PDA

View Full Version : DIY slosher or Orbital tank?



jvuokko
10-Oct-2010, 12:20
I am quite interested about sloshers as it allows easy development of a single 4x5 sheet and also 2-4 sheets simultaneously with intermitted agitation instead of using rather continous agitation for single sheet in plain tray.

Before trying to build one with my really poor DIY skills, I would like to hear if there's good experiences using Paterson Orbital like a slosher tray?

I happen to have two Orbital tanks so it would be good to get some use for them :)
(I used them with motorized based until I suddenly begun to get really uneven results).

The final question is that because the film's edges are against the wall's of the tank in Orbital, is there danger of uneven development caused by developer "wave" bouncing back from the opposite wall of the side that I am lifting up.

The lifting pattern could be left, closest to me, right then again the edge closest to me.

jeroldharter
10-Oct-2010, 14:42
I suggest getting a Photographers Formulary slosher which holds up to 6 sheets of 4x5 and fits in an 11x14 tray. The rigid and relatively compact Yankee trays work well with them in my experience. This is it:

http://stores.photoformulary.com/-strse-241/FORMULARY-SHEET-FILM-DEVELOPING/Detail.bok

The slosher is rather expensive but well built and worth it. These are the trays I was referring to:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/362618-REG/Yankee_YAC1114_Plastic_Ribbed_Developing_Tray.html

http://stores.photoformulary.com/catalog/4x5sloshertraythumb.jpg

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/images/images345x345/362618.jpg

jeroldharter
10-Oct-2010, 14:44
Yes, you should go around the clock when sloshing the slosher so that agitation is effectively random.

cjbroadbent
11-Oct-2010, 01:23
....The final question is that because the film's edges are against the wall's of the tank in Orbital, is there danger of uneven development caused by developer "wave" bouncing back from the opposite wall of the side that I am lifting up.....
Shoot a gray card and you get your answer. I use the motorised orbital for 8x10. The fins have been sawn off because they cause eddies. There is a very slight difference round the edges of the negative- better than hangers in tanks. I keep in mind 'chemical exhaustion' and use two shots of everything.

jvuokko
11-Oct-2010, 02:51
I'll do the test.

Pete Watkins
11-Oct-2010, 07:15
Jukka,
I have 4 orbitals and swear by them. I've sawn the fins off, made sure that the negs can't settle on the tank base and I'm gonna get critisized for this by all the orbital experts BUT I use 300ml of chemical. 2 x 2 minute 300 ml pre washes, 300ml of D-76H (or D-76) 1-1, water stop on Foma film and 300 ml of an alkali or neutral fixer. I fix twice. Water wash and final rinse in de-ionised or distilled water.
Pete.

Jim Noel
11-Oct-2010, 08:29
Slosher trays are easily and cheaply built, usually less than $10. I prefer them to all tanks because there is less film handling, thus less danger of scratches.

jvuokko
11-Oct-2010, 12:55
I used to use 300ml of chemical with motorized base.

Now as I checked, with agitating by rocking the Orbital tank, even the 300ml might not be enough to cover negatives fully. The curvature of the base is quite big.

Stephane
11-Oct-2010, 13:19
I use 400ml in the orbital with motorized base. I also cut the fins off the lid because it scratched my 8x10 negatives. Now, I can say that the orbital changed my life!

philipmorg
11-Oct-2010, 14:02
Another easy DIY approach is to glue multiple 5x7 trays into a larger tray. You put the chemicals and the film to be developed into the 5x7 trays, and you agitate the larger tray (which of course moves all the smaller trays in concert). After development, you move the film into either identical setups for stop bath and fixing, or stack the developed sheets in a single 5x7 tray of stop and then fixer.

ric_kb
11-Oct-2010, 14:10
or, for those of you with better DIY skills, try a rocker table... actually a table top that rocks by being rocked by a motor... any number of trays.. all being agitated the same...
Kodak used to publish plans for such, to be used to "rock" dyes during DT process...

jvuokko
20-Oct-2010, 07:56
First gray-tests gave quite poor results.

However it could be caused by test film + developer that I used: Efke 25 and Rodinal 1+50.
None of my test sheets were nowhere near even. To my surprise, the sheet that I developed using agitation that Kodak suggests for single sheet in tray (rocking tray) was worse, the middle part of the negative was really thin when compared to edges.

The orbital - not very good... My Q&D slosher test - worse than orbital :(

For next test I will use D-76 but as I have pile of cheap Efke, I probably use it. After all, Efke should not be that bad..


Examples:

Q&D Slosher (agitation: first minute continuous, then one cycle every minute):
http://jukkavuokko.com/linkatut/lf/rodinal_efke25-01-qd-slosher%20web.jpg


Orbital as daylight slosher (agitation: first minute continuous, then one cycle every minute):
http://jukkavuokko.com/linkatut/lf/rodinal_efke25-03-orbital-slosher%20web.jpg


And the (embrassing) result of one sheet in tray method:
http://jukkavuokko.com/linkatut/lf/rodinal_efke25-02-kodak-agitation%20web.jpg

Kirk Gittings
20-Oct-2010, 08:13
Interesting, good effort, but there seems to be some other things going on that may impact the evenness. See the shadow of the film holder edge on the left of the top two and the right on the bottom example. What is causing that?


First gray-tests gave quite poor results.

However it could be caused by test film + developer that I used: Efke 25 and Rodinal 1+50.
None of my test sheets were nowhere near even. To my surprise, the sheet that I developed using agitation that Kodak suggests for single sheet in tray (rocking tray) was worse, the middle part of the negative was really thin when compared to edges.

The orbital - not very good... My Q&D slosher test - worse than orbital :(

For next test I will use D-76 but as I have pile of cheap Efke, I probably use it. After all, Efke should not be that bad..


Examples:

Q&D Slosher (agitation: first minute continuous, then one cycle every minute):
http://jukkavuokko.com/linkatut/lf/rodinal_efke25-01-qd-slosher%20web.jpg


Orbital as daylight slosher (agitation: first minute continuous, then one cycle every minute):
http://jukkavuokko.com/linkatut/lf/rodinal_efke25-03-orbital-slosher%20web.jpg


And the (embrassing) result of one sheet in tray method:
http://jukkavuokko.com/linkatut/lf/rodinal_efke25-02-kodak-agitation%20web.jpg

Ash
20-Oct-2010, 08:58
I dumped the base from my orbital, leaving it flat on a surface. I keep the solution moving in the tray (keeping a tide going to each corner) tilting it every few seconds very gently. Never had an issue with my negs that way.

jvuokko
20-Oct-2010, 09:05
Interesting, good effort, but there seems to be some other things going on that may impact the evenness. See the shadow of the film holder edge on the left of the top two and the right on the bottom example. What is causing that?

That's a good point.

I exposed the negatives under the enlarger. That kind of light could cause some reflection from the edge of the film holder I presume.
Cannot figure any other reason.

I like to use enlarger as it's easy way to get even light. But ofcourse the photographing gray card also works as long as each sheet has similar exposure (are my shutters that precise?) and light is exactly same between each test shot. It does not matter if one side of the card will have bit more light as it will be then in every test negative.

Kirk Gittings
20-Oct-2010, 09:15
A refection of the holder edge would not cause that shadow. That is either spill light bouncing off of something nearby or another light source to the side?

jvuokko
21-Oct-2010, 00:07
Then it have to be something where light reflects. Now I cannot imagine what, but I will photograph the gray target and redo the test.

cjbroadbent
21-Oct-2010, 09:16
Jukka,
Thanks for sharing (as the say). Those negatives are more interesting than a lot of others here. You have got me worried. I'm off to do my own gray patch tests.

jvuokko
21-Oct-2010, 11:21
Did more tests. Results are very different now - which is good :)

Exposure was done by using camera, target was gray card. The lightning wasn't perfectly even, the left side of the card was 1/2 stop brighter than the right edge.

But that shouldn't matter, each negative should have smooth tonal change from left to right.

I have pile of TMY2 4x5 sheet film that is partially damaged by a bomb scanner. The negatives does not have any pictorial usage, but they're good for this kind of test (as the line exposed by scanner is clearly visible and there's no additional fogging).

Developer was D-76 dilution 1:1, 20 degree celsius.

Perhaps the best result came from both development that utilized some kind of slosher. One was Paterson Orbital in water bath and the another one was SS hangar lying at the bottom of the tray.

To my suprise, the normal single sheet tray development by rocking the tray (like kodak suggests) was again the worse. Not really as badly as with Efke25 and Rodinal, but it quite bad.

Would be nice to compare my tray development with shuffling sheets with these... I hope that it's somewhere near the Orbital/ss hanger slosher.

Also the Jobo did well with this combination. This is the first B/W combination that has no streaking and unevenes!

This whole test was worth of all effort, it returned my confidence to Orbital and also showed that slosher is really the way to go (unless I have more than 4 sheets to develop).

http://jukkavuokko.com/linkatut/lf/devtest-d76-tmy2-min.jpg

jvuokko
21-Oct-2010, 12:01
I dumped the base from my orbital, leaving it flat on a surface. I keep the solution moving in the tray (keeping a tide going to each corner) tilting it every few seconds very gently. Never had an issue with my negs that way.


I found out that rocking the orbital in kind of a circular pattern (manual imitation of the motorized base) on the flat surface works fine.

I did my agitation by raising the tray from the front side (the side nearest to me), then left, then back (farthest), then right and then again front.

Seems to work fine with intermittent agitation too. One minute continuous, then two "cycles" each minute.

400ml seems to be minimum amount of the developer to get negatives fully submerged when not rocking the orbital tank.

I don't know if this is better agitation method or not. Perhaps the slow but continuos agitation works better than my intermittent agitation with all developers?

bvstaples
21-Oct-2010, 12:13
I also use a Paterson Orbital to do both 4x5 and 8x10. I shoot mostly Tri-X and Delta 100. I use about 350ml of solution, any more and it seems to slosh out the sides, as I use a motorized base.

When I started using the motor base, I felt the agitation was to intense. I modified the base with a new motor to reduce the speed by 50% (it also went from a 220V to a 120V system). Now I get very pleasant results and very even development. Before the base I used the "flat on a surface tip up alternate corners" method described elsewhere here, with good results also.

Thanks for sharing the test, it was very interesting.


Brian

jvuokko
22-Oct-2010, 13:22
Ran another test. Now TMY2 and Efke 25, both developed in Rodinal 1+50 and D-76 1+1.

I used Orbital the way I did in previous test.

The result: Really even! The rodinal was fine and I can't tell difference between rodinal 1+50 and D-76 1+1.

Never before got so good result with Efke 25 or Efke 50 (I have used pyrocat-HD and Rodinal 1+100). No pinholes, no any fails.

The left one is Efke 25 in Rodinal 1+50, intermittent agitation in Orbital and right is same with D-76 1+1.

http://jukkavuokko.com/linkatut/lf/devtest-d76-rodinal-efke25-orbital_slosher.jpg


I think that I am really falling love with my Orbital tanks after long struggle with motorized base :)

The way towards more sophisticated sloshers begins..