Example of Semi-Stand vs Tray processed 7x17 negative

[Steve Sherman]

pardon my ignorance, but why did you use a tank for one and tray for the other? Might this have introduced variables other than developer/stand?

Hello Wayne,

The test was designed to show the difference between constant agitation in a tray and Semi - Stand where agitation happens only once at the mid way point. 10 years ago my understanding of Pyro was less than it is now, nevertheless ABC is still considered a highly energized developer as opposite to Pyrocat HD both of which are Pyro based. The Reduced Agitation or Semi - Stand method clearly produced much higher micro contrast even with a considerably less dense negative.

Cheers

[Steve Sherman]

Attachment 135071

Thanks for your hard work Steve. I was referring to the actual process itself, especially the tubes and agitation procedure. Is electrical conduit of the size required available at somewhere like Home Depot or must it be purchased from an electrical supplier (more expensive, especially if there is a minimum quantity).

I am interested in your procedure particularly as it would relate to ULF development.

Thanks again.

Hello Will,

These are the pix of my tubes for 7x17" film. The same tubes of appropriate size are used for 5x7" film. I no longer screw a corresponding tube on top rather I just presoak in the same initial tube and dump the water and pour in the developer and cap with a round cap which is light tight. After an initial agitation of several minutes I reorient the film and turn on the white lights and begin prepping another tube for processing another sheet of film.

I know of many photogs who use Home Depot black "ABS" tubes which are very inexpensive, albeit not quite as refined a plastic as the electrical conduit which is still rather inexpensive relatively speaking. Caution, white "PVC" is said to be NOT opaque so that should not be an option as an FYI. Even with the grey Electrical tubing I used a "cylinder hone" to debur the inside walls of the tubes. The 3" diameter works perfectly for 7x17" film as well as 5x7" film.

Cheers

[Andrew O'Neill]

I have always preferred semi-stand over stand when using pyrocat-hd. I also use tubes.

[William Whitaker]

Thanks Steve.

[Wayne]

That's why I wonder why you changed from tray to tank as well as from constant to semi-stand. This introduces another variable. Is there a reason you can't do both in a tray?

Hello Wayne,

The test was designed to show the difference between constant agitation in a tray and Semi - Stand where agitation happens only once at the mid way point.

Cheers

[Steve Sherman]

That's why I wonder why you changed from tray to tank as well as from constant to semi-stand. This introduces another variable. Is there a reason you can't do both in a tray?

Hi Wayne,
The one time I tried semi stand in a tray all things being equal, dilution, developer and agitation the resulting density of the negative was extremely weak and therefore I abandoned that orientation of processing film in all future trials.

[William Whitaker]

...back in the early days I used a large can which held 4400 ml of solution. In the very beginning I used a stirring motion to agitate, big mistake, increased density at the bottom of the neg, went to a plunging action like a washing machine and that cured some of the initial agitation hurdles. 4400 ml for one 7x17 "piece of film was not efficient in spite of the low cost of PyroCat HD. I now use 3" Grey Electrical conduit (plastic). A terrific idea devised by my good friend Tim Jones (climbabout) a 7x17" piece of film requires 2400ml to process and I use an version method of agitation. Usually, 2 minutes initial agitation for most normal contrast scenes. However, most of my photography is done under unusual lighting conditions and there in lies the real reward with this type film processing.

Okay, so let me see if I've got this... The 7x17 film is loaded by rolling it along the long axis, emulsion-in, and inserted into the conduit developing tube. After pre-wash (or not), developer is poured into the top of the tube and the tube filled so as to cover the film. Then the tube is capped and the tube inverted end-over-end to agitate for 2 minutes after which it's set on its end to "stand" until the next step.

Sorry to be pedantic, but I find it very easy to get lost in step-by-step instructions (including those on bottle labels).

Is the developer used as a one-shot or have you found you can re-use it for another negative? In my case (for 12x20), I would require a tube about 4" in diameter and I calculate that I would need just over 4 liters of developer working solution, which seems a tad extravagant for one negative. As far as the tube goes, it looks like 4" nominal PVC conduit would work, although I've not tried to source it yet nor have determined a price.

And one more question: WRT the last sentence of the quote above, what sort of lighting conditions benefit from this method of film processing?

Thank you again for sharing your findings Steve!

[Michael Mutmansky]

Michael, while I have never tested the "White" PVC tubes I have been lead to believe there are not opaque like the Black ABS is, just a word of caution. The rest of my tube setup sounds very similar to Michaels with the glued bottom piece and a removable cap on top. The one word of caution I would offer for those who chose to make their own, the amount of "free" space above the film is necessary as some solution does leak out during inversion, that space can not be so much as to not allow your hand to get down to grab the neg once the processing is over. I only put developer in the tube, remove to stop and fix in trays in the dark.

Definitely not opaque! However, it would be possible to paint them with something to make them better, or completely opaque. Black Plastidip comes to mind.

The grey electrical conduit PVC may be, I don't recall if I tested them or not. I wouldn't count on it without testing. They aren't available in the large diameters of the white PVC or black ABS, however, but as SAteve says, they will work in the 3" diameter for the 7x17 sheets.


---Michael

[Steve Sherman]

Okay, so let me see if I've got this... The 7x17 film is loaded by rolling it along the long axis, emulsion-in, and inserted into the conduit developing tube. After pre-wash (or not), developer is poured into the top of the tube and the tube filled so as to cover the film. Then the tube is capped and the tube inverted end-over-end to agitate for 2 minutes after which it's set on its end to "stand" until the next step.

Sorry to be pedantic, but I find it very easy to get lost in step-by-step instructions (including those on bottle labels).

Is the developer used as a one-shot or have you found you can re-use it for another negative? In my case (for 12x20), I would require a tube about 4" in diameter and I calculate that I would need just over 4 liters of developer working solution, which seems a tad extravagant for one negative. As far as the tube goes, it looks like 4" nominal PVC conduit would work, although I've not tried to source it yet nor have determined a price.

And one more question: WRT the last sentence of the quote above, what sort of lighting conditions benefit from this method of film processing?

Thank you again for sharing your findings Steve!

Yes Will, you've got the description / sequence correct. Sandy King has said you can use the developer a second time, I choose not to keep this as absolutely consistent as possible.

Even at 4 liters, the amount of Cat would only be approx 30 A to 20 B per sheet. Lighting conditions in both directions, compress large amounts of contrast as well as expand very little contrast. I have developer dilutions / schemes from N - 6 to N + 5

Cheers

[Tin Can]

Well, as long as we are on 7x17, I am setting up N2 burst system for 8x10 tanks and may consider making or buying custom 7x17 tanks for N2 burst.

My system is not yet built, but I want to ask a question. I am 75% ready.

Does anybody have an opinion on vertical vs horizontal tanks for panoramic films such as 7x17 using N2 burst?

Film hangers can be made or adapted from medical equipment and I believe they use vertical tanks for all X-Ray sizes.

I might add, I have an aversion to tubes as my fingers cannot grasp the film.