Convince Me To Develop On My Own The B&w Film

[mfogiel]

Since I've started with the rangefinders 9 months ago, I've tried to avoid developing film at home mainly due to lack of time:

- first I've tried the chromogenics, but I couldn't get happy with the tonality and sharpness, moreover periodically the negs would come from the lab full of dirt and scratches...
- so I've turned to the silver films and a "pro" lab, but every now and then I was getting uneven results, and finally, last week, i got back 6 rolls of MF film shot over Christmas, with air bubbles over all the frames, plus scratches and some extra dirt... you can take a look at the attachment below...

Therefore, unwillingly, I am starting to consider home development, and I would like to ask some advice from current practitioners.

My normal weekly volume amounts to 2-3 rolls of 35mm, while after a holiday I could come back with 40-50 rolls between 35mm and MF, so my problem is how to set it up in a way which would enable me an occasional 2 35mm roll development, but also a capacity to develop 8 35mm or 6 120 rolls in one go. Since I live in a place where the temperature can stay quite high in the summer, and since I remember the steel reels are the easiest to load anyway, my preference would go towards steel tanks and reels.

Here we come to the first problem: Kindermann is not producing the steel tanks anymore - is there an alternative producer with a sales operation in Europe for this?

Then - which B&W films today are the least prone to scratches and curling in the manual development process?

Finally, which developers are most effective for the trade off between the results and ease of storage and handling?

I'd appreciate any help - BTW how much time does it take you to get your "regular" load of film processed on average?

Thanks in advance.

Marek

 

[Sam R]

1. Used stainless tanks should be available almost free. 2 Developers are easy, even liquid forms are available. 3. Very easy to control temp of chemistry by running water over beaker. Drying film. Get a can of denatured alcohol; pour in medium size bowl, when you are finished with your chemistry, simply run film through bowl, saturate two fingers with alcohol and use fingers as they werre a squee- gee. The film with be dry in two minutes and ready to work with.

 

[Rhoyle]

Once you get used to it, you'll find that it's easy and you'll appreciate the fact that you're controlling the quality yourself.

 

[Uncle Bill]

Processing your own is easier than you think. I use the plastic AP/Patterson tanks with no trouble at all. I found doing my own developing got a much better negative than relying on a lab which gets expensive. Depending on your choice of chemical/film combination factor about a half hour on average per batch.

I treat it like a zen exercise and half the fun is experimenting with different film and developer combinations. These days it's HP5 and Tri-X processed in D-76. Other developers include Diafine and Rodinal depending on the situation.

 

[foto_fool]

Marek - I started developing my own again after similar disappointments from the pro lab. Long turnarounds (sometimes weeks). dust and fixer flakes on the negs, scans smaller than requested and out of order - etc.

I usually develop three rolls in a session over a couple of hours start to finish - much longer and the demands of the family turn hostile. First I get a gallon or two of water to temperature with ice and the microwave. Once it is at 20C it will stay there a long time. I use Patterson-type plastic reels and tanks - for me they have a very positive feel and are easier to load in a dark bag than the stainless reels. I just finish my rolls off with a PhotoFlo rinse and hang them from the ceiling in a low-dust area with weighted film clips. I leave them overnight and scan the next day.

If you want to avoid scratches and curling, sadly, you will have to avoid Adox, Efke, Foma, Forte, etc. - the "old-style" emulsions. In my hands the Ilford Delta and Kodak Tmax series seems to be the most scratch resistant.

I am using Ilford chemistry in the 500mL (Ilfosol S) and 1L (Ilfotec DDX) bottles. I go through it fast enough that I have not had any problem with loss of activity. I have heard that Rodinal is the most stable developer and keeps forever. I may start working with this for slower films, but would hesitate to use it on Delta 3200 for example.

Once you start you will at least only have yourself to blame for your disappointments, instead of paying for the privilege of having someone else screw up your film for you.

- John

 

[oscroft]

The quick answer is you should do it because it's easy and fun 😀

My normal weekly volume amounts to 2-3 rolls of 35mm, while after a holiday I could come back with 40-50 rolls between 35mm and MF

That's similar to me, and I manage it by using different sized tanks - I use a 2 or 3 roll tank for average processing loads, and I have an 8 roll and two 5 roll tanks for when I get back from my far-flung trips. (Tank sizes in terms of 35mm - they have adjustable spools and can take 120 film too).

since I remember the steel reels are the easiest to load anyway, my preference would go towards steel tanks and reels

Is that from personal experience, or from something you've read? The reason I ask is because opinion is divided and some people (like me) think Paterson plastic tanks are painlessly easy to load, and the spools are adjustable for different film sizes (and you can pick them up very cheaply on eBay - that's where I got all of mine).

Then - which B&W films today are the least prone to scratches and curling in the manual development process?

If you keep scratchy things way from the surface of them, no films will get scratched 🙄 It's really not hard to process a film without ever touching the surface (except at the ends). I've used quite a few different films, and I dry them hanging up with suitable weights and none of them curl much at all. And by filing them in proper sleeves held flat in folders, what little curl they have straight from processing soon gets flattened out.

Finally, which developers are most effective for the trade off between the results and ease of storage and handling?

There's no need for any trade off in results. HC-110 liquid concentrate provides excellent results - the only trade off is in price, because it costs more than powdered developers like D76.

BTW how much time does it take you to get your "regular" load of film processed on average?

It probably takes me about five minutes per film to load the spools (plus ten minutes getting the changing bag and tank together), and about an hour for processing a tankful (including getting the chemicals ready) and getting the films hanging up to dry.

Go on, have a go - you'll enjoy it.

 

[Pherdinand]

mfogiel:
Sorry to see the bad lab results. But i had similar experience. So i do my own now.

SS tank: have no idea. I also would like to have some, but could not find any at a reasonable price, so i just use Paterson Plastic.
Sam: "Used SS tanks should be available almost free." Where??

Curling: So far i have noticed that all the film types I used can curl, it depends mostly on how i dry them... ut none of them curled so bad it would be not bearable, sometime si keep them under some books for a few days and it helps.

Developer: I guess Diafine is definitely the best compromise between result quality and ease of use. This includes temperature variations which he doe snot care much about. In fact it must be the easiest developer to use, with VERY long shelf life. But it gives you no flexibility.

Good luck. And go for it.

 

[kuzano]

Cant find tanks....

Cant find tanks....

SS tank: have no idea. I also would like to have some, but could not find any at a reasonable price, so i just use Paterson Plastic.
Sam: "Used SS tanks should be available almost free." Where??

I Just did a search for developing tanks on eBay and there are a bunch of them for auction AND for sale. That's on the US eBay. I'm sure if I got more specific on the searches, I could find even more.

I also checked the closed auctions and they are selling dirt cheap compared to what I recall paying new.

Many were stainless steel. However, I would use the plastic tanks if using a changing bag. My only good experience with stainless occurred in a dark room with tabletop surface.

 

[nightfly]

It seems like the disappointments you have already had are all the reason you need. I can't imagine entrusting my film to someone else. I hate shooting color for just this reason.

Get some good quality stainless steel reels (Hewes reels are head and shoulders above everything else) , the are easier to load and more importantly easier to dry if you are doing multiple sessions back to back. If plastic is even a little bit wet it binds to the film and is a pain to load. You can wipe stainless steel dry with a paper towel and use them immediately.

I hand my film from a hanger on the shower curtain rod with clothes pins. Weight down the bottom and it doesn't curl.

You should be able to find used steel tanks on ebay or in your local classifieds. I bet you can buy them new from B and H or from their used department as well. They sell the Hewes reels as well, sometimes re-branded as King something.

Chemical wise, I like Rodinal. Film wise, Tri-X or Neopan 400. Never had any scratching or curling problems with either. To me this combo is black and white photography, but the nice thing is doing your own developing, you can find what suits you.

I would however find a film you like and settle on a developer and just shoot with those for a year. It's tempting to dick around with different combos, but difficult to develop consistency this way. It's the shots that matter, not the chemistry.

Have fun.

 

[mfogiel]

Thanks for the tips so far - I did develop my own film for a few years when I was young. and I remember the steel was faster to load ( I was shooting MF only then) it kept the temperature better and it tended to be less prone to keeping air bubbles and streaking, and then. if people buy Leicas, because they are pretty. why not buy the steel tanks, even if they are only as good as the plastic ones ? 🙂
Other problems I remember, related to the final rinsing the film and getting the excess water away - when you did it with a squeege, the scratches were guaranteed, and if you did it with the fingers, it dried with some marks frequently...
I think Roger Hicks wrote the tip on his website, to dry the film diagonally - I'd like to try that...
For the moment, I've found a supplier of steel tanks and reels in Milan, and have bought some Prescysol EF on the net - I've read some great comments about the staining developers and the ease of scanning of stained negatives in general, so I thought that if I have to sacrifice myself to developing the negs, at least it should be something highly sophisticated 🙂. Would you also recommend the use of distilled water for the development, and some kind of an anti sand filter on the water tap for washing the film?

 

[JoeV]

Regarding HC-110 liquid concentrate, it may seem more expensive than some other developer choices, but its remarkable keeping properties enables one to purchase a larger size container at a bit better discount on price per unit volume.

The Kodak standard directions are to mix with water to make a "stock" solution which is then diluted further for one's working solution. However, the water-diluted stock solution, though it keeps better than some other developers, has less longevity than simply using a medicine dropper and dispensing a measured amount of the 'syrup' concentrate straight into your working volume of distilled water. Used in this manner, HC-110, like Rodinol, will keep for years.

I would recommend buying the larger plastic jugs of distilled water and use distilled for all processing step, except the intial rinse, where you can use filtered tap water; just ensure the final rinse is in distilled.

As for film, I'm a fan of Ilford; though it's more expensive than some eastern European brands, you're paying for quality and Harman's commitment to the longevity of B/W film. Plus, you can buy 10-roll 'bricks' of film at a good price from internet order sites like Freestyle.

As for reels and tanks, many folks swear by stainless, but I've found Jobo plastic reels and tanks to work for me; they're easier (for me) to load - there's a learning curve with stainless in trying to curl the film just the right amount to get it to load properly (while working by feel alone) - just make sure the reels are well washed of any residual photo flo or other rinse aid, and completely dried, prior to reuse.

As for drying film quickly, I've found isopropyl alcohol (at least 90%, NOT to 72% drugstore stuff) diluted with a bit of DISTILLED water works well, as long as you have a completely dust free area to hang the reel until it's completely dried (meaning not just the back of the film, but the gelatin emulsion is completely dry internally; gelatin swells when wet, and you must allow sufficient time to completely dry before handling.) Also, make sure there are NO sources of combustion (pilot lights and other flames) when using open dishes of IPA.

I would also say that if you can dedicate an area for use as a simple darkroom, and acquire a 35mm enlarger, that the commitment to silver printing of your negatives can also give you more satisfaction in photography. I am a fan of Ilford warmtone RC Pearl finish paper; a bit pricey, but good results and quick processing verses the long rinse and drying times of fiber paper.

~Joe

 

[shadowfox]

I am pretty happy with C-41 black and white films, but one thing I miss, lovely grains from films like Fortepan, and there's no way I'm going to constantly overpay the *only* pro-lab in town just to do something that I could've done myself.

Just like everyone else, I suffer from lack of time, but I need to make the time.

 

[foto_fool]

Would you also recommend the use of distilled water for the development, and some kind of an anti sand filter on the water tap for washing the film?

For dilution and washing I use the water from the dedicated drinking tap I installed in the kitchen. It has an under-sink filter that pulls contaminants nearly as well as an RO unit, but only cost about US$40. What it doesn't do as much of that an RO unit does, is de-mineralize "hard" water. If your tap water is soft, one of these units can save you a bundle of cash compared to buying jugs of "distilled" - and you don't have to recycle the jugs.

- John

 

[MikeCassidy]

D-76 taste better than Scotch.

 

[oscroft]

Other problems I remember, related to the final rinsing the film and getting the excess water away - when you did it with a squeege, the scratches were guaranteed, and if you did it with the fingers, it dried with some marks frequently.

I'd say the obvious answer to that is don't use either a squeegee or your fingers - I just hang my films up straight from the final wetting agent rinse and they dry fine. (The tip to hang it diagonally sounds interesting, but I haven't had any reason to try it myself).