richard_urmonas

You should not presoak with modern films. Modern films contain agents to ensure the developer enters the film quickly and evenly. If you presoak, these agents are washed out, and you can get uneven development as a result. I know Ilford specifically warn about presoaking, not sure about the other brands.

I think I understand what is going on. Tri-X in Diafine has a high contrast in the shadows, and a significant shoulder which starts at a low level. The result of this is that a Zone V exposure (a middle tone) prints as a light grey, rather than a mid-grey. This is basically because the shoulder makes it closer to the pure white end of the scale, than a "normal" film / developer combination. To get a mid-grey it is necessary to place the object around the Zone 3 region. The easy way of doing this is to simply set the light meter for a faster speed (the 1200 to 1600 ASA that people claim). Now what the people doing this fail to understand is that this is not a film speed increase, because you lose around 2 full stops of shadow detail.

 

This loss of shadow detail is unacceptable for me, so I shall be looking at different developers, in the hope of getting good shadows, but with control of the highlights, with a shoulder much further up the scale.

Lex,

 

So reading between the lines of your reply, my measured speed using density 0.1 above fb+f could be valid. So there was no issue with development failing to give a speed increase (which is more or less what I expected).

 

I have not had time to plot the response curve for the Tri-X in Diafine combination, but eyeballing it, there seems to be a big shoulder starting in the mid tones (which is expected for a compensating developer). So your comparison of the different EIs suggests that the issue is really how your meter responds to the light conditions, rather than any "speed increase" of Diafine.

 

Anyway as you say it comes down to trying it for oneself.

I developed a test roll of Tri-X (400TX) in Diafine this weekend.

The speed I found for it is around EI400 to 500 (using density 0.1

above fb+f). There has been a lot of talk on this site about

the "big speed gain" of Tri-X in Diafine. So is there really a speed

gain ?

<p>I rechecked Jobo USA webiste, and yes the 6 sheets are only

a problem with the older 2509 reels (the non "n" version).

See:

</p>

 

<a href="http://www.jobo-usa.com/jq/jq9603.htm#A2963">http://www.jobo-usa.com/jq/jq9603.htm#A2963</a>

I agree with Steve. Photograhic Glycin (as opposed to non-photographic Glycine) has a short shelf life in dry form. Get it from Photgrapher's

Formulary. They claim to make it fresh every 2 weeks. Their prices

including shipping are quite reasonable.

With the Jobo reels you can only do 4 sheets per reel. They originally

said 6 sheets, but there were problems (I think it was some films

flexed too much and touched) so they ammended it to 4 sheets. Leave

the middle slot empty.

 

Secondly check the tank is completely level when on the roller.

There is very little fluid in the tank, and a slight incline

could be enough to stop the developer etc. reaching the film at

one end.

 

Finally 30 seconds in one direction sounds a bit long. The machine

only gives two revolutions in each direction at 75 rpm. Before

I had the machine, I would roll the tank up and down the edge of the

bench. Only 2-3 seconds in each direction. Results were good.

Ansel's book "The Negative" should give you details on how to fine tune

your development time. As a start, I would look at the development

times for similar speed and type of films and take an average.

This should place you near enough for fine tuning.

 

For storage the amber glass bottles are good. As soon as you have

mixed the chemicals pour them into the smaller size bottles, fill to

the brim and make sure the cap seals tightly. Usually smaller bottles

are better as they sit full for the longest time, and when

opened they are quickly used up.

It is fairly easy to re-roll 120. There are a few things to watch.

 

1) Do not unroll too much at once. Keep the two spools quite close

together, and keep the paper taught.

 

2) When you reach the end of the film (the leading edge in this case)

it is not taped. The important thing is to keep it held firmly against

the paper backing as it goes on the spool. Remember to keep the two

spools close together.

 

3) When you reach the taped end of the film you will probably have a

little slack in either the paper or film. Just gently peel the tape

away from the paper (leave it attached to the film). Now just roll

uop the remaining paper. The pressure from winding onto the spool

will tape it back in the correct position.

 

Lex.

 

You Rolleiflex is well overdue for a CLA. Rollei's are fairly tollerant of film irregularities. You probably have some gummed

up or dried out lubricants in the film metering mechanism.

What you are seeing is normal. Agfa films in Rodinal give

an incredibly dark purple. HP5+ in rodinal (from memory)

has almost no colour.

I have experimented with Beutler developer in a Jobo machine.

Results are good, but I have not had a chance to finalise my

tests. Sorry, I have not used either of the films you

mention, so cannot give times.

My understanding (which may be wrong) is that NaCl in the wash

helps to draw out any chemicals, hence improves speed of wash.

HCA style compounds on the other hand as well as drawing out

the chemicals, actually assist with breaking long chains of

fixer molecules into smaller pieces which can be removed more

easily.

 

Chemicals can have a finite life. This is due to reaction

with things like oxygen from the air, contaminants in the water

etc. Think about it. Sodium Sulphite is used as a preservative

in developers. To do so it must react with say oxygen more readily

than the developing agent, thus preventing the developing agent

from being degraded i.e. preserving it. Again this is my interpretation of what I have read, it may be incorrect.

This space is fairly typical for tanks designed to take both 35mm

and 120 reels. I have never worried about it. Just let the reels slide

around. I even have a theory that this additional motion improves aggitation.

Tonality

 

What we must remeber is that characteristic curves are only a

crude tool for trying to undestand what a film + developer

do. In particular it looks at how large areas of uniform exposure

look. In the real world the viewers impression of an image is based

on much more than how evenly spaced the greys are. We perceive

micro details. So things like accutance, micro contrast, grain etc.

all come into play. So we can take two developers with characteristic curves so similar they should be indistinguishable, yet we will see

a difference in prints made from two "identical" negatives developed

in these two developers. Tonality is the term we use to try to

explain this effect.

 

Years ago I went away from Rodinal, in search of lower grain etc.

My images were good but they still lacked something. When I tried

Rodinal again I was very pleased with the look of my images. Others

I showed them to ALL commented that they looked "better" or "nicer"

or "richer" than the previous batch of photos.

A common problem is too much pressure on the sides of the film. You

only need to curve it to get it started. Once you have done the first half a turn, your fingers should only be stopping the film from twisting. There should be almost no squeezing force on the film.

1. Jobo recommend 10 changes of water with 30 seconds rotation each

(note this is not 30 seconds in the drum, but 30 seonds rotation).

 

2. I am not sure citric is safe to use, from memory acetic is one of

only a few acids which do not cause the fixer to decompose. I would

just use a water rinse instead of a stop bath.

A decent lab will be able to handle film in holders. They

will return the holders to you. Once you have used up the

first box of film, you can then use it for storing exposed film.

The use of the term "contrast" with developers, is different from

contrast in a negative. From your perspective any decent developer

will give you a good negative. To explain the term in developers, it relates to the way the developing agents behave as the film develops.

As the silver develops there are various byproducts produced.

These byproducts affect the activity of the developing agents.

The highest concentration of these byproducts will be in the

densest part of the negative. If the developer slows down

due to these byproducts, then obvioiusly the speed of development

will be slower in the high density areas, than in the low density areas. This reduces the contrast in the highlights, and this

developer is classed as a low density developer. Conversely,

if the developer activity increases due to the byproducts, the rate

of development in the highlights will be faster than in the low

density areas. This is a high contrast developer.

Careful. Different developers behave differently with temperature

change. The Ilford chart is for MQ and PQ developers. If you

go outside the range of the Ilford chart, things can change rather

dramatically, as the super additive effect changes (much less effective

at low temperatures, various effects at high temperatures).

 

The safest path is to download a datasheet for the developer you

are using, and look at what the manufacturer suggests.

A two bath fix is only really needed if you are trying to get the maximum capacity out of your fixer. I prefer to use a single fix

bath, and only use the fixer for half of the rated capacity

i.e. only fix half the number of films or half of the amount of

paper the manufacturer states. You should be able to get the

fixer capacity either from the packet, or from the manufacturers

website.

It sounds that the film has not loaded properly. You should

practice much more with a dummy roll of film. When I learnt

to use stainless spirals, I would load the film 10 times

each day with my eyes shut, I did this for a couple of weeks (I actually wore out the first dummy roll of film). At this point

I think I had experienced every type of jam, misload etc. etc. possible. I have never had a problem with loading film in the

dark since doing that. You will develop a feel for when the

loading has gone wrong, then just unwind a bit and continue

loading.

Unless you are using a staining developer (e.g. pyro based) then

you should use an acid fixer. I researched this after reading

the "Film Developing Cookbook". Acid fixers prevent staining

etc. by removing unwanted developer products far more effectively

than alkaline fixers. I suspect this is why film manufacturers all

suggest acid fixers. As for washing, years ago I read research

which investigated rapid washing (for processing machines).

They found that it was possible to wash acid fixed film to archival

standards in just 15 seconds. I wish I could find where I had

read this. Anyway the Ilford washing method works, and is both

quick and water efficient.

Edward.

 

Just to clarify what other have said. When you mix the powder

you produce a stock solution. This will be the volume that

is written on the packet (usually 1 or 5 litres or in US gallons).

The stock solution is what you store, and depending on developer

this lasts for 2-12 months. Liquid developers (apart from HC110)

are already stock solutions and are stored in this form.

 

When you want to develop a film, you then mix your 1:1 (1 part

developer stock solution + 1 part water) or 1:4 or whatever ratio making only enough for the film(s) you are developing. The diluted stock solution does not keep well and so must be disposed after use.

Agfa claims 5 min in Rodinal 1+25 for EI of 50. For EI25

they give the same time, 15min at 1+100. I haven't done Pan F

but these times should be a reasonable start.

It depends what developing you are doing. The Jobo machines

are continuous aggitation so are not good for high accutance work.

Otherwise they are convenient as you can be tidying

up while the developing or fixing is happening. You will no doubt

come across comments about the Jobo machine being more consistent.

I think this is a matter of technique, it does not take much

to get consistent results with hand inversion. If you want to buy

one of these machines go second hand, they are dirt cheap as the pro's

seem to be getting rid of them and going digital.