fred aspen

Received this PM from Lowell Huff, apparently a principal at Clayton:

 

"Paterson asked if i would produce their formulas, they did not want to pay the price for us to make it. We feel as do others that this is a much better developer and a better value."

 

Looks like Paterson Darkroom is 'fini.'

Clear but with frame markers would indicate a camera/shutter problem.

 

Clear but with no frame markers would indicate a developer failure.

 

Just my .02,

 

Ron

Google doesn't have any current information, all I was able to discover on their website was Paterson's announcement that the products have been 'Discontinued.'

Anyone have any current information on Paterson's situation and the dropping of

the darkroom product lines? I am especially fond of Acutol and wonder if the

lines might get bought by another firm similar to Agfa.

 

Anybody?

 

Thanks!

 

Ron

Thanks for all the good advice. Checked my Weston dial against my Process thermometer and found it was reading about 1.5 deg. low which would account for the hot negs now that I have gone to a tank with an air bell. Apparently a full stainless tank with poor agitation/flow was offsetting the thermometer error.

 

Always somethin'....

Thanks, all, for the helpful responses. Ran another roll today with a plastic tank that has an air space to get more flow and breakup.

 

Worked so well that I think I will have to back down on the number of inversions as the sky was a tad hot. There was a significant change in the results with all the mods so have to tweak the workflow a bit.

 

Again, thanks to all!

 

Ron

Pete,

 

Was an overcast day and light meter said the intensity was quite stable. However, I think you might have it with the air pocket. Unthinking, I was filling to the neck of the tank leaving no air trapped in the upper part of the tank.

 

Your mixing analogies are right on the money. It makes perfect sense what happened.

 

And I was just reading about Jobo tanks and the cautions about not underfilling nor overfilling.... Duh!

 

Thanks!

One other thought/question:

 

Kodak (and others) suggest that dev times less than 5 min. lead to uneven development.

 

I understood this to mean mottled development within the frame rather than frame to frame variations. I am now thinking it means both.

 

Comments, anyone?

After pondering the problem somewhat and if uniform density is the goal, one could certainly make a case for some or possibly all of the following for this film/developer combination:

 

A) Only shoot 24 ex. rolls and develop on plastic reels which load from the outside not putting film at the extreme center;

 

B) Follow the Kodak method of agitation of 5 sec/30 instead the more commonly used 10 sec/60, especially with dev times of 5 min. or less;

 

C) Use the Hoy method of agitation:

 

(A 35mm technique which has, for me, provided the best results with the traditional spiral tank, was suggested by Bill Hoy of Bedford County, VA.

 

* Use a tank at least twice the size needed for the number of reels you plan to develop.

 

* Fill the extra space with empty reels, placing the film at the bottom of the tank.

 

* Pour in just enough developer to cover the film, then simply invert the tank at the specified interval, draining the developer completely from the film.

 

* After five seconds, reinvert the tank, reimmersing the film.);

 

D) Not use 'blocky center core' Kindermann SS reels with 36 ex. rolls which restricts agitation/flow at the extreme center of the reel. (Kindermann has been my personal preference but uses a phenolic center which has some mass as opposed to open centers found on Honeywell Nikor reels.)

 

E) As Lex suggested, use developers with longer developing times for the film/developer combination.

 

Note: I am using the inversion/twist/rotate method of agitation that was suggested in George Todd's book, Making Twenty Photographs.

 

Just some added thoughts,

 

Ron

Hello All,

 

Doing some scans on Scan Dual IV in manual exposure mode on a roll of Neopan

400/ISO 400/5 min. HC-110-B/10 sec each minute-3 twisting, rotating

inversions/68 degrees and noticed some obvious, gradually increasing from frame

1 to 6, density changes from the first exposure (at the center of the SS tank

reel) to the sixth exposure. (Leica RE/Summ 50mm/F6.3 @ 1/500 manual exposure,

entire roll.) Exposures seemed to exhibit very little frame to frame differences

from frame 6 onward.

 

I would expect a slightly thinner neg from those right at the center of the reel

because of reduced agitation/flow but not (est.) 2/3 to 1 stop difference. Do

not have access to a densitometer to confirm but the scanner in manual exposure

mode can see very small differences in density.

 

Possibly could be because of the short development time for the HC-110? I may

try dilution H next go around. I have been using Xtol undiluted and haven't seen

obvious differences with that developer.

 

Possible differences in developer activity between 110 and Xol?

 

Curious what might be causing this anomaly. Not a problem as I can easily

correct the exposure but want to try and eliminate the variables.

 

I welcome all comments and suggestions.

 

Thanks!

Agree with Evan, you have a camera/exposure problem. With numbers on the edges you are developing properly. Check your camera's operation.

 

Ron

Actually, I recently traveled this same road but I have subsequently found that Conrad Hoffman's advice is sound.

 

When I was in school and had unlimited access to a densitometer I had to post the fb + fog and highlight densities on all work submitted. Once the personal film speed was calibrated and workflow was determined, the numbers were very similar from submission to submission and could be predicted with some regularity.

 

I think you'll find once you have a densitometer and take a few readings that you will gradually outgrow it and it will someday see light on eBay.

 

Just my .02,

 

Ron

Had the same problem with a 221xxx series and spent a few minutes exercising the switch back and forth. After 50 or excursions it was operating normally but it needs a reminder session fairly regularly to keep it operating properly. I would guess it is a poorly designed switch or it is getting some exposure to the elements and oxidizing the contacts. A common problem from my readings.

 

R.

It looks like a depth of field issue to me. With focus on the daughter up close the mom is going to be soft unless you choose a smaller f/stop, i.e., 16 or 22 but then you will be getting softness from the diffraction limit.

I just had a recent experience with short dated film (which was rectified) and the best advice given was to order by phone and ask for the date of the stock to be shipped or specifically request the newest stock on hand. I ordered over the internet and got what I didn't expect.

UPDATE!

 

Received a telephone call from the Purchasing Manager at Freestyle who advised me there was a system glitch that had film actually dated 11/06 in the computer system as 11/08. Their software is designed to catch shipments of short dated film and prevent this type of problem but failed in this case for reasons yet to be determined.

 

Bottom line: Fresh roll will be coming dated 11/08.

 

Freestyle is working very hard to dispell their early image during the 70's and 80's as a fogged paper and short dated film house. They want to emerge as a respected house carrying traditional film/wet darkroom products.

 

All's well that ends well. They did the right thing. Kudos to Mr. Joseph.

Thanks for your input, Jeff, I will do that in the future.

 

I have dealt with B&H for 30+ years and never have received anything less than a year out. Of course, they do a land office business in photo goods and have fast inventory turns.

 

Live and learn, and trust no one!

Ordered a 100' roll of Ilford FP4+ from Freestyle Photo and received it today

with an expiration date of 11/06, a little over 60 days from now.

 

They charged me full fare for the roll!

 

I emailed my disgust but no response.

 

Beware!

Managed to find the mfr. (BKAPhoto) who offered to replace the entire unit at no charge!

 

Great customer service!

 

Ron

Does anyone have the address/website/email address of the manufacturer of the

Lloyd bulk film loader?

 

I have a warped side plate and need to replace it. Hopefully it will be less

expensive than the $44 for a new one.

 

Thanks!

 

Ron

There might also be some grit/grime lodged in the drive shaft guide.

 

I would be inclined, if it were my problem, to use the smallest drop of isopropyl alcohol on a toothpick and apply it to the drive shaft and immediately exercise it.

 

Good luck!

 

Ron

Don't know if this will help but had the same problem with F100. Turns out the M-S-C autofocus.manual switch (looks like the N90 has the same switch lower right hand next to the lens) appeared to be in the "S" mode but was half way between M-S. When in the "M" mode, the autofocus drive shaft is retracted. When half way, it makes intermittent contact.

 

HTH,

 

Ron

Okay, here's the deal!

 

The Bogen adapter uses the 1.55V silver cells and they read right up against the high edge of the battery test marker on the scale. As the batteries slowly discharge, the meter becomes more and more accurate. Upon initial installation of the batteries, the meter will read about 1/2 stop high (at least on my unit).

 

The Wein zinc-air batteries take about 15 minutes to come up to proper voltage after taking off the air seal. They initially indicated at the middle of the battery test marker and they finally came to rest very near the top end of the test marker. Meter readings are a tad high, about 1/3 stop, but I expect that will drop down after some usage.

 

Summary: With my particular unit, when the batteries are new, I will get a slight underexposure error. In the middle of the battery life I have a very accurate meter. And, to extrapolate, I expect there will be a slight overexposure error using the silver oxide replacement in the Bogen adapter but shouldn't have that error with the air cell since they have a very stable output throughout their lifetime. The silver cells do have a slight decay ramp to their output over their life cycle.

 

That's all I know.

 

Thanks to all who contributed,

 

Ron

Thanks, David, I am beginning to suspect a battery adapter problem.

 

My dial computer reads the same as yours for sunny 16 so apparently no dial changes have taken place other than enlarging the window from 7 stops to 9 stops and adding the gray scale sticky label.

 

I tested against a Luna Pro Digital and the old model reads about 2/3 to 1 stop higher (underexposure)from the darkest closet on the low range to outside on the high scale which is presently foggy instead of sunny.

 

Bottom line: either a bad adapter or the unit needs to be shipped to Bogen for calibration. If the Wein cells fix the problem, back to Bogen for a new adapter.

 

Thanks, everyone, for your help!

Well, Paul RON, it looks like your numbers are about the same as mine on the Luna Pro meter. I assume your "regular 625's are the alkaline variety and would account for the higher readings.

 

I have ordered some Wein zinc-air cells to try. It could be that the adapter is faulty and not dropping the voltage down to the recommended 2.7 volts. I measured the internal resistance and it varied somewhat, which makes me suspicious.

 

I will report back once the cells arrive and are tested.

 

Ron