Photographer's Formulary 8x10 slosher tray?

[Jordan]

Photographer's Formulary 8x10 slosher tray? Anyone have any experience with one of these 8x10 trays? Are slosher trays recommended for normal agitation processing? Thanks in advance.

Jordan

[David Karp]

I often use a home-made slosher for normal tray development of 4x5 film. I like it a lot. Have never seen the Formulary version in person.

[Gem Singer]

Jordan,

I looked at the Photoformulary 8X10 slosher. Didn't purchase it because it holds four 8X10 negatives and requires 16x20 trays for developer, stop bath, and fixer.

Three 16X20 trays take up a large amount of space and require three, or four liters of solution in order to cover the slosher effectively.

If you have the space and don't mind using that much chemistry to process four sheets of film, the Photoformulary slosher is well built and a nice way to prevent scratching negatives when tray developing.

[Jordan]

In regards to even development in smooth skies...... How does a slosher tray do? I've got enough room for 16x20 trays so that shouldn't be a problem.

[Heroique]

Here’s what the slosher trays look like for 4x5 and 8x10 sheets.

Plus here’s a helpful thread (http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?t=52936) with more information about them, including alternatives.

[Richard Wasserman]

I use a slosher type tray for 4x5 and get very even well developed negatives.

[BetterSense]

I bought 4 white plastic basket-like containers at Hobby Lobby. After adding some more holes with a drill and a step-bit, they work just like individual sloshers. I suppose they could be zip-tied together to make a 4-sheet slosher but having the indivdual baskets comes in handy for +- developing.

[jb7]

I made one, 4 8x10's in a 20x16 tray-

Perspex sheet, with stainless screws to separate the sheets-

http://img23.imageshack.us/img23/5201/dsc5350.jpg

It's a tight fit,
even a half inch extra all around would make things a lot easier-

It uses a minimum of 2.5 litres of solution, and the base needs to be level,
to ensure coverage- 3l would be a more comfortable volume-

I tried ID 11 first, but a low dilution requires a continuous agitation,
and there were problems with reflections of the waves of developer off the walls of the tray-
particularly visible in sky areas, to answer a previous question-

After switching to HC110, and intermittent agitation, the negs became far more even-
though I've got to admit, I haven't processed very much recently,
as the darkroom space has been taken over by something else...

[Jordan]

I need to know whether slosher trays are prone to surge marks? Jb7 mentioned a reflection coming off the walls of the tray with his. Are these recommended more as a solution to scratches or were they meant to be used more so as a means for stand development?

[Jordan]

OK, so this really for me is like an alternative to the Jobo 3005. The jobo 3005 has been unreliable in terms of giving me the even development I am looking for in smooth skies. Trays are an ok alternative, but really prefer not to shuffle the negatives and the occasional scratches. I really thought the slosher seemed like a great alternative. Remember I am thinking to use a slosher tray with 8x10 film. Also the slosher can hold 4 negatives which better than I can comfortably tray process. I know I should probably just try this out for myself, but I would prefer to save a little and money, but really picking your brains as to whether you guys think a slosher tray is my best alternative. I will be using hc110 diluted 1:90, giving me around 8 minutes of development time. So any last suggestions, encouragement, or discouragement is appreciated.

[jb7]

I use Dilution H, 1:64-

I've only used it with Fomapan films,
dev times around the 11 mins mark, with presoak-

No problems at all with scratches,
and with minimal agitation, it will give even development.

Generous volumes of chemicals will give better results,
and 3l is more than adequate-

If you could find a slightly larger tray than the Paterson one,
then it would be quite a good system,
but my slosher needed quite a bit of shaping to allow it to occupy the very bottom of the tray-
vital if you want to minimize chems quantities-

Leveling your work surface is easy, fill your tray with liquid...

It works, though it is a cheap solution, and will be sniffed at-

[Jordan]

Jb7,
I like your tray design and the handle in the middle is a great idea! I would be using it in a tray large enough with some wiggle room. Since I dilute my hc110 out the way I do, I would be using over a gallon per 4 sheets, so the volume of liquid will be plenty.

[jb7]

1:100 sounds better-
I think I'll be testing that out myself soon-

[blakezie]

I just received my 4x5 slosher from Photographer's Formulary. There were no instructions with it so I loaded some light struck film to see how it held the film in place. Of course, my trepidations will be addressed when I actually develop some film but right now i am a bit skeptical since there is nothing to hold the sheet film in place except the tension of the bowed film. It is quite a bow, lifting the center of the sheet about an inch off the floor of the slosher.

It seems to me that a couple of molded-in nubs that hold the film down would be enough to keep it in its compartment without such a large bow, thus less developer could be used to accomplish the task.

First, am I loading the unit correctly? (I cannot imaging any other way but I am asking any way.)

Second, can that large bow introduce an undesireable wave flow?

I suppose i will find out.

[jeroldharter]

I just received my 4x5 slosher from Photographer's Formulary. There were no instructions with it so I loaded some light struck film to see how it held the film in place. Of course, my trepidations will be addressed when I actually develop some film but right now i am a bit skeptical since there is nothing to hold the sheet film in place except the tension of the bowed film. It is quite a bow, lifting the center of the sheet about an inch off the floor of the slosher.

It seems to me that a couple of molded-in nubs that hold the film down would be enough to keep it in its compartment without such a large bow, thus less developer could be used to accomplish the task.

First, am I loading the unit correctly? (I cannot imaging any other way but I am asking any way.)

Second, can that large bow introduce an undesireable wave flow?

I suppose i will find out.

I have the 4x5 and 8x10 PF sloshers. You should have no "bow." The film is simply dropped into the compartment. I place one end of the film down against its compartment edge and then gently lower the rest of the sheet. The sheets lie flat. Then you gently lower the slosher into the tray of solutions and the liquid rushes in from all sides. I gently lower the slosher. You should have a little wiggle room in the tray so that you can nudge the slosher around for agitation. I prefer the Patterson 14x17 trays for the 4x5 slosher. The 8x10 slosher is obviously larger and does not fit in Patterson 16x20 trays. It easily fits in the old yellow Kodak 16x20 trays which are slightly oversized.

I too was worried about film rising to the top but it never happens to me. I have not had any problems with the sloshers. Every method has its downsides. The main downside of the 8x10 slosher is its size and the necessary sink space for the trays and relatively large solution volumes required.

You might consider BTZS tubes for 8x10. However, you are limited to 2 sheets at a time unless you figure out some clever method for rotating more tubes simultaneously.

[cyrus]

Just take a normal stainless steel hanger, bend the handle so that it rests flat into a tray, and use it to develop negs by holding onto the handle and moving it for agitation.

[jan labij]

Geez, how complikateddddd. I develope 5X7's in a ribbed bottom 8X10 tray, pouring 6 oz. of developer over it just like it said in Watsons hints on photography, published in the late '90's----er 1890's, and rocking the tray slowly but continously in Ansco 130, 24-1. I'm so far behind the times, I use orthchromatic film and develope under a ruby kodack candle lantern. So this may not help anybody.