!@#$ing plastic.

[Stephanie Brim]

That's it. Screw the meter...I need a stainless tank and reels.

I finally broke film in half today. I've never done that. I just cleaned the reels so I know that isn't the reason. I'm sick to death of these things.

If anyone has one they're not using, PM me. Otherwise it's going to be a massive Ebay search to get me a 2 roll tank, two 35mm reels, and a 120 reel.

And as an update, I may have already found something.

Blah. And here I thought I was doing good by getting plastic stuff.

 

[wlewisiii]

Try to get yourself Hewes reels for the 35mm - they are much easier to load.

William

 

[pesphoto]

I wouldnt use anything but steel anymore. I may have an extra 120 reel around here somewhere.

 

[ChrisPlatt]

Save your money!

Save your money!

In my experience moisture is the main culprit.
Plastic reels work fine *IF* completely dry.

Even the humidity that builds up from sweaty
hands in the changing bag can cause jams.
So air out your changing bag between uses.

After rinsing, shake your plastic reels free of
large droplets, then dry them for a minute
with warm air from a blow dryer before use.

I have had Jobo, Paterson, GAF, and Yankee
plastic reels (and tanks).
All worked just fine *IF* completely dry...

"Excelsior, you fathead!"
-Chris-

 

[rvaubel]

There is a reason stainless steel reels are the standard. The reels you get will last a lifetime.

Rex

 

[Seele]

Stainless steel reels are all very well, but once you have dropped one, it's gone: the slightest misalignment between the two spiral coils makes it impossible to load correctly.

Stephanie, I'd imagine you used Paterson plastics tanks and reels? For me I would not touch them with a barge pole and actually forbid my students to use them. The ball-bearing ratchet works well in theory but the further you proceed, the more resistant it has to work against, and when it gets to a certain point, something has to give.

For years I have standardised on the Jobo system; the reels do not have rachets and you load them manually by gripping the film at the far end. They also saves on chemicals and can be used for rotary processing in a suitable processor. I can bounce Jobo reels off the wall and then use them immediately with no ill effect whatsoever.

Perhaps you might want to look into that.

 

[SolaresLarrave]

Keep them dry... I wrecked several frames in a roll of film last Friday. But it was my fault for not having dried the spirals well enough, and for not having inserted the film firmly enough...

Enough. Good luck with your search! 🙂

 

[ARCHIVIST]

In my experience moisture is the main culprit.
Plastic reels work fine *IF* completely dry.

Even the humidity that build up from sweaty
hands in the changing bag can cause jams.
So air out your changing bag between uses.

I have to agree with Chris - condenstaion is a snag in more ways than one.
I still have and use my original JOBO plastic tank and reels that I purchased over 30 years ago. Have to admit to owning metal as well but rarely used.

Peter

 

[Gerry M]

film reels

film reels

Has any one had experience with the Arista apron style tank/reel(?) that Freestyle sells? Page 43 in the Fall 06 catalog.
Gerry

 

[40oz]

IDK, if you reels are dry, and you snip the ends of the film at an angle, I don't see how the patterson plastic reels can cause people so much trouble.

 

[tedwhite]

Steph:

Don't know about plastic, as I've used the same steel Nikkor tanks and reels for 30 years and see no reason to change.

The argument for not using steel reels because you might drop one and it would never be the same again is akin to an argument for not using a Leica M7 because you might drop it and it would never be the same again.

Advice: Never drop.

Ted

 

[wlewisiii]

What Ted said. Plus the Hewes reels really aren't that expensive - maybe $20 at most and while that can be "interesting" to come up with sometimes :bang: it's a very worthy investment. So even if you do mangle one, toss it in the recycle bin and buy another.

William

 

[Stephanie Brim]

I dunno. I can do one of two things in my mind:

I can try the Jobo tanks and reels since I've been eyeing the processors on Ebay anyway, watching what they go for purely for future reference. Or I can get a stainless tank + reels and learn all over again to load film onto them. I have a feeling that stainless will give me less problems, but if the Jobos are good then perhaps I should just try and get a few extra feels for the tank.

 

[Crasis]

Steph:

Don't know about plastic, as I've used the same steel Nikkor tanks and reels for 30 years and see no reason to change.

The argument for not using steel reels because you might drop one and it would never be the same again is akin to an argument for not using a Leica M7 because you might drop it and it would never be the same again.

Advice: Never drop.

Ted

Have to give props to the Nikkor reels and tanks, although the 250mL has a nasty lid. Have to pour in liquids while tilting the tank. The 500mL tank is wonderful though. 🙂

 

[Stephanie Brim]

The tank that's for sale on APUG is a 1000ml model for 4 35mm or 2 120 rolls. One is a Nikkor. Maybe I should take that route.

 

[Crasis]

The tank that's for sale on APUG is a 1000ml model for 4 35mm or 2 120 rolls. One is a Nikkor. Maybe I should take that route.

Ergh, how much film do you shoot? A 500mL tank is more than enough for me. There has never been a time when I've had to develope more than 2 rolls of film.. that were the same film and using the same developer. It just doesn't happen for me.

That 1000mL tank may be a massive waste of space for you. If you just processed 1 roll in it, to do inversion agitation, you would need to use twice the amount of chemicals as a 500mL tank!

250mL is too small, btw. The vast majority of the time, you will want an empty reel in there along with your full reel of film in order to fascilitate good solution flow during agitation. This means that 250mL doesn't cut it.

 

[rxmd]

That 1000mL tank may be a massive waste of space for you. If you just processed 1 roll in it, to do inversion agitation, you would need to use twice the amount of chemicals as a 500mL tank!

Er, why?

I'm using a Paterson 1000 ml tank. With inversion agitation I just put in the amount of chemicals for one film. That's three hundred something ml for a roll of 135 and 500+ for a roll of 120. After all, most of the time the tank is standing anyway, with film and liquid at the bottom.

Now when I use the tank for rotation, I have to put in more chemicals because the tank is oriented sideways and I have to account for the extra height. So I do rotation only for chemicals where it doesn't matter and the process is boring and tedious anyway (esp. fixing). Rotary processors are overrated for B/W in my opinion.

And BTW I'm in favour of plastic reels. If you keep them reasonably dry the Paterson reels are no big problem, for me at least. It pays off to trim the corners of the film. My experience with steel reels is bad. Jobo has reels with a lever where you can get two rolls of 120 on one reel without problems. Also I wouldn't like to have to buy one reel for every format. I've got three reels for my 1000 ml tank and that is doing fine; with steel reels I would need five. And if I ever find myself buying that Yashica LM44, with plastic reels I can just use the ones I have, with steel reels I need to buy another reel.

Philipp

 

[Stephanie Brim]

Jo bo? Is that kind of like this.

😀 :bang:

 

[Crasis]

Er, why?

I'm using a Paterson 1000 ml tank. With inversion agitation I just put in the amount of chemicals for one film. That's three hundred something ml for a roll of 135 and 500+ for a roll of 120. After all, most of the time the tank is standing anyway, with film and liquid at the bottom.

Now when I use it for rotation, I have to put in more chemicals because the tank is oriented sideways and I have to account for the extra height. So I do rotation only for chemicals where it doesn't matter and the process is boring and tedious anyway (esp. fixing).

Philipp

That's strange and extremely interesting. So there are times when the film is touched by no developer at all right? Does this effect the development times at all? Does this tend to cause more bubbles? Ever had any problems and do you have any warnings about doing this?

I could see how not filling the tank would actually be a good thing since you're allowing the developer to homogenize in an area that isn't touching the film itself. Using a 1000mL tank and only filling it with 350 mL though, still seems a little.. steep to me.

I'll have to try filling 350 in a 500 tank next time. Thanks for the infos 🙂

 

[rxmd]

That's strange and extremely interesting. So there are times when the film is touched by no developer at all right? Does this effect the development times at all? Does this tend to cause more bubbles? Ever had any problems and do you have any warnings about doing this?

Actually that's how I learned to process films, and I never thought it should be any other way 🙂

There might be times when there is no developer on the surface of the film during inversions, but my inversions are usually pretty short (maybe a second) and I think most developers are not quick enough to dissipate from the film surface during this time, since they are water-based solutions. There are some bubbles at the surface obviously, but I've never had bubble problems on the film, unless I used too little developer for the number of reels I had in the tank. It's not recommended to go below the minimum 🙂 Paterson actually prints the amounts per reel on the bottom of their film tanks (290 ml for a 135 or 126 reel, 370 ml for 127, 500 ml for 120 and 220).

Philipp