film canisters

How do you pop the top off of the all metal ones? that heavy duty fit makes me believe bulk loading is superior just for that misery.

had one that the leader got sucked into it, couldnt get it out. Had to pry the crap out of it in order to get the film out. had to rip open the lips in order to get a chance at getting the cap off. lost a few frames from that i think but experience.

First two rolls developed, they be drying now, but of course the important roll is the one that had the damage. i believe from being on top and not getting the volume of developer at the instant start of things.

guess i merely need to prefill the developing tank first

How do you pop the top off of the all metal ones? that heavy duty fit makes me believe bulk loading is superior just for that misery.

 

With a film cassette opening tool, or, failing that, a bottle opener.

Sometimes they can be awkward to do in the dark and need multiple tries, but normally they pop right off.

Tip: lay everything out on your bench before you begin and have a light tight box to hand to put the film in in case something goes wrong, you don't want to be fumbling around in the dark.

I wouldn't suggest pre-filling the tank, sounds like you didn't use enough developer.

0028 and 0036 is pretty much the typical one of the role showing the white streak on the bottom, or what was the top during development. Fomapan 100

0058 is typical of what i got with the arista edu ultra 100

developing at home with the cinestill monobath wasnt too bad, a learning curve to it. but the arista can is the one i had to rip apart. Not fun at all. and i did try a regular bottle lid puller but to thin and tight to get a grip.

What do the edge markings look like on the bottom of the frames?

Probably a development issue (not enough chemistry), but the fault is straight enough that it could also be a shutter problem, assuming you were using a camera with a vertically running shutter.

The (I assume) reversal processing is messing with my head a bit when it comes to what should look 'normal'.

i did try a regular bottle lid puller but to thin and tight to get a grip.

Victorinox 'Swiss Army Knife's did the job for me.

had one that the leader got sucked into it, couldnt get it out. Had to pry the crap out of it in order to get the film out.

'Ripping' open the cassette should be normal practise. They're not meant to be re-useable these days, and pulling the film back through the felt light trap can cause scratches.

Therefore best practise is to open the cassette and remove the spool. A simple beer-cap type bottle opener can be used for the job, provided it has a sharp enough edge to grip on the thin cassette lid material.

I definitely don't recommend pre-filling the tank to pop the spiral into. Not inside a changing bag at least.

cinestill monobath

Urrrrgh! Shudder!

The (I assume) reversal processing is messing with my head a bit...

A monobath is essentially just a mix of developer and fixer Steve. It gives a normal negative... after a fashion.

Very uneconomical in use and allowing no control over the development stage at all.

its different,,,, it works after a fashion. but i think we can agree its more reliable then other concoctions like using coffee and beer and those that have used urine to develop film

smells better too

A monobath is essentially just a mix of developer and fixer Steve. It gives a normal negative... after a fashion.

Very uneconomical in use and allowing no control over the development stage at all.

Thanks, I think it was the 'Cine' part of it that got me confused, I tend to associate them with reversal for some reason.

So, to repeat my previous question, how do the edge markings look? Camera problem or development problem?

How do you pop the top off of the all metal ones? that heavy duty fit makes me believe bulk loading is superior just for that misery.

/QUOTE]

 

Use a 'church key' - a bottle opener - to remove the end cap from the end. It's easier to remove the cap from the end that the spool does NOT protrude through.

 

In the 'good old days', cassettes were made with removable ends. Unfortunately, too many photographers complained that if they dropped the cassette, the end would just pop off all by itself, so the manufacturers started crimping the caps onto the ends. Ilford was the last manufacturer to adopt that procedure, so it was possible to reuse Ilford cassettes with bulk loaders.

So, to repeat my previous question, how do the edge markings look?

If the monobath didn't reach the edge of the film, then it'll still look like undeveloped and unfixed film - i.e. grey and fairly opaque - which would explain why it appears pale on the positive scans.

but i think we can agree its more reliable then other concoctions...

Possibly. But you still have to order and buy it from a photo-supply source. So why not buy a proper developer and separate fixer from the same supplier?

"Its different" - is that any good reason to use it?

In fact it's so 'different' that I can show you a book published in 1940 that lists a couple of formulae for monobath developers. And I'm pretty sure they were around well before that time.

Now I wonder why they never caught on? Could it be because they give inferior results?

If the goal is cheap and easy, my personal choice would be a one-shot Rodinal dilution.

In fact, that was my personal choice for years, I also happened to like the way it looked, which was far more important.

Never had any issues and a bottle lasts a very, very long time.

A couple of points. I was usually able to open the cassette by banging the extended end down on s hard solid surface. That failing, the beercan opener did the trick. I eventually switched to reloadable cassettes whre one end screws off. When I use commercial rolls I try to not rewind the film all the way back into the cartrige, or if I do, I use a leader retriever to get it out.

As to developers...I'd strongly encourage you to use a simple to use standard "good old" one, D-76 if you want a powder, or a bottle of Rodinal for a lifetime supply of one shot solutions. Nail the dilutions, times and temps and then experiment if you want. Too many folks wander off into the weeds before they have a compass to rely on.

well in the kodak paperwork for d76 it says put the solution into the developing tank, THEN put the film reels in.

the stop bath and fixer IS something id like to shimmy away from as i get going. Less parts of the process to help me figure things out.

whats worse is i realized that i shot my arista edu 200 iso film as iso 200, but the film itself is marked as ultra 100 iso.... lovely people putting the wrong stuff in the film canister...

 

the stop bath and fixer IS something id like to shimmy away from as i get going. Less parts of the process to help me figure things out.

Problem is, you've moved from a process that is relatively forgiving with regard to temperature, time and agitation, but has a few more steps, to a process that appears to be rather sensitive to all three of those factors ( I did some research yesterday).

Whilst time, temperature and agitation are all important in conventional development, 30 seconds more or less isn't going to result in total disaster (assuming dilutions that give a time of something like 8-10 minutes), nor will the temperature being a bit off or a few extra inversions.

Hence the advice to start with something known to be easy and forgiving. We're not saying use D76, ID11 or Rodinal because they're our personal preference, we're suggesting them because they're well proven and the choice of photography schools for the last century or so.

I'd still like to know what the film edges looked like, but I'm resigned to the actual cause of the problem forever remaining a mystery...

in the kodak paperwork for d76 it says put the solution into the developing tank, THEN put the film reels in.

And I'd assume the majority of photographers, utilizing changing bag loaded daylight tanks, got bearable results too with that soup? - I used Ilford powders and Kodak's T-Max developer bottles; so no personal experience.

One of the big issues I've heard in the past for monobaths were for photojournalists working on site. In that situation, quality was not overly important since the results would be printed in halftone on newsprint, archival quality wasn't particularly important, and getting the results FAST was in many cases prized above all else. Digital made all of that moot, especially since a ~2mp DSLR was more than enough for the above and it was even faster than handling any chemistry.

These days, film is expensive. Developers like D76 are cheap and give repeatable results, and rapid fixers in my experience have quite a long life(a lot of reuses) before they no longer work adequately. I like playing with developers, especially if I'm trying them out on cheap or free expired film, but if I'm trying for quality results you'd best believe I'm going to use a known quality conventional developer.

well in the kodak paperwork for d76 it says put the solution into the developing tank, THEN put the film reels in.

 

the stop bath and fixer IS something id like to shimmy away from as i get going. Less parts of the process to help me figure things out.

 

whats worse is i realized that i shot my arista edu 200 iso film as iso 200, but the film itself is marked as ultra 100 iso.... lovely people putting the wrong stuff in the film canister...

Developing:

I don't think I've ever put developer in the tank before the film even with D76 and it didn't seem to hurt anything.

If you're happy with the results from the monobath then that's fine but the extra couple of steps in the normal process are relatively fool proof. The only real way to screw it up is to have bad fixer or not leave the film in the fixer long enough. The beauty of it though is that even after the film has dried you can re-fix it if something went wrong in the fixing step.

And I don't want to start an argument with this statement but you will likely still get good results even if you forget the stop both or just rinse with water between the developer and fixer. Plus, accidentally leaving your film in the stop bath too long won't hurt anything. You don't have to be very precise about it.

So there really isn't much more of a risk of screwing things up with the normal process. If you're worried about cost or just trying to avoid having to order/keep more photo chemicals than what you really need, - diluted white vinegar works great as a stop bath. And like I've said, some people use plain water though I'm not advocating that.

Ilford's explanation of common processing errors with example negatives

Opening Cassettes/Canisters:

A bottle opener isn't the perfect tool for the job and some are better than others, - but they will work. It might take a few attempts. Usually if you keep at it, you can pry an end off eventually.

A couple of things I noticed taking a closer look at the top two photos: There are actually several horizontal bands across the film. The line between the top two bands is thin and razor sharp. I don't know that that would be caused by too little developer in the tank.

Were these photos shot through a window? There appears to be some reflections/ghosting.

the ilford site was useful, however several different issues can be mistaken for each other... it all counts on wether or not the camera was properly exposing the film...

So, was it properly exposing the film?

I felt that the 'insufficient chemistry' example was perhaps a little misleading as the film edge markings should be less developed on that edge, though that could just be pe looking at it on a phone screen not seeing the difference.

Simply put, if the fault continues into the film edge area, it's a development/handling fault. If it remains within the image frame, it's a camera shutter problem.

And I don't want to start an argument with this statement but you will likely still get good results even if you forget the stop both or just rinse with water between the developer and fixer. Plus, accidentally leaving your film in the stop bath too long won't hurt anything. You don't have to be very precise about it.

I always use a stop bath with fiber based paper, and usually use one with resin coated. My big thing with FB is that when I started printing on it(having only used RC before) I found that the RC was hiding a lot of my "sloppiness", and started using Ilford's archival wash process almost to the letter to keep my prints from turning brown in a day or two. Since RC-and film-doesn't "soak up" chemistry the way FB can, you don't necessarily have to be as diligent about making sure you get as much left over chemistry as possible out. I also never used hypo clear until I started using FB either.

If I have some stop handy, I'll use it with film, but don't routinely use it.

Rapid fixers are acidic anyway, so they do act as a stop bath at the cost of sometimes depleting the fixer a bit early. If you're like me, you probably push your fixer beyond its reasonable limits anyway, so having it fail testing a bit sooner than it might otherwise isn't necessarily a bad thing.

I always use a stop bath with fiber based paper, and usually use one with resin coated. My big thing with FB is that when I started printing on it(having only used RC before) I found that the RC was hiding a lot of my "sloppiness", and started using Ilford's archival wash process almost to the letter to keep my prints from turning brown in a day or two. Since RC-and film-doesn't "soak up" chemistry the way FB can, you don't necessarily have to be as diligent about making sure you get as much left over chemistry as possible out. I also never used hypo clear until I started using FB either.

 

If I have some stop handy, I'll use it with film, but don't routinely use it.

 

Rapid fixers are acidic anyway, so they do act as a stop bath at the cost of sometimes depleting the fixer a bit early. If you're like me, you probably push your fixer beyond its reasonable limits anyway, so having it fail testing a bit sooner than it might otherwise isn't necessarily a bad thing.

Yeah, I'm sure what you've said is all true and if for any reason I happened to be out of vinegar I'd probably just use plain water. I'll leave it to more knowledgable people to argue over why to use a stop bath or why you don't need it. :)

I think it's fairly safe to say though that it's not absolutely essential when processing film.