Polaroid 55 clearing ideas

[anglophone1]

I have a stock of 12 boxes that I'm about to start using on a project, first trip is to Scotland, I'm in France and I've left my clearing tank in Ireland!
I've read several alternatives here, anyone got any ideas that will still hold good.
The project is field not studio based (environmental portraits) so portability is key.
I'm shooting a Razzle with 135 to keep it all lightweight so it's really an opportunity to find a compact portable but sturdy alternative to the bucket, I reckon to shoot no more than 10 per day and will have a base to return and wash properly.
I will not want to process later ( one obvious solution) as I wan to give each subject their print straight after the shoot.
Best ideas for this folks?
Thanks
Clive

[RawheaD]

Shooting FP-100C45 in the field, I've found the wax paper method to work quite well. Specifically:

(1) peel off print, give to subject
(2) wait as long as you can to allow emulsion side to dry
(3) cover emulsion side with kitchen wax paper
(4) store in a ziplock bag till you get back to base

[anglophone1]

Pola 55 clearing ideas anyone?

[Frank Petronio]

I didn't know that there was any Type 55 that was still good? Have you tested it recently?

Shoot one for the subject and one for the darkroom. Especially being old, you might need a stop more exposure for your negative versus a decent print. If you need confirmation that you got the shot, use digital ;-p Or better yet, get a second body with Fuji Instant in it for reliable prints. Even a cheap Instax type camera would suffice. Then process later. Why make it hard on yourself?

As far as clearing in the field, the bucket was pretty good for the bulk it was. You could put each film into it's own Rubbermaid tray but a dozen of them would take up a lot of room.

[sanchi heuser]

Clive,

Best would be to put polyester sheets (or any other plastic that will not react with the chemicals) on each side of the negative, the sandwich into a ziploc and ziploc into a plastic box.

The negative must not dry, later it can be and washed.
Just put it out peel the plastic sheets away and dip into a 18% natriumsulfite solution.

Some people propose a box with water and put the negatives in.
I think that method is not very good cause the negatives will move to much
in the box and scratch.

Cheers Andi

[anglophone1]

i've just ordered some lock&lock boxes that are the rigt size, jus need to find some polyester sheet.

Clive,

Best would be to put polyester sheets (or any other plastic that will not react with the chemicals) on each side of the negative, the sandwich into a ziploc and ziploc into a plastic box.

The negative must not dry, later it can be and washed.
Just put it out peel the plastic sheets away and dip into a 18% natriumsulfite solution.

Some people propose a box with water and put the negatives in.
I think that method is not very good cause the negatives will move to much
in the box and scratch.

Cheers Andi

[anglophone1]

Frank , bought a case back end of 2009, have kept it fridged,and been testing before shoots. last test this week at IS0 50, looked good.
As i said I've left my bucket at the other end of Europe and I'm flying up to Scotland to shoot next week so thought it might be good to find an alterantive, and more compact solution.
One of the resaons for using 55 on this is to be able to give sunject "their picture" too, if shooti FP100 in my 195 alongside, I might as well use ordinary BW film...........

I didn't know that there was any Type 55 that was still good? Have you tested it recently?

Shoot one for the subject and one for the darkroom. Especially being old, you might need a stop more exposure for your negative versus a decent print. If you need confirmation that you got the shot, use digital ;-p Or better yet, get a second body with Fuji Instant in it for reliable prints. Even a cheap Instax type camera would suffice. Then process later. Why make it hard on yourself?

As far as clearing in the field, the bucket was pretty good for the bulk it was. You could put each film into it's own Rubbermaid tray but a dozen of them would take up a lot of room.

[D. Bryant]

Frank , bought a case back end of 2009, have kept it fridged,and been testing before shoots. last test this week at IS0 50, looked good.
As i said I've left my bucket at the other end of Europe and I'm flying up to Scotland to shoot next week so thought it might be good to find an alterantive, and more compact solution.
One of the resaons for using 55 on this is to be able to give sunject "their picture" too, if shooti FP100 in my 195 alongside, I might as well use ordinary BW film...........

Back in the day when I was sort of addicted to Type 55 I started out storing the wet negatives in a plastic container with a top that sealed shut. Briefly as each negative needed to be preserved I would wrap the negative in a water dampened paper towel and stacked into the box. More convenient than carrying the official bucket made by Polaroid which I later used back in the darkroom to clear the goo, then followed up with proper washing.

FWIW, shooting at ISO 50 did not produce an optimal neg. Also don't for get to coat the prints with the applicator, otherwise they will oxidize and fade. Ansel Adams recommended that one technique for reducing printing density of the print was to leave then uncoated and let the print fade and then coat.

Good luck!

[Noel Peirce]

Pretest your film. Also shoot two exposures in the field. You'll probably find that an additional 1/2 to 1 stop more will give you a more printable negative (better shadow detail) than what you'd have with the best print negative. Give the subject their print and hold the other packet for development until back from the field. And like others have said, just hold your first neg. in a plastic air tight bag with wax paper or the equivalent sealed over the emulsion. The undeveloped back up neg. will be good insurance and probably the better negative technically.

[BrianShaw]

last test this week at IS0 50, looked good...

Which looked good, the neg or the print? Both are not generally good at the same time. The concept of both a pos + neg in the same exposure was always much better than the real product.