywood and coated with marine epoxy. This tray features a tapered right end, with a gasketed flap in the middle of this...which when closed ensures that the tray holds liquid, and when opened allows chemistry to be dumped.

Procedure is to have chemicals in tubs to left of this tray, dump into tray, move empty tub under dump-flap on right side, agitate by tray-rocking, open flap and place 2x4 under left edge of tray to elevate to facilitate dumping, at the end of dump cycle gently squeegee print to save maximum chemistry and minimize carryover of chemistry to next step, remove 2x4, reseal flap, pour in next chemical. Took awhile to get up to speed with this...but it works great.

What I found in "dialing in" the above process is that a pre-soak did not work for me...as it interfered with later absorption of developer which caused some visible unevenness. I'm using Ilford Classic FB (available as 30x40 sheets) and mileage may vary on this pre-soak issue with other papers. At any rate...I find that two gallons of chemistry works fine...and at the start of a run I dump a little less than half of the developer into the tray prior to adding the print, then quickly pour the remaining developer over the print before starting to rock the tray. As for developer dilution...I did find that if I used an "extreme" dilution I had trouble with getting maximum blacks, so I dialed this back a bit and now find that my Moersch 4812, when diluted to 1:24, works great with a four minute developing time (3.25 active rocking plus .75 dumping/squeegeeing).

I also use my single tray for the entire process...including washing/squeegeeing (glass smooth epoxied surface facilitates squeegeeing). This means that the print does not get moved about until it is ready to hang - which minimizes having the print become creased.

Right now I'm printing some 30x40's for an upcoming show using this tray...and down the road I'll likely build a larger tray of the same design to do 40x60's. Will still fit over my sink... although I might need to up the amounts of chemistry for this. Here are photos:
180960180961

[Tin Can]

John this is great advice and the pictures really help. I was trying to visualize something like this with buckets.

Your system design makes sense.

Thank you!

[John Layton]

Thanks Randy. Do note that the backdraft vents are somewhat less effective due to the tray's high position...and I'm thinking I'll add a "Y" connector higher up so I can direct the vent flow from above this tray when I'm using it.

Also...having one tray does slow things down a bit. I could add a second tray as a holding tank if I needed to...but this would mean stacking and shuffling 30x40's and I really don't want to risk creases and tears by over-handling the prints. As is...I can set up to do a print early - using the tubs directly for processing test strips, then do a complete run (including washing/squeegeeing/hanging, and selenium toning if I want to) for one large print - and then either do a second copy of the same print if I need to, or set up with a completely new image...and get this second one printed and hung, for a grand total of two prints by days end.

I guess I could do things more quickly...and to be honest the longest phase of my procedure, especially for large prints like this - is making and evaluating test strips. With 16x20's, and even 20x30's, I can more easily afford the materials I need to make several copies of a given image if I need to...but with 30x40's, I really like to get what I consider to be a "final" (and saleable) image either on the first or second try.

Part of what makes doing one final print effective is knowing that I can go back later and make a print which is more or less identical to one I'd made earlier...due to a combination of the Moersch 4812 developer (which is extremely consistent until it quickly dies), plus the consistency of my Heiland LED VC head (which required a painful parting with a really nice SWC to purchase), plus trying to keep good notes!

Another thing that I should mention is that the chemical tubs have covers (not shown in photos)...and because of this and as each chemical is poured into the tray and then back into its tank after each step - this means that nothing is laying exposed to oxidation for excessive periods of time.

[Tin Can]

John all advice noted and much appreciated. I have been doing mostly 16X20 and have trays, paper stock to 20X24.

I am plotting a winter's end project to 30X40 and/or 9X34 pano so exploring possibilities. It's another level.

Paper costs more the bigger it gets and I am glad it is still available. Ilford:)

Thank you again!

[bob carnie]

My approach to printing 30x40's is to use a single, elevated (on 2x4 "stretchers") tray (34x48") which I built from 3/4" birch plywood and coated with marine epoxy. This tray features a tapered right end, with a gasketed flap in the middle of this...which when closed ensures that the tray holds liquid, and when opened allows chemistry to be dumped.

Procedure is to have chemicals in tubs to left of this tray, dump into tray, move empty tub under dump-flap on right side, agitate by tray-rocking, open flap and place 2x4 under left edge of tray to elevate to facilitate dumping, at the end of dump cycle gently squeegee print to save maximum chemistry and minimize carryover of chemistry to next step, remove 2x4, reseal flap, pour in next chemical. Took awhile to get up to speed with this...but it works great.

What I found in "dialing in" the above process is that a pre-soak did not work for me...as it interfered with later absorption of developer which caused some visible unevenness. I'm using Ilford Classic FB (available as 30x40 sheets) and mileage may vary on this pre-soak issue with other papers. At any rate...I find that two gallons of chemistry works fine...and at the start of a run I dump a little less than half of the developer into the tray prior to adding the print, then quickly pour the remaining developer over the print before starting to rock the tray. As for developer dilution...I did find that if I used an "extreme" dilution I had trouble with getting maximum blacks, so I dialed this back a bit and now find that my Moersch 4812, when diluted to 1:24, works great with a four minute developing time (3.25 active rocking plus .75 dumping/squeegeeing).

I also use my single tray for the entire process...including washing/squeegeeing (glass smooth epoxied surface facilitates squeegeeing). This means that the print does not get moved about until it is ready to hang - which minimizes having the print become creased.

Right now I'm printing some 30x40's for an upcoming show using this tray...and down the road I'll likely build a larger tray of the same design to do 40x60's. Will still fit over my sink... although I might need to up the amounts of chemistry for this. Here are photos:
180960180961


John I am using the exact same tubs, they are about 40 inches in length , very good way to process using the scrolling method.

I also have larger trays which I use as well, both methods are completely satisfying to work with.

[LFLarry]

Based on my first hand experience, here are a few hard lessons that I earned when printing big in trays.

Big defined as 30x40 and 40x50 prints which are actually 32x42 (printed on 42" roll paper) and 56x46 (printed on 56" roll paper).

For 30x40 I found that I needed a minimum of 3 gallons of developer and 5 gallons for 40x50. Anything less, I would get the nasty developer flow marks, etc. and every piece of paper lost was $20 to $27 a pop...

I tried pre-soaking the paper in distilled water before going into the developer and that was a nightmare. The paper soaks up the distilled water and then when you put it into the developer tray, it doesn't ever fully developer properly. If I recall correctly, I think I even let it develop for 20 minutes once to see if that helped and it was a miserable failure. If someone has ever even successful at pre-wetting big prints before development, I would love to hear how that worked.

Of all the methods that I have tried for development (face down for 1 min, two people submerging quickly, large nap roller, etc.), I found that by rolling the paper up after exposure and then pick one side of the tray and unroll towards the other and then quickly submerge the paper into the developer and move developer over the paper with your gloved hands being sure to have it fully covered in about 10 seconds or so. With that method, I have perfect prints every time.

It is a lot of fun to see your prints come to life at this size.

Good luck and keep us posted!





+1 for tray development.
5 litres of developer in 2 buckets, splash and move with hands (gloves) or large brushes/wipes/sponges. works better with a helper.
bob carnie is right, flow marks are the enemy. prewetting the paper helps a bit (might decrease contrast though). diluting developer and cooling helps even more (increased developing time). practice by moving up in size before doing really big ones.
put on some groovy music.
enjoy.

[LFLarry]

John, that is a genius design and technique !!!!

Can you share exactly what epoxy you used? I need to try this and reclaim some space in my darkroom.

I am printing 40x50 on 56" roll paper (46x56 with border) so my trays are HUGE... I found that I used 3 gal for my 30x40 and 5 gal for my 40x50 prints or a factor of about 1.6 going from 30x40 to 40x50 in case that helps you calculate chemical usage in the future.

I was always worried about the epoxy, but now that I know you are doing it successfully, that is all I need to know.

Larry




My approach to printing 30x40's is to use a single, elevated (on 2x4 "stretchers") tray (34x48") which I built from 3/4" birch plywood and coated with marine epoxy. This tray features a tapered right end, with a gasketed flap in the middle of this...which when closed ensures that the tray holds liquid, and when opened allows chemistry to be dumped.

Procedure is to have chemicals in tubs to left of this tray, dump into tray, move empty tub under dump-flap on right side, agitate by tray-rocking, open flap and place 2x4 under left edge of tray to elevate to facilitate dumping, at the end of dump cycle gently squeegee print to save maximum chemistry and minimize carryover of chemistry to next step, remove 2x4, reseal flap, pour in next chemical. Took awhile to get up to speed with this...but it works great.

What I found in "dialing in" the above process is that a pre-soak did not work for me...as it interfered with later absorption of developer which caused some visible unevenness. I'm using Ilford Classic FB (available as 30x40 sheets) and mileage may vary on this pre-soak issue with other papers. At any rate...I find that two gallons of chemistry works fine...and at the start of a run I dump a little less than half of the developer into the tray prior to adding the print, then quickly pour the remaining developer over the print before starting to rock the tray. As for developer dilution...I did find that if I used an "extreme" dilution I had trouble with getting maximum blacks, so I dialed this back a bit and now find that my Moersch 4812, when diluted to 1:24, works great with a four minute developing time (3.25 active rocking plus .75 dumping/squeegeeing).

I also use my single tray for the entire process...including washing/squeegeeing (glass smooth epoxied surface facilitates squeegeeing). This means that the print does not get moved about until it is ready to hang - which minimizes having the print become creased.

Right now I'm printing some 30x40's for an upcoming show using this tray...and down the road I'll likely build a larger tray of the same design to do 40x60's. Will still fit over my sink... although I might need to up the amounts of chemistry for this. Here are photos:
180960180961

[bob carnie]

181004
Here are the trays I use when I am doing flat prints, when I am doing large rolls 30 inch x 10 ft I use the troughs John uses

1. I use lots of chemicals to avoid flow marks
2. Never pre soak

My trays are 34 x 44 and 48 x 50 inches that are made from grey plastic which is welded and super strong.

[John Layton]

Larry - I used marine epoxy from a company called Rakka. Much lower price than the equivalent from West System, with low VOC and generous setting time...qualities that weren't as important with the tray I've outlined above - but more for the large (3ft x 16ft) sink, partially visible in the photos, which I'd built and installed as my darkroom was coming together about five years ago. This being my twelfth darkroom in just over fifty years...I really wanted to get this one right!

The sink basin I built in two sections out in my garage...and moved these down to the darkroom to affix (with short screws and mending plates) onto the 2x4 framework which I'd already built in place, then I joined the two basin halves (glued and screwed), and then completed all shelving, etc., then installed the vent system prior to sealing all with the Rakka epoxy - thus epoxy fumes were mitigated.

On a side note...I had a bit of Rakka epoxy left over from the sink project - and used most of this to seal a set of five 24x34 inch trays, which I now use to print 20x30's. When I grew interested in printing larger...I knew - even with the possibility of squeezing in four 34x44(ish) trays into my sink, and using a single fix - I really did not want to take up that space in the sink...nor did I want to deal with the logistics of pouring, dumping, washing, and storage of such large trays...nor did I want to compromise the efficacy of chemicals through long exposure to air...nor did I want to "waste" lots of chemistry through what would be the large carryover from tray to tray. At any rate, I had just enough Rakka left over to seal this large tray.

The single tray solves all of the above mentioned issues. Furthermore, the reason that it can work with a relatively small amount of chemistry (and this applies especially to the developer) is that I am starting this (developing) cycle by pouring a small quantity into the tray prior to placing in the exposed paper...then quickly pouring the remaining developer over as much of the paper as possible to ensure quick, even coverage. It is then that I begin rocking the tray, which is very effective with this tray, as the edges are 5" high so I can really "rock it" with no spillage whatsoever. Also, as mentioned, chemical carryover is minimized by gently squeegeeing the print near the end of each dump cycle (with tray tilted upwards)...with the print remaining in the same, image side up orientation, as the pressure from the squeegee, while gentle enough to do no harm to the emulsion...is still firm enough to force out most of the liquid which would otherwise remain trapped under the print. Indeed, solution volumes on the "dump" side pretty much equal those on the "fill" side (although this data is meaningless for all but the developer, as all following chemicals receive some degree, however small, of carryover).

In fact, throughout the entire development cycle, the print is never flipped over, although I do gently lift one or two edges at the beginning of a tray rocking cycle to facilitate initial chemical circulation under a the print - and once rocking commences, chemistry flows and moves freely on both sides of the print. The only time the print is flipped comes just before dumping the final wash water...when I gently flip the print over, dump the final wash, and squeegee the back (glass-smooth epoxy finish keeps print free of dents/scratches) prior to flipping once more to squeegee the front prior to lifting out - and for this (lifting) I attach the hangers first...so that I can lift evenly and hang on the drying line with little to no risk of bending and/or creasing (and boy, do I ever hate creases in my prints!).

Jeeesh - am I getting long winded in my old age! But there is something else I should mention. This tray would be very difficult to use effectively (at least with my current 2 gallon volumes) with paper cut from a roll...unless one were to first "reverse curl" the paper prior to processing. The paper I had on hand during the testing phase of this tray came from the end of my last (42" wide) roll of Ilford Classic - and boy...was this an adventure! I first tried plopping the exposed/curled sheet into straight developer and lost too much time trying to "de-curl" the paper during this cycle, getting horrible results. Then I tried a five minute water presoak (more than enough time to flatten the paper), and while results were somewhat improved, I still got lots of unevenness, particularly noticeable in broad, non-textured areas of even tonalities. I then tried a combo of pre-soak and highly diluted developer - and, while results were a bit better, the prints still exhibited unevenness. My guess was the the pre-soak itself was interfering with the later uptake of the developer.

About the only way I could see using this tray with paper cut from rolls would be to invent some sort of "hold down" system - so that the paper's uncurled edges could be held slightly above the bottom of the tray - for at least long enough to allow the paper to relax a bit as solutions begin to penetrate. Another strategy (which I believe that someone else has already mentioned) would involve actually re-rolling the exposed paper onto a dowel affixed slightly above the rear of the tray...and then scrolling downwards from this into the tray. This might actually work quite well, and could present what might be the best of both worlds between using a "scroll and trough" system and open trays. The further advantage of this, in that it facilitates the use of rolled paper, is that such rolls are available in a larger variety than are pre-cut papers, and the cost per square inch of rolled paper is generally quite a bit less than that of sheets.

At any rate...for all of the above, I do hope I've given the starter of this thread at least some good info!

Bob...I had to refresh this page so did not see your above post - do you build your large plastic trays or buy them already built?

[bob carnie]

I had a plastic welder dude make them for me , expensive but perfect for the job, they take a beating and have handles that really help when rocking the print.

[Tin Can]

John your addendum is well received. Very though with specifics.

I will try Raka and had already planned on flat cut paper.

I am not a fan of rolling my negs in tubes. I don’t. Paper may be worse.

Please keep writing as you share very valuable experience.

Ps I am also building a small wood boat. Raka!

[Tim Layton]

Hey, what a great thread!!

I thought I would chime in a little bit and share a few things based on my experience in case it can help anyone.

I started printing big back in 2010 and built custom trays for my 40x50 prints. I over built them and they were HUGE and very heavy.

When I moved and built my new darkroom in 2015, I started rethinking everything and I have been exploring a variety of methods for developing big prints over the last couple of years.

My most frequently printed size is 42x62, but I routinely print 32x42 and 24x72, all from roll paper.

I also recently moved form printing via 4x5 negatives to 8x10 via my Beseler 8x10 system on the 45V-XL chassis.

Over the last several months, I have been testing tube development which I got the idea from Ken Osborne. Ken has a really sweet setup for his 30x40 prints that is basically like a huge motor driven Jobo type of deal.

I tested it and didn't really care for it too much. I missed having my hands on the prints and being able to watch things as the process advanced.

So, I went back to the drawing board and designed and built some new trays and like John, I ended up doing a single tray for my dev/stop/fix1/fix2 and then a separate tray for selenium toning and archival wash via a Kodak tray syphon. My single tray design is a lot like John's, but instead of using Epoxy, I found some thick sheets of Plastic PVC that I was able to cut with a skill saw and glue on to 1/2" plywood along with a large exit gate like John's. I built my water holding tray first and then did the more complex single tray. Here is a video of my wash tray on YouTube at https://youtu.be/hUrp_8eifJg

I sealed the seams with 100% silicon and they have never leaked so far.

I found that I liked to have a regular tray (not the quick drain design) as my water holding bath and another tray dedicated to my selenium toning. So, I was able to go from 6 HUGE trays down to 3 which was a big space savings for me.

I use about 2.5 gallons of developer for my 32x42 and 4 gallons for my 42x62 prints. I trim an inch off my prints after they are flattened.

My development technique is to roll the paper after exposure and then place the rolled paper on the right side of the tray and then release it to the left and quickly submerge it below the developer line and work it with my gloved hands to ensure I have total coverage in the first 15 to 20 seconds or developer streaks will occur and ruin the print. I will also confirm that pre-soaking the prints in water does not work. The bigger the print, the bigger the risk and hassle factor, but it is all worth it when you see those big prints.


Tim