How do you process your 4x5 sheet film?

[unixadmin]

I've been reading through Using the View Camera. In the chapter on

processing your film, Simmons outlines the three main methods for

processing sheet film: open tanks and hangers, trays, or daylight

tanks (rotary or inversion). It looks like there are definite

advantages to using open tanks and hangers. I have a low end Jobo, so

I've been trying to decide if I'll try their sheet film kit with the

25xx series drums or the open tanks and hangers method.

 

I have two questions. First, which method do you use and why?

Second, if I decide to try the open tanks method, which specific tanks

and hangers come recommended?

[bruce watson]

It depends on what you value. Like most things, this, too, is a trade off. It also depends on what (and who) you believe. It also depends on what you are trying to accomplish.

 

The problem with using tanks and hangers is that you have to use lots of chemistry, so it precludes using developers as one-shots. You can replenish, or you can alter your times with every set of hangers, or... Also, hanging film edge-on in developer has it's own peculiarities. "Bromide drag" seems to effect larger sheets more than smaller sheets (or roll film on a reel and on edge). This means that you have to agitate regularly. Excellent for nitrogen burst, but not for stand development.

 

If you believe in the idea that agitation effects the formation of edge effects (most people believe this it seems) then you'll want to develop in trays so that you can do stand or semi-stand development.

 

If you want control and consistency, you'll want to develop with continuous agitation in a rotary system of some sort. Use developer one shot, rigid control of temperature, etc.

 

Me, I'm a heretic. I don't believe that agitation has much if anything to do with acutance. I've tested it to my satisfaction, and there isn't much if any published data to support either side. So I'm willing to give up the possibility of some edge effects for the certainty of more consistent processing. I use a Jobo, and the 3010 tank. Works beautifully for me. YMMV.

 

As to tanks, I'm told that Kodak made a great nitrogen burst hanger line. I know where one was (in pieces) just a couple of weeks ago. All the tanks, loads of hangers (4 up for 4x5, 5x7 and 8x10), covers, and most of the control system and valves, etc. If you want to talk to the shop that had it, email me off list and I'll give you their contact info.

[ahaohio]

I only do B&W at home.

 

I use an old Unicolor drum (holds 6 sheet of 4x5). Developer is HC110 dil B (single shot).

 

Works fine.

[ken_miller4]

I've used trays, tubes, and tanks/hangers, in that order. I dropped trays since I had a real problem with negative scratching. I don't think it was an issue with my technique, but rather with the sheet film itself. Occasionally, a sheet of film would have a very sharp protrusion on the corner. Any movement would damage the sheet below. In fact, the new Tri-X seems to exhibit sharp edges on almost every sheet of film. So, for me, trays=bad.

 

Tubes work fine, but it gets tiring rotating the tubes in the water bath. That, and I was limited to 4 tubes at a time. I could have done 6 with a larger bath, but it was too much like work to consider it. Very even development, however, and absolutely no negative damage.

 

I now use tanks and hangers. I can develop 8 sheets at a time, all to different times (based on development requirement) very easily - you just need to keep track of the times :-)

 

I tried using Kodak 4A hangers (for 4x5), but I had a real problem with surge marks along the edge where the clip flips over. I tried all sorts of different agitation techniques, but nothing I tried would get rid of the area of slighly increased density. I now use Carr hangers - there appear to be two kinds, ones with long u-shaped clips, and ones with short u-shaped clips. I had a similar increased density problem with the longer clips, but fixed it by both a) increasing agitation to increase the randomness of the flow, and b) bending the clip out away from the film ever so slightly. The hangers with the short clips have never exhibited this problem. I agitate for 15 seconds a minute (about 8 out-in movements), substantially more than is recommended. I found that a gentle out-tilt-in-out-tilt-in would almost certainly give me surge marks. Increase the agitation, and they go away.

 

While tanks do require a lot of volume (about 1700ml for 4x5), I just queue up a bunch of film to run through the tank. With a single batch of HC110 diluted 1:10.5 I can run through about 4 batches of film before any appreciable density change appears on the film.

 

The one problem I can see with the Jobo is that you must process all the film for the same time - unless you run through a lot of film, this could be very inefficient when you're trying to process N- and N+.

 

Hope that helps you out.

[lawrence_francis3]

I currently use both a JOBO and the BTZS tube system.

 

If I have several negatives requireing the same developer and same development time, I'll use the JOBO and do up to 6 sheets at a time. A real time saver.

 

But, if I have only one or two negs to process, I'll use the BTZS tubes. This allows me to: (1) develope different films at the same time (2) use different development chemistry in each tube, (3) process each negative for a different length of time and (4) optimize the usage of chemistry.

 

In fact I'm a big fan of the BTZS system (http://btzs.org/) in general. Yes it's a little complex, at least initially, but I don't have any surprises anymore when I get home.

[silent1]

I process black and white for my 9x12 cm plate camera in 1 1/2" ABS drain pipe, three tubes in my Nikor large diameter dual 220 stainless tank. That takes more than a liter of developer, though, and the tubes float some; I'm working on making single processing daylight fill tubes, still from ABS pipe.

 

Certainly easy handling, though; curl the sheet, emulsion in, and slip it into the end of the tube. Put the tube in the tank. Repeat for two more sheets, close tank. Produces fine negatives, and doesn't require adjusting times for rotary processing or excessive concern for aerial fog or developer oxidation.

[Troll]

The CRADLE for tray processing seems a good compromise for 4x5 or 5x7. www.summitek.com

[andrew_oneill]

I use BTZS tubes for both 4x5 and 8x10. You can use them for continuous agitation as they were designed for or for stand. Yes, stand. I had much better results doing stand development in the tubes than I ever did with stand development in a tray (the tubes are filled to the top with developer, capped and left standing up).

[peter_dendrinos1]

Any more I am strictly B&W. I use a Jobo 1500. I use it for the consistency. It produces very repeatable results that are very uniform. I bought this one used, and sent it to Jobo for some rework. It runs like new and cost me all in all about 1/3 new.

 

Pete

[eric rose]

I'm a tank and hanger man. Found some tubs at a dollar store that hold 1300 ml of chemicals. I can do 8 sheets at a time. Another benefit is that they come with air tight lids so the chemicals stay fresh between sessions.

 

Consistancy is not an issue and I like the fact that I can develop N-, N and N+ in the same tank at the same time. I just take the appropriate sheets out at the right time. Saves a lot of time.

 

As for hangers, I use whatever I can get cheap. I've never had a problem with surge marks. Must be my shaky hands.

[jco]

I use unicolor print drums for all my sheet film processing.

1-shot developers and constant agitation for the developer

and stop baths, intermittant for fixing. Works beautifully,

economical, and consistant. I use the simple drum rollers to

agitate and I built a circuit to control it intermittantly

for fixing.

JCO

[rellimkm]

Trays! Cheap and simple. I did 6 4x5s my first try and didn't scratch a negative. You just have to be careful. Oh, and here's a tip for timing yourself....I have an iPod and make playlists that are the length on my developing time. For instance, Voodoo (full version) by Godsmack is 9 min and 3 sec. long. Perfect for JandC 200 in R09 @ 1:40. Song ends and they go in the stop. By the time the next song is done they have been in the fix long enough to turn the lights on. Just find the right combo of songs.

[alec1]

I use a small rack holding 5 4x5 hangers in 4x5 open tanks, and process by nitrogen burst. Why? Consistency and convenience. With practice you can do the same via "dip & dunk" [see the Kodak large format book for instructions].

 

Larger tanks require too much chemistry, unless you're producing large numbers of negatives. Then, with 3 1/2 gal. tanks, and a #40 rack holding 12 4-up hangers, you can process 48 sheets in one pass!

[ken_lee11]

It seems to me that the ideal method would be something like BTZS tubes, but with light-tight openings, so that once loaded with film, the liquids could be changed in daylight.

 

Does such a thing exist ?

 

I got rid of a Jobo tank, because I found it troublesome to load, and I often process 12 at a time. Now I develop in a tray, but would love to get back into the daylight if possible.

[phillip_p._dimor]

I use a Unicolor roller too. Pretty cheap and plentiful on E*ay too.

You can even use certain Jobo drums on a Uniroller. I'm not sure which ones, but the larger tank that holds two 4x5 reels should work.

You could do a run of 24 sheets at a time..<br><br>

 

I don't use trays because i'm clumsy and I don't like to be in the dark for upwards of a half hour.<br>

I don't use hangers because they use a lot of chemistry. I do use hangers to dry my sheet film though.<br>

If I could afford a Jobo processor, I'd have one but instead opted for the Uniroller. Works fine for me.

[leslie_wall]

Read this post I did about a year or so ago. http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=0047o6. To answer the why. I find that I can control the dev. very well this way, plus once the negatives are in the baskets you don't touch them again so there is little chance of finger prints or scratches. I hope you find this interesting.

[steven nelson]

For TMAX 400 and XTOL: I started with the six sheet Jobo tank but found the edges were uneven. I moved to the Jobo Expert Drum 3010 with a cheap motorized base and have been very pleased with the results.

[doremus_scudder1]

Craig

 

I develop 4x5 sheet film, up to six sheets at a time, in 5x7 trays. Scratching is not usually a problem, although every now and then, I do scratch a neg. I shoot at least two exposures of everything, though, and have never "lost" a shot from processing scratches. The above posters are correct, trays take more practice and skill ("the simplest tools always require the most skill"). If you go to tray development you will have to practice with scrap sheets until you are confident and then keep "on the ball" while processing in order not to keep damage to a minimum.

 

Why go through all this? Tray developing has several advantages. First, there is evidence that tray developing, done correctly, results in superior evenness (see Strobl's "View Camera Technique"). Also, cost and size are low and portability is high. I can carry a couple of bottles and three 5x7 trays with me just about wherever I go and develop just about anywhere I can find dark. No other method allows such individual treatment of negatives. Set up time is minimum. Chemical use is also minimum (500ml for 6 sheets is more than adequate). Different films with multiple development times can be done at once (though one must keep on top of things) and there is a lot less "fiddling" as far as loading film into hangers or tubes is considered (which also can result in damage).

 

Disadvantages of rotary processing are: Continuous agitation which can cause uneven development (especially on the edges of the film)and the accompanying shorter development times which kill any compensating or edge effects that could be obtained with other agitation schemes. Loading problems such as films overlapping or sticking to the tube, etc.

 

BTW, edge effects are real and provable. They have nothing to do with accutance, rather are areas of more/less density between areas of widely-differing exposure. These are caused by developer exhaustion (controlled by an intermittant agitation scheme) and cannot be achieved with any kind of "continuous" agitation such as rotary processing. Edge effects give an "outlining" to isolated tones in the print that enhance the perception of sharpness and deliniation. I obtain visible edge effects and good evenness with a scheme that agitates once through the film stack every minute.

 

If you have a chance, get a few trays and give tray processing a try. If you are patient and not all thumbs, you will be surprised how easy it really is.

 

Regards,

[robert_meyer]

2 1/4 x 3 1/4, 3 1/4 x 4 1/4, 9x12cm, 4x5 Yankee Daylight Tank;

5x7, 6 1/2 x 8 1/2, 8x10 Kodak Tanks and film hangers;

11x14 Trays

[brian_ellis16]

Tray development has the advantage of being inexpensive. That's it's only advantage that I know of. OTOH, it has some significant disadvantages. Foremost among them are the fact that you have to stand in complete darkness for 10 or more minutes over open trays of chemisty and inhale the chemical fumes, which I found very distasteful whether actually toxic or not. You have to simultaneously shuffle several sheets of wet film while wearing gloves and also keep track of the order in which the film is stacked and the number of times the stack has been rotated in each of four positions. It's also slow since most people find it difficult to handle more than four to six sheets of film at a time. And of course no matter how good you get at it, in my experience there was always the occasional scratch on what otherwise was the best photograph I ever made.

 

The alternative I found and have been using for about 8 years is the BTZS tubes. They take up little space, are easy to use, everything is done in daylight once the tubes are loaded with film, are not overly expensive (actually are very inexpensive if you choose to make your own as many people have done), and seem to last a lifetime. Unlike Jobo and some other systems, you can vary the development times of particular negatives in a single run.

 

The only disadvntage I've found is when you have a large number of negatives to develop at one time. While in theory you could handle mayber a dozen tubes at once, in practice I've found that six is the most I'm comfortable with so if you typically process say 18 or more sheets in a single session you'd have to make at least three separate runs. Jobo and probably other systems allow you to process 10 negatives at a time so as long as all the negatives are to be devleoped for the same time you can do more negatives faster.

[w_t1]

i use a method similar to "the Cradle" mentioned earlier, but it's a lot cheaper than what they want...

 

take a 2" diameter +/- piece of PVC pipe, cut off 2 - 1" wide or so rings...cut each ring in half. You now have 4 C-shaped pieces of pvc pipe, sand the edges smooth, etc

 

glue those 4 pieces into an 8x10 tray, creating four quadrants in the tray...i think i used some kind of plumbers glue

 

i do 4 sheets at a time this way, they don't touch each other, you also need some cheap 1.5-2 gallon buckets to pour the chemicals into when each stage is finished, it all happens in one tray. I've been using this method since trying the jobo tube method which i had problems with.

 

tom in Seattle

[bob haight]

Actually, BTZS says the tubes are light tight after the development stage. I use them in the dark (when open) until fixed so I don't know. I have done tray development and the film for me scratches from the sharp corners. The way to avoid that is to cut the corners using some type of template as a guide, but, obviously delicate work in the dark.

[scott_walton2]

I like developing with my hangars because it lets me develop by inspection

easily. Never had a problem. The hangars I use are the Kodak single 4x5's. I

had a sheet metal shop make me tanks to hold up to 30 hangers but have

rarely done that many at a time. I have done the tray thing and didn't care for it

and did the yankee daylight tank and always got real bad results with test

sheets... surge marks no matter what type of agitation I did!

[pat_wilson1]

I use trays. At one point (very hectic project time) I did 20 sheets of film at once, 10 per tray, one per hand. Scratching is a serious problem only if you are careless. My problems were never with development but with washing. Development I was very careful, but somehow got less careful during washing. You can get a cut film washer to wash that film for 10 minutes or so by itself which makes life much easier. I have found, so far, trays to be easy, cheap, and very consistant.

[__jon__]

Craig,

 

>Me, I'm a heretic. I don't believe that agitation has much if anything to do with acutance.

 

I'm with Hogarth. I've never seen any difference with constant or intermittent agitation. I use my $15 Unidrum, which I originally read about here:

 

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/unicolor/

 

>Doremus Scudder , may 07, 2004; 05:02 a.m.

 

>Disadvantages of rotary processing are: Continuous agitation which can cause uneven development (especially on the edges of the film)and the accompanying shorter development times which kill any compensating or edge effects that could be obtained with other agitation schemes. Loading problems such as films overlapping or sticking to the tube, etc.

 

All I can say is that Doremus must have never used a rotary processor before--I have absolutely none of these problems. I get the most consistent negs I have seen out of my rotary--and no thank you, I don't like standing in the dark with trays of chemicals.

 

>BTW, edge effects are real and provable. They have nothing to do with accutance, rather are areas of more/less density between areas of widely-differing exposure. These are caused by developer exhaustion (controlled by an intermittant agitation scheme) and cannot be achieved with any kind of "continuous" agitation such as rotary processing. Edge effects give an "outlining" to isolated tones in the print that enhance the perception of sharpness and deliniation. I obtain visible edge effects and good evenness with a scheme that agitates once through the film stack every minute.

 

Phoeey. Yet another photographic myth perpetuated! Dr. Henry showed that agitation doesn't affect 'edge effects'--why is it that every one that propagates that myth never has any microscopic evidence to back it up?

 

I wouldn't ever give up my rotary for the few if any benefits of trays, and definately not for the negatives.