How much developer in multi-reel tank with fewer than max number of rolls?

[Roger Hicks]

Great stuff! 😉

I usually use continuous agitation for my stuff but if I do use my 5 reel Paterson tank with only 3 films I certainly don't load it up with enough solution for 5 films. I use all the reels just to ensure that things stay where they should but I use enough solution to cover the 3 films and "splash about" at will. As Roger said I have never noticed any difference.

Of course I am a rank amateur (hope that doesn't mean that I smell) so don't take my word for it. Play around on your own and come to your own conclusions. That is what makes this hobby so fun.

But, like me, you suffer from the disadvantage of having actually tried it, rather than relying in imperfectly understood theory and plain misconceptions.

A further interesting little thought here. I have an old Paterson tank, adjustable for 16mm, 35mm, 127, 120/620. On the bottom are moulded volumes for each size of film, i.e. you DON'T use the full 120 volume for 16mm.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Thanks for the further replies. Yes, I've also come to realise that consistency in practice is fundamental. This is why I am wondering what to do now.

It seems the consensus is I should measure how much solution I need to cover three loaded rolls in the bottom of the tank and then calculate the amount of HC-110 based on that. This is logical to me - if I use enough developer for 5 rolls, then the dilution will be too strong for 3 rolls (or rather, it would be another dilution than the one I intend to use).

Then add two empty rolls on top. And agitate as per normal.

I'll give this a go hopefully tonight.

best
philip

Dear Philip,

Very true, but there is no point in looking for more precision in a system than the system is capable of supporting. For example, heating or cooling of the developer in the tank is something that is very seldom addressed. It can be instructive to measure the dev temperature when you tip it in, and then, at the end of the dev time, tip it back into the graduate and measure it again.

Likewise, ANYONE who re-uses developer is introducing a very significant variable (except with fully seasoned/replenished developers).

D76 stock solution cycles up and down in pH in storage, so there's another variable.

ALL film processing is a question of "close enough" and it's a question of understanding that (a) total consistency is very difficult indeed (b) the B+W pos/neg system is astonishingly flexible and forgiving (c) some people like making life difficult for themselves (d) many people see what they want to see and (e) books such as Haist, Clerc, Glafkides and other standard texts are more reliable than internet gurus. Are you familiar with "Gurus and Why to Avoid Them", http://www.rogerandfrances.com/subscription/ps ignore gurus.html ?

From the end:

1 Never trust anyone whose vocabulary does not include the phrase, "I could be wrong."

2 Never trust anyone who tries to tell you that their way is the only way. This is nonsense. If it were, everyone would do things the same way. The fact that they don't is something of a clue.

3 The purpose of photography is to enjoy yourself and make good pictures. It is not to purify the soul through suffering. Too many believe that if something is more difficult or expensive or obscure, it must necessarily be better, which is patent nonsense. A lot of photography is easy as well as enjoyable, and you can make superb pictures without ever venturing into the obscure.

4 Trust your own judgement. If five people tell you five different things, begin by considering the likelihood of which view is best. Then try it. Try the second likeliest, too, if you like.

5 Do not confuse great pictures with deep technical understanding. Many excellent photographers use an extremely limited range of techniques, and don't really understand how or why they work. That's fine -- until they start trying to explain to others how things work, when they may peddle flat nonsense, emphasizing the trivial and ignoring the important, thereby misleading their hapless pupils.

6 Do not confuse deep technical understanding with great pictures. Many of the greatest technical experts are indifferent photographers. This does not mean that technical understanding is inimical to good photography; it merely means that it is no guarantee of good photography. The only time that technical expertise gets in the way of photography is when you spend so much time reading and 'testing' that you never take any real photographs for their own sake.

7 Remember that times change. For example, when variable-contrast (VC) papers first appeared, they were awful. Now, except when you need the highest possible contrast (Grade 5 graded paper), or want a particular surface that is not available in VC, they are equal or superior to graded papers for the vast majority of applications.

8 If a guru's strategies work, it is because they are based on sound scientific work. Many guru-worshippers get this backwards, imagining (for example) that the Zone System (free module) is the basis of sensitometry, rather than a summary and sub-set of it. Read 'hard' books like Haist's Modern Photographic Processing and you can learn the real science behind the popularization -- and reflect that as well as being the author of perhaps the most highly respected work on the subject, Grant Haist is also a much-published photographer.

Cheers,

R.

 

[rybolt]

No. Once the film is wet, the chance of new air bells forming is effectively non-existent.

Cheers,

R.

Roger, Maybe we're having a language conflict. The air bells I'm referring to are generated by improper agitation and pockets of air getting stuck between the layers of film. I've seen it happen in both the developer stage and also the fix stage. Tapping the tank lightly after each agitation generally dislodges them. It's more common with plastic reels and 220 stainless reels than it is with 35mm stainless reels. For this kind of 'air bell' to occur getting the film wet wouldn't prevent another bell from forming. Adding a drop of photo flo to the developer can also eliminate it but I've never been brave enough to try that.

 

[Brian Atherton]

Put 3 reels in the tank and pour water into the tank until they are covered. Pour the water into a gradient. That's how much chemicals you need for 3 rolls of film. Don't forget to put the other 2 empty reels in the tank to keep things from sloshing around.

I'm not sure why Roger says what he says about agitation, He must not use Rodinal. Agitate that too much and you will have a disaster on your hands. Everything is of importance in developing, and agitation is no exception. The idea is to have a set routine for your optimal negs (found by testing), then stick to that protocol for consistency.

I've only quoted the above from Steve M as this is exactly what I did when working professionally, and it saves me typing. 🙂

Never had a problem using this method with D76 and FP4, HP5.