PaulN
Monkey
bennybo said:
I started off by twisting the spindle but always worried that I wasn't agitating enough. The back & forth motion didn't seem as thorough as a inverting the tank. Of note, I've noticed that I get a small amount of chemicals on my hand when I flip the tank. The seal isn't 100% on either the Samigon or Paterson tanks that I own. If you have small kids and are trying to keep the chemicals out of reach, be cautious when inverting, as you may spray some drops if you do 4 or 5 quick inversions.
-Paul
peterc
Heretic
Unless you need the prints from the C41 negs, ask for developing the filmstrip only. Most places (at least in my neck of the woods) will do one-hour or while-you-wait developing and give you the strip sleved for $2 to $5 (or a cup of coffee at the place I frequent).Fred said:
Peter
enochRoot
a chymist of some repute
great info, as i was getting ready to start developing film at home. one question is in regard to using the same developer on different films. someone mentioned diafine as being good for this. i have some neopan, some tri-x, and some t-max. would diafine work ok on all of those? could i just use one developing time, or would it be different for each film and/or each speed?
Fred
Feline Great
"Unless you need the prints from the C41 negs, ask for developing the filmstrip only."
Thanks for the suggestion peterc, I'll make some enquiries, the local lab is a superstore here that is only geared up for 35mm and APS. Around here if you talk about roll film you get odd looks. This is really pixel country.
There is a lab in Bath about 10 miles away who used to do E6 roll fim in the hour, I guess they might be set up for 120 C41. Not been over there for a long time so I'll have to look them up again, if they still exist.
Thanks for the suggestion peterc, I'll make some enquiries, the local lab is a superstore here that is only geared up for 35mm and APS. Around here if you talk about roll film you get odd looks. This is really pixel country.
There is a lab in Bath about 10 miles away who used to do E6 roll fim in the hour, I guess they might be set up for 120 C41. Not been over there for a long time so I'll have to look them up again, if they still exist.
Last edited:
paulfitz
Established
My Ifosol comment was just that the TMax 100 negs processed in it tended to look almost identical (to me) as TMax 100 process in Xtol 1:3. I standardized on TMax100 and Xtol 1:3 for scanning with a Nikon Coolscan. It gave me great resolution and detail with a Contax G1 and 35mm Planar. Others may disagree - I've only run one bottle of it.
For example, there is a big difference between Ilfosol and Rodinal, dramatic to me.
Now with all the info I have gotten from here and other places on the web, I want to play with all the other films like Efke, Bergger, Foma, and Forte and the Chinese film. I did some Bergger 200 and Forte 200 in D-76, but they seemed a little grainy.
The beauty of all of this is that the results can be so different for each film/developer combo, depending on the lens/camera. You can learn each one, then apply to the subject as you see fit.
Now I want to play with Diafine. I too do the "save up and batch" routine which is kind of a pain. Would be nice to mix types and just process it all at once.
So I will be making a visit to J and C photo.
To me, the wonder of film is that we have all these CHOICES and a great level of individual CONTROL, which is what it's all about for me.
Learn to process your own black and white with whatever method you want and you will feel in control of the process, which is quite liberating artisitcally, and also makes it "your way" which is artistic in my mind. I take no issue with anyone's method, as I am pleased that they have "their own way", and so I like to see their results.
It suits their vision and I hope they keep sharing it here for all to see.
For example, there is a big difference between Ilfosol and Rodinal, dramatic to me.
Now with all the info I have gotten from here and other places on the web, I want to play with all the other films like Efke, Bergger, Foma, and Forte and the Chinese film. I did some Bergger 200 and Forte 200 in D-76, but they seemed a little grainy.
The beauty of all of this is that the results can be so different for each film/developer combo, depending on the lens/camera. You can learn each one, then apply to the subject as you see fit.
Now I want to play with Diafine. I too do the "save up and batch" routine which is kind of a pain. Would be nice to mix types and just process it all at once.
So I will be making a visit to J and C photo.
To me, the wonder of film is that we have all these CHOICES and a great level of individual CONTROL, which is what it's all about for me.
Learn to process your own black and white with whatever method you want and you will feel in control of the process, which is quite liberating artisitcally, and also makes it "your way" which is artistic in my mind. I take no issue with anyone's method, as I am pleased that they have "their own way", and so I like to see their results.
It suits their vision and I hope they keep sharing it here for all to see.
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
I want to be contrary here and recommend stainless steel reels and tanks over plastic. I started out with Paterson because they were supposedly easier. I did have some trouble with stainless steel when I tried them initially, but then someone showed me how to do it right. That's when I found that it is easeier and much faster (for me) to use SS. And you use less chemistry in multiples of 500ml, making mixing easier if you are using liquid stock solution.
The secret to SS reels is in how you bend the film when you wind it on. Do it right and the film practically loads itself. When I started processing film again after a gap of many years, I was nervous. But the film went on like buttah.
I have never processed C41 but I have done E6, and it was not that hard to do even in an basement darkroom with no heating/cooling. If C41 is easier, I wouldn't hesitate for a second.
Earl
The secret to SS reels is in how you bend the film when you wind it on. Do it right and the film practically loads itself. When I started processing film again after a gap of many years, I was nervous. But the film went on like buttah.
I have never processed C41 but I have done E6, and it was not that hard to do even in an basement darkroom with no heating/cooling. If C41 is easier, I wouldn't hesitate for a second.
Earl
brightsky
Established
This thread is very timely.
I'm almost to the spot you are shutterflower. Sick and tired of damaged negatives and lousy scans.
I have not developed film since 1979, and even during the 70's I only developed color.
The terrific information on this thread has already prompted me to make a shopping list of what I'd need to develop B&W!
I'm almost to the spot you are shutterflower. Sick and tired of damaged negatives and lousy scans.
I have not developed film since 1979, and even during the 70's I only developed color.
The terrific information on this thread has already prompted me to make a shopping list of what I'd need to develop B&W!
Jordan W.
Member
For those considering doing their own B&W -- especially if you scan your negatives -- go for it. You can get everything you need (in terms of hardware) used from eBay or elsewhere. For chemicals, go for something simple like Xtol, HC-110 or Diafine to start, with any rapid fixer. You'll have way more fun and save money. Resist the urge to try out a billion different developers until you've gotten the best negs possible from your current soup.
C-41 isn't too bad, but it's more difficult than B&W. The chemicals are harder to come by and the process isn't as flexible as B&W (C-41 is a "standard" process -- all films go in for the same time). I've done E6 as well, which is rewarding (at the end) but not nearly as easy to do in a temporary darkroom / kitchen / bathroom, etc. I suggest getting really good at B&W before attempting C-41 or E6.
C-41 isn't too bad, but it's more difficult than B&W. The chemicals are harder to come by and the process isn't as flexible as B&W (C-41 is a "standard" process -- all films go in for the same time). I've done E6 as well, which is rewarding (at the end) but not nearly as easy to do in a temporary darkroom / kitchen / bathroom, etc. I suggest getting really good at B&W before attempting C-41 or E6.
Finder
Veteran
Plastic and stainless both have ups and downs. You can't load plastic reels unless they are bone dry and, reportedly, air bells are more common with plastic, but I have not found this myself. If you drop a stainless reel, that is usually enough to make it useless, particularly 35mm. If you fill a stainless tank with too much developer, you will have uneven development - the edges of the film are denser because the shifting reels have only cause agitation where they hold the film, but the center of the film has been moving back and forth without causing agitiation. Air is needed to make sure the developer moves.
It is no secret I am in love with my Jobo processor. That has simplified developing for me. But I have had success with both plasitic and stainless tanks with most of my experience with stainless. But whichever you have, keep a blank test roll around to practice loading and to test a reel to see if a processing or loading error was caused by a damaged reel (especially for stainless).
Be careful of stainless tanks with joined bottoms - usually large 8 to 10 reel tanks. Chemistry can hide there causing dichroic fog on the next processing run. Farmer's reducer can get rid of the fog, but when you ask for it, don't be surprised if your local photo supplier suggest you contact the local garden center (happened to me). Just tell them it was named after Mr. Farmer and is not used by farmers. Farmer's reducer can be difficult to find.
It is no secret I am in love with my Jobo processor. That has simplified developing for me. But I have had success with both plasitic and stainless tanks with most of my experience with stainless. But whichever you have, keep a blank test roll around to practice loading and to test a reel to see if a processing or loading error was caused by a damaged reel (especially for stainless).
Be careful of stainless tanks with joined bottoms - usually large 8 to 10 reel tanks. Chemistry can hide there causing dichroic fog on the next processing run. Farmer's reducer can get rid of the fog, but when you ask for it, don't be surprised if your local photo supplier suggest you contact the local garden center (happened to me). Just tell them it was named after Mr. Farmer and is not used by farmers. Farmer's reducer can be difficult to find.
This has been claimed before, but is incorrect... The only benefit to allowing air-space is that you are assured of fluid movement by the gurgling sound!Finder said:
Just the other day I mixed up a gallon of Diafine, from powder of course, using two translucent gallon jugs of distilled water from the market. Part B is reluctant to fully dissolve, typically leaving a light "snowfall" of white particles on the bottom of the container. With all air removed, rotating and tilting the jug results in obvious agitation of the contents revealed by the motion of these undissolved particles throughout the jug.
The liquid in the container has momentum, inertia... resistance to change of motion which you're trying to induce through moving the container. This inevitably results in various swirling movements of the fluid within; it's not like the developer is a solid block like ice; it's a fluid!
If you think back, you too have surely seen this effect in those decorative glass globes with the Winter scenes... shake it a bit to stir up the "snow". Yes indeed, agitation without aeration!
I won't say that leaving an air-space in the tank is actually harmful, but it seems to me frothing could increase air bubbles on the film surface, and maybe increase oxidation of reusable developer. So, maybe no harm, but no necessity either!
bcs89
Contented Oly Owner
Unbelievably timely thread, (for me!) thank you all for the great info. I am sure I will be back with questions....
Cheers,
Scott
Cheers,
Scott
kaiyen
local man of mystery
re: leaving air space in the tank.
I don't think the point is that agitation without leaving an air space doesn't lead to adequate flow. Rather, it's that it takes more agitation to achieve adeuqate flow when the tank is full, in my opinion.
When sticking to 5s agitation every 30s, I discovered that I had uneven development with 120 film in my SS tank when the tank was filled all the way. Switching to 10s every minute and doing an inversion/rotation technique has helped a lot. However, the final cure was being a bit more careful with how much developer I put in the tank. It takes exactly 15.5 oz to cover the reels with a bit of extra for leakage. 16 oz is to the lid, and 16.5 is to the cap. If I stick to 15.5 then I can apparently achieve proper flow during those 10s.
If I agitate more, then I start getting close to continuous agitation.
allan
I don't think the point is that agitation without leaving an air space doesn't lead to adequate flow. Rather, it's that it takes more agitation to achieve adeuqate flow when the tank is full, in my opinion.
When sticking to 5s agitation every 30s, I discovered that I had uneven development with 120 film in my SS tank when the tank was filled all the way. Switching to 10s every minute and doing an inversion/rotation technique has helped a lot. However, the final cure was being a bit more careful with how much developer I put in the tank. It takes exactly 15.5 oz to cover the reels with a bit of extra for leakage. 16 oz is to the lid, and 16.5 is to the cap. If I stick to 15.5 then I can apparently achieve proper flow during those 10s.
If I agitate more, then I start getting close to continuous agitation.
allan
Finder
Veteran
Doug said:This has been claimed before, but is incorrect... The only benefit to allowing air-space is that you are assured of fluid movement by the gurgling sound!
Well, I guess we'll just have to disagree on this point, in the absense of transparent developing tanks with particles floating throughout the fluids so that you can verify I'm right... Over several decades I fill my stainless tanks all the way to avoid trapped air, and put spacers as necessary to keep the reels from moving up and down as I invert the tanks. I never get uneven agitation.
Over several decades I fill my stainless tanks all the way to avoid trapped air, and put spacers as necessary to keep the reels from moving up and down as I invert the tanks. I never get uneven agitation.bennybo
Member
Take a drinking glass and add some glitter.
Fill it completely full with water.
Put Saran Wrap tightly over the top.
Let the glitter settle and invert.
Shake the heck out of it if you want.
The only movement you'll get is the glitter moving by gravity.
If your "glitter" is as light as a water molecule - no movement.
Let just a little air in. Shake. Viola. Snow globe.
There are air bubbles inside a snow globe for a reason.
My guess is you still have enough air bubbles in a "full" tank to get adequate mixing. You've just optimized your mixing technique over the years.
Fill it completely full with water.
Put Saran Wrap tightly over the top.
Let the glitter settle and invert.
Shake the heck out of it if you want.
The only movement you'll get is the glitter moving by gravity.
If your "glitter" is as light as a water molecule - no movement.
Let just a little air in. Shake. Viola. Snow globe.
There are air bubbles inside a snow globe for a reason.
My guess is you still have enough air bubbles in a "full" tank to get adequate mixing. You've just optimized your mixing technique over the years.
Twist and turn that sealed glass with only water and glitter and you will see the agitation occurring. Shaking it linearly isn't going to do much, as you apparently have noticed.
sf
Veteran
Today I will go and look at Glazer's supply of film development tanks and kits, etc.
Gonna get started with that ASAP.
I want to shoot Fuji films because I like the spools with their little hooks and the film with the holes for the hooks, but I prefer the look of HP5 - heavily.
Gonna get started with that ASAP.
I want to shoot Fuji films because I like the spools with their little hooks and the film with the holes for the hooks, but I prefer the look of HP5 - heavily.
sf
Veteran
Bottom line : Is it cheaper to home develop B&W than it is to pay some shop an average of $10 per roll of 220?
T_om
Well-known
shutterflower said:
WAY, WAY, WAY cheaper. Not even in the same ball park.
Once the (very minor) expenditure is made for a decent 4-reel stainless tank, a changing bag, and a gallon kit of Diafine, you are done spending money on film developing for a couple of years.
The 4 reel tank will hold 4 35mm or 2 120 spools. The 4 reel tank is the 'sweet spot' for tanks. Unless you shoot lots of film in which case you may like to buy my last 8-reeler...
I'm just using 4-reel tanks now since I already have 4.
Tom
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
Tom: Did you say Diafine?