Maxwell Photo-Mural tanks

Does anyone remember or, even better, have actual work experience with

the Maxwell Photo-Mural Tank? This was a processing drum from the late

seventies to sometime in the eighties, in which purportedly you could

process a large (30x40 or, in the larger one, 40x60) mural-size print.

They were small in diameter and supposedly you had to roll the paper

in between a sort of "springy" netting material, which was supposed to

keep the emulsion side form sticking to the successive base side of

the paper when rolled up somewhat tightly. The processing solutions

would seep through the netting material and soak the emulsion solidly,

never preventing any tiny part of the emulsion from being reached; you

had to invert the long thin drum or tank continually for the duration

of each process and empty from the bottom and then fill in the next

solution from the other side. I remember reading a photo magazine's

review of this item but don't remember which one it was nor the month

and year. I do, however, have an image of an ad from Petersen's

Photographic, mid-1979, which I hope to be able to upload for you to see.

 

If anyone has any information on this, to me, fascinating darkroom

item, please post it or write to me.

 

Thanks.

 

Sergio Reyes<div></div>

Two replies:

 

1) Roller transport processors are available up to 84 inches wide; and you'll see at least a 52" wide processor at any place with a 50" Chromira or Lambda printer;

 

2) You can use 12" diameter plastic drain pipe and horizontally roll it on a roller base, like a Unicolor drum.

I vaguely recall that it was literally a piece of hardware store PVC drain pipe with plastic chickenwire "netting". You can probably buy everything for $20 at Home Depot. Not sure about that netting though...bubble wrap might be better.

In response to:

john kelly Photo.net Patron Prolific Poster, feb 09, 2006; 04:04 p.m.

I vaguely recall that it was literally a piece of hardware store PVC drain pipe with plastic chickenwire "netting". You can probably buy everything for $20 at Home Depot. Not sure about that netting though...bubble wrap might be better.

<p>--------------------------------------------------

<p>Hi, thanks for that input. However, I kind of think it must have been of a thinner gauge than regular PVC as that would have made it too heavy what with the solution and all. Also, you're on the right track about the bubble wrap (in that it has to be a "springy" material, i.e., that maintains a spacing of maybe 1/4 inch between successive layers of the photo paper). But it can't be literally bubble wrap as you can plainly see that it would stick to the emulsion and make a huge number of splotches where the developer, etc, didn't reach the emulsion in a regular pattern. No, it must have been a kind of very thin netting material that had a "cellular" structure. That is, think of it as a kind of honeycomb of netting, but the material must have been made of very thin strands of plastic that somehow maintained their shape, so that all of the solutions flowed through and reached all of the emulsion very regularly. That's why I think it was a very fascinating piece (IF it worked as advertised, that is). Anyone else has some definite idea of what magazine did the review? I'm beginning to get obsessed by this...

 

Thanks.

 

Sergio

I know this thread is old bought one when they came out Worked great. Only problem later is over time the plastic mesh turned more into dust. As many things do over time The caps were a soft plastic the tube was clear not PVC