Forget the bakelite Rondinax, the Lab Box is coming

Having owned just about every brand of daylight processing tank in my misspent youth, I think the flaw is in the concept itself - tanks should be as simple as possible, for better cleaning and better sealing. A loading mechanism inevitably makes them too complex. It was better than nothing when I lived in a squat and had to process film in a broken kitchen sink where several other inhabitants were washing or cooking, or when you have to process in a hotel bathroom. But when you can set yourself up in a more permanent way, there are more affordable options that deliver better results...
 
Put a sensible price next to it and I will support it and buy it. But if its price looks like a joke, no way it will replace my trusty bakelite Paterson from the 70s.
 
No mention yet of how much liquid is needed to develop a roll (my Paterson tank uses 290ml developer per 35mm roll and 500ml for 120).

Looks like it can only develop one roll at a time. Paterson tank will do 2 rolls of 35mm.
 
Okay, I agree it's particularly nice for those who shoot and develop single rolls at a time or have no confidence / proficiency in developing in Hewes/Nikkor or Paterson tanks.

But, having easily sold my unused Rondinax 35U across the globe recently for a stunning EUR 65 + shipping, I think this is of interest to many people.
 
I'm signed up for the news letter, I'm looking forward to the kick starter announcement.
I'm not sure if I'll back, just because I have both Patterson (2 and 5 roll capacities) and several steel tanks.

While it may be a potential cause of trouble down the road, what interests me here is the auto-loading capability. Even with good (Hewes? I forget the name for them, they have a different and much better centre clip) reels, loading the reals is still the biggest headache in my film processing workflow. If I could do it any time of day (my film loading room can only be used after the sun goes down) and it was always painless, it might be worth the money.
 
Anything which encourages more young people to get into film photography, and buy more film, which this plainly does, can only be viewed as a good thing if you love the hobby. And I say "young people" because the photos of the ten principals indicate this is a hipster project. More power to them, and I wish them luck. I will probably back it for that reason alone, as I don't need another daylight loader.
Eventually many people who buy these will fall in love with actual-not instax- film photography, set up a real dark room, buy even more film, shave, and the world will be a better place for everyone.
 
Looks expensive, to make, to sell. My guess, well north of a C note. What I got works, why mess with it. All I got to do is close the laundry room door.
 
What? - No changing bag or locking oneself in a darkened closet to load a reel?

It's heresy, I say. With that said, it's been over four decades since I used a Rondinax 35U. I was in the military at the time.
 
I'm perfectly content with my changing bag and 1 reel and 3 reel Paterson tanks. I think it's cool to see people doing "new" things but I won't buy into it.
 
I use Rondix and Rondinax tanks almost exclusively for all my film developing nowadays. A modern replacement that does both? Sure, it will be great.

Long past the day when I would process two or more rolls in a single session ... :)

G
 
Godfrey said:
I use Rondix and Rondinax tanks almost exclusively for all my film developing nowadays. A modern replacement that does both? Sure, it will be great.

Long past the day when I would process two or more rolls in a single session ... :)

G
Click to expand...

Godfrey,
The biggest downside for me (real or imagined) of the Rondinax is the inability to maintain a precise temperature for processing formula that require long developing times. This has always forced me, if using the Rondinax, to use processing methods I might not normally choose if using a tank and a temp controlled water bath.
Do you have a preferred developer, time, film that you have settled on as working optimally with the Rondinax? Just curious.
 
I must admit, daylight (rather than dark bag) loading would be pretty neat, as long as it works reliably. I wonder how easy it would be to unspool/reload if it mis-loads? Not for me, I'm comfortable with the Paterson, but I wish them all the best.
 
Larry Cloetta said:
Godfrey,
The biggest downside for me (real or imagined) of the Rondinax is the inability to maintain a precise temperature for processing formula that require long developing times. This has always forced me, if using the Rondinax, to use processing methods I might not normally choose if using a tank and a temp controlled water bath.
Do you have a preferred developer, time, film that you have settled on as working optimally with the Rondinax? Just curious.
Click to expand...

I process all film in the Rondix and Rondinax tanks exactly the same way: HC-110 mixed from concentrate at 1:49 dilution (4 ounces mixed into 196 ounces of water); one-shot only, I toss after every film processed. I process only when ambient temperatures hover between 70 and 76 degrees in my condominium, have all the water I'm going to use sit to stabilize temperature overnight before processing. When starting out, I chill the developer down to 68°F and let the temperature float afterwards. Process routine:

1 min - Pre-soak
8 min - developer
1 min - water rinse
8 min - fixer
1 min - water rinse (6 changes, last change with two drops wetting agent)
Squeegee and hang to dry

Because of the constant agitation, I see little point to extended development times: that would just boost contrast and grain unless you went to hyperdilute developer. The slightly lower HC110 concentration and constant agitation for 8 min generates a slightly thin, sharp, slightly grainy, slightly contrasty negative at standard EI; I often add 1/3 to 1 stop exposure to flatten down contrast a little and get more shadow detail, depending on the light.

Since all my rendering work is from scans, this works very well for me. The negatives have a uniquely pleasing look to my eye. :)

G
 
You should look at it like the makers look at it:
It is not a replacement for Jobo, Paterson or AP developing tanks.
It is just an addition to the market mainly for
- photographers on travels
- beginners in home-developing (no need for a darkroom or changing bag).

And as such a supplement it makes sense.
Home developing is getting more popular.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom