8x10 film processing

[chaspics]

If you can find them, I've used Jobo, and Unicolor print drums and motor bases for years with excellent results. I don't even pre-rinse. Just reduce standard time by 15%.
Tray processing is an excellent option. Inexpensive and easy to practice. I don't recommend more than one sheet at a time.

[Michael Kadillak]

Yes, mechanical processes are preferred as long as the primary objective - tailored negative development can be attained. That is why I use gaseous burst (individual hangers can be pulled) and tray development (which is a human attempt at a mechanical process) with one significant caveat - the infrared monocle which is a game changer for development by inspection. I purchased a brand new CPP2 years ago and all of the tanks and used it twice once I experienced the negative density variability of one development time for all the film in the tank and that shut that process down rather quickly. Part of this justification was a function of needing to produce a negative to print on fixed paper grade Azo, but it does not stop there. Modern silver multi contrast printing papers (like Ilford) I contend have a bias for grades 3-4 producing more contract than the lower paper grades hence the need to ensure negatives are crafted specifically to these objectives. Why are they doing this? IMHO manufactures are formulating their photographic printing papers for the current analog economy trying to cast as wide a net of results satisfaction as possible. Yes, you can attain a "printable" negative with an enormous latitude of negative density and jump through various hoops doing it, but why not make the best negative possible given the costs of 8x10 sheet film (or for that matter any film these days)? I would also add tube reduced agitation development because you can adjust the individual development of the single sheet to the desired negative density.

My contention is that at the end of the day in order to optimize any process you need to own it from start to finish.

[Pere Casals]

an ATL

By now I control all components of the ATL 2500, it is a machine impressively well designed, but service can be a nightmare. Only there is a sensor that I don't understand: The arm has two 4-wire (instead 3 wire) Hall sensors that detect top and bottom positions, beyond "rotation detection" these are the single Hall sensors I'll interface as I removed the malta cross that has two: one for the zero point of the dumping nozzle and the other one for "nozze in place". Those Hall in the arm are a bit weird because they may also detect proximity or sense, lacking documentation I will substitue them by regullar Halls and I'll detect proximity by an additional way, so I can lower the arm speed before reaching the end point, if not the arm gets clogged when reaching the bottom position.

See here why this ATL was retired, the damaged gearing in the nozzle, moved by a Malta-Cross, that also distributes the air pressure to the right bottle:



I remove anything that may be prone to fail to get a reliable operation.

an ATL - thankfully rarely damaging anything other than their own film. Get a certified & calibrated thermometer too - even Jobo say not to rely purely on their own internal thermometer

The internal PT probe (in the circulation pump area) has a calibration trimmer in the same cable, you have to disassemble a lot to reach it, it's inside the black box that contains the rotation motor and the circulation pump motor... But I've removed the Temp control from my electronics, I've an independent thermostat for that with a new probe, my electronics places the bath heating in "Auto" mode when the water levels are reached, with additional safety measures. This is a critical subsystem because if heating starts without water then all plastics will be melted. That Thermostat has embedded PID so heating will be stable like in good magnetic stirrers, in that way I avoid programming a PID in my control.

Process will start when the extrenal thermostat signals OK and when first bottle Temperature probe reads a high enough temperature, if we fill the 1st bottle just before process start then chem can be too cold and process has to be delayed until temp is suitable.

If you do anything bigger than 4x5, my opinion is that the best use of a CPE is to convert it into something like the TBE-2 tempering bath...

We can do 50x60cm RA-4 with those paper drums, but we also have the 57 and the 810 experts, so we plan to do all with the ATL.

If you find that easier to do than by cutting process time, so be it. At the end of the day it achieves the same effect. Go too far however & it'll flatten the mids.

Let me reiterate, I've calibrated film with different agitations and when I use reduced agitation I know exactly what I do, to me it's an important tool.

Not quite - what you perceive as the 'midtone' isn't what the film perceives as such - where the grain is most apparent is where the film's characteristic curve

Of course, by changing exposure you place more grain in a zone or other in the scene... but it's for sure that TX/TXP peaks in grain near film toe, I've no doubt in that.

[neil poulsen]

There is a new product coming in 2 weeks from Stearman Press. It's the follow up to their highly successful sp-445 and is called the sp-810. Very easy to use and takes minimal chemistry. Also does 45x7 and maybe 4x5. I have one coming. It looks to be the best option for small volume.


Kent in SD

I would be more interested in the film holder that they use, than the tank. For one thing, it's a daylight system, and that introduces variability into the process.

As a result, I long ago decided to dip and dunk film in the dark. I do this with both medium format and 4x5 and obtain consistent results.

But 8x10 film is too large for the 4x5 process that I use. So, I've been experimenting with an 8x10 dip and dunk film holder sold by Calumet in their heyday. Used as manufactured, this device leaves surge marks, so I've customized it to reduce this effect. I would be interested in seeing the Steerman device and how effective it might be.

I bought and have been using one of the reduced developer tanks that Vinny sold. If interested, I could provide dimensions. While they might not get the professional quality tank that he fabricated, it would be easy enough to make their own 8x10 tank to any dimensions and volume that they needed.

[Two23]

I would be more interested in the film holder that they use, than the tank. For one thing, it's a daylight system, and that introduces variability into the process.

As a result, I long ago decided to dip and dunk film in the dark. I do this with both medium format and 4x5 and obtain consistent results.

But 8x10 film is too large for the 4x5 process that I use. So, I've been experimenting with an 8x10 dip and dunk film holder sold by Calumet in their heyday. Used as manufactured, this device leaves surge marks, so I've customized it to reduce this effect. I would be interested in seeing the Steerman device and how effective it might be.

I bought and have been using one of the reduced developer tanks that Vinny sold. If interested, I could provide dimensions. While they might not get the professional quality tank that he fabricated, it would be easy enough to make their own 8x10 tank to any dimensions and volume that they needed.

They don't use film holders. This is a merger of tray processing and a covered tank. I should be getting one in the next week or two. Here's a video showing how it works. Looks great for someone like me who will only be doing a few sheets at a time and doesn't have a dark room. The fact it does all three formats I use (4x5, 5x7, 8x10) makes it very versatile. The SP-810 has been in development for two years now and looks pretty well engineered. I can load this in my bathroom and use it in my kitchen. Will also do Land dry plates easily. I wouldn't write it off so quickly--it looks good. I saw one at Jason Lane's house and was impressed. Let's see how it works.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Wdz...ature=youtu.be


Kent in SD

[interneg]

Only there is a sensor that I don't understand: The arm has two 4-wire (instead 3 wire) Hall sensors that detect top and bottom positions, beyond "rotation detection" these are the single Hall sensors I'll interface as I removed the malta cross that has two: one for the zero point of the dumping nozzle and the other one for "nozze in place". Those Hall in the arm are a bit weird because they may also detect proximity or sense, lacking documentation I will substitue them by regullar Halls and I'll detect proximity by an additional way, so I can lower the arm speed before reaching the end point, if not the arm gets clogged when reaching the bottom position.

I think it may be to do with the disposal of wash water/ waste chemistry - the reclaimed chemistry goes into one of the six tubes into the storage bottles and the waste/ rinses are drained between them.

[Pere Casals]

Those I mention with 4 wires detect elevation of the drum, top and bottom positions.

Those two for the disposal chem nozzle have 3 wires: One detecs the reference position, and the other detects each additional step in the a Malta cross.

[interneg]

Those I mention with 4 wires detect elevation of the drum, top and bottom positions.

Those two for the disposal chem nozzle have 3 wires: One detecs the reference position, and the other detects each additional step in the a Malta cross.

What you want is pp.34-35 of the service manual - OK, it's for ATL2 & 3, but the changes to make the ATL2x00 machines were not to do with these parts of the circuit design as far as I can tell.

[Drew Wiley]

Garsh. Ansel and Karsh and EW did things a certain way, so nothing is evidently better than the way they did things. Ben Franklin hunted turkeys with a blunderbuss, so, he bein' so smart n' all that, there must not be any better way to bag a turkey. Oddly, my wife went out the day after Thanksgiving and picked up another turkey half-price, even though neither of us even owns a blunderbuss. ... But my main objection to Jobos is that they're simply revved up too much, even at the lowest speed setting. Unless you use a high volume of solution, or tweak it, or displace the oxygen with something inert like argon, there are issues in my opinion. That's why my own drum processors have a much lower speed options (plus a much stronger gearmotor capable of handling bigger drums, which in turn are designed to fill and drain much faster than Jobo drums). For sheet film work, I prefer trays; but it really doesn't matter much in the end if your turkey still comes out tasty and fully cooked.

[dodphotography]

I tray developed for the first time in a while tonight. While the results look great ... jeez, I was freaking out.

1.) I used 8x10 flat bottom trays, per my mentor. I struggled feeling the film and being able to grap the bottom sheet cleanly. My mentor advised me that she doesn't like channeled trays, that the developer pools inside those channels and can cause uneven development.
2.) Upon transfering the film from prewash to developer, threw on some gloves super fast and instantly ripped them off. I couldn't feel the sheets at all, period. They were your standard medical blue nitrile gloves. So I'm not too happy about soupin bare handed in the long run of things, who knows... cancer maybe?


HELL OF A LOT FASTER than doing 1 at a time in my Patteron Orbital Tank. I processed 7, no uneveness or scratches. Since I have access to a darkroom at work, I'm able to shoot and process daily so I only needed to turn to trays after a long thanksgiving break / weekend which made a little backlog.