Vertical tank for stand developing 8x10?

[Mark Sawyer]

As background, I've been stand developing 8x10 film horizontally in a tray in HC-110 for many years with excellent results. However, I'm finding the newer Arista film offerings (especially the new 400 speed 8x10) respond very poorly to my old techniques, (extremely large grain, development artifacts, etc.).

So I'm considering moving to a pyro developer, still with the stand technique. I've read that film must remain vertical during pyro stand development to avoid, and was wondering what tank (or other option) people are using for the development phase?

Thanks muchly!

[cdholden]

I can't speak to the compatibility between pyro developers and stainless steel, but if you're sticking with HC-110, I've got a set of tanks for vertical use if you're interested.
Both 1 gallon and 3.5 gallon plus hangers.

[Mark Sawyer]

Hi, Chris!

I'm hoping someone has a hanger-less option that uses a bit less developer, maybe a quart at a time. I may have to make my own out of plexiglass, but I'm hoping there's a good ready-made option.

[BetterSense]

Could you share your stand developing technique?

[cdholden]

Hi, Chris!

I'm hoping someone has a hanger-less option that uses a bit less developer, maybe a quart at a time. I may have to make my own out of plexiglass, but I'm hoping there's a good ready-made option.

Wouldn't "hanger-less" mean that the film will be touching a side of the tank at some point in time? That could yield unwanted results due to uneven development.
I could be wrong, but just sharing a thought. I like the hangers, but I prefer trays. I use Rodinal or HC-110, so no problems with stand development yet. I don't have a dedicated darkroom, so stacking trays and moving between bathrooms is much easier than hauling tanks between my first and second floor options.
Even if you make a thinner tank to minimize fluid volume, I would recommend adding a wider base to each, or a stand to hold all of them together, for stability. My gallon tanks aren't near as stable as the 3.5 gallon tanks... even empty.

[EdWorkman]

Someday I'll have an answer
Back when the Xray thing started I struggled with scratches
Jim Fitzgerald uses hangers and early-on contributed toward oddsize hangers for ULF.
I found a way to make hangers from window screen extruded aluminum frame stock
BUT
Questions that remain are - can I load them without putting hamfistprints all over.
The framestock is quite wide compared to standard hangers, so i am sure that traditional agitation will create so much turbulence as to create more than obvious development issues.
Now we get to Extreme Minimal Agitation as described by Sandy King and discussed.
I made tall vertical thin [minimum chemical volume] long tanks for 7x17, my plan that i haven't tested is:
Drop the hangers in and slosh them around well for a short time;
Let them stand for say 30 minutes;
Pull them out, turn over, slosh around;
Stand for the remaining time, upside down.
I'm hoping the initial and midpoint agitations will not result in swirlies and the inversion will even out any "bromide drag".
Not much real help I realize, but I hope it's encouragement at least.

[jp]

If you build something for 8x10 from plastic it could have the slots for film sheets like the 4x5 hp combiplan has. The film doesn't warp and touch things because there is a slight arc to it so it holds its shape.

I just developed some fomapan 100 (which there is a corresponding arista product for) 8x10 in a tray in pyrocat-hd with no artifacts or uneven development. I put 1L of chemical in a 9x11ish patterson tray. That said, I'm not so good at shuffling and would rather not have to be putting hands in the chemicals and don't like gloves, and the amount of time an upsized combiplan tank would save me over one-at-a-time tray developing, I'd gladly waste a little extra developer.

[Lachlan 717]

What about a BTZS 8x10 tube used in reverse (in other words, fill the tube and then put on the empty cap)?

[vinny]

I made skinny tanks out of 1/4"abs. I used pmk and stainless hangers. 1000ml tanks are about an inch wide and hold two hangers comfortably. That's not much pmk at all when u look at how long the bottles will last you. I also made tanks to hold 6 hangers to speed things up. Not sure how to do it w/o hangers.

[mikew]

Hi Mark,

Unfortunately, processing 8x10 film with long periods of "stand" is inherently problematic no matter what developer or process you choose. I made the jump from Rodinal and HC-110 to Pyrocat-P about 5 months ago and after 200+ sheets of film, I still haven't found a processing method that when using minimal, extreme minimal, semi or stand cycles produces even development of large areas of even tonality (to within +/- log .03). And I should qualify that by saying that my tests are done by making a Zone VII exposure of an evenly illuminated surface (within 1/10 stop). So I have had success with subjects without such even tonality.

From my experience, your best bet is to use some version of tube development. I tried all sorts of tank/hanger techniques and all my results were mottled or had surge marks. Hangers are really hard to use with vigorous agitation.

Beyond tanks designed for roll film, there's nothing prefabricated - to my knowledge - available except for real BTZS tubes from the View Camera store. Those tubes are great for traditional developers but I've had problems with the 8x10 tubes and Pyrocat; they have ridges inside which can leave uneven staining marks on the back of the film. So, with the help of some great people on here, I fabricated my own tubes out of 3" ID ABS tube where agitation could be done by either rolling on a table, rolling a bath, inversions or a combo of both. I still haven't managed to perfect minimal to stand-type agitation, but I have managed to use the tubes for Divided Pyrocat development. The results are similar to what you'd get with minimal agitation but you will use more chemistry. (I'd personally rather use more chemistry to get the results I want) I print on VC paper and I don't do any scanning so I actually use Divided Pyrocat to develop to a specific CI as you would with a normal working dilution. But if your work involves scanning, Divided development is an even better technique. And there's tons of info on Divided development around here and elsewhere.

Another point is that if you're looking for the same or better tonal separation and accutance that you had with HC-110, I would imagine that you wouldn't have to use stand development with Pyrocat (or another pyro developer) to get it. You may get better results without having take it that far. Just a thought.

If you need any info on making tubes let me know.

Best of luck!

Mikew