roscoetuff
Well-known
So my first developing effort went without a hitch. Worried that sucker to death, made up the checklists, did everything and it came out wonderfully. The plan is to keep this up for 20 rolls or so in a single tank and then begin to think about multi-reels. I mean... yes I like this, but I do have a life. FWIW, I'm using the Samigon plastic reels and these babies are amazingly easy to work with. I practiced 3 times with a dud roll and wondered why I worried. Okay... I'm shooting like crazy to have plenty of film to practice with... and it's fun anyway... even if I lose something here and there.
Okay, lots of questions:
1) Changing bag size vs. manageable reel capacity: Darkroom Dave does 5 reels in a Paterson tank, but that puppy is probably going to make my changing bag run out of room. Two or three seems to be a practical size. What do you do? Do you multi reel process... or not?
2) I'm using a Paterson single reel tank and plan to keep with that to get enough reps to say, "I think I've got it!" Muscle memory experts say the magic number is 20. So that seems fine. I like to plan ahead. So I'm looking at 1) Paterson, 2) Jobo (not likely) and 3) Arista as the main plastic contenders. Stainless tanks aren't beyond the pale, but I think I'm sticking with the Samigon reels... these things are simple! What do you use for multi-reel?
3) Serious question: Will multi-reel processing introduce a slew of new issues that really should be deferred until much more experience than 20 rolls? If so, why and what sort of problems?
FWIW, my first processed roll was Ilford HP5 in Ilford DD-X... 'cause that's what my local guy had. Lots of "density" in those first negatives. I'm thrilled!!! Success wasn't expected... if I'm absolutely honest. And so I've just received a bottle of Kodak HC-110 based on recommendations, and a bottle of Adox's Rodinal... just because I couldn't resist. Plan is to use up the DD-X and switch to HC-110 as the "go to" assuming I like the output. Rodinal... dunno. It's there. Mystery is solved. I have no rush to go there.
Additional advice is always appreciated... even if my experience is still to green to know how to use it!! Thanks to all who offered recommendations earlier btw!
Okay, lots of questions:
1) Changing bag size vs. manageable reel capacity: Darkroom Dave does 5 reels in a Paterson tank, but that puppy is probably going to make my changing bag run out of room. Two or three seems to be a practical size. What do you do? Do you multi reel process... or not?
2) I'm using a Paterson single reel tank and plan to keep with that to get enough reps to say, "I think I've got it!" Muscle memory experts say the magic number is 20. So that seems fine. I like to plan ahead. So I'm looking at 1) Paterson, 2) Jobo (not likely) and 3) Arista as the main plastic contenders. Stainless tanks aren't beyond the pale, but I think I'm sticking with the Samigon reels... these things are simple! What do you use for multi-reel?
3) Serious question: Will multi-reel processing introduce a slew of new issues that really should be deferred until much more experience than 20 rolls? If so, why and what sort of problems?
FWIW, my first processed roll was Ilford HP5 in Ilford DD-X... 'cause that's what my local guy had. Lots of "density" in those first negatives. I'm thrilled!!! Success wasn't expected... if I'm absolutely honest. And so I've just received a bottle of Kodak HC-110 based on recommendations, and a bottle of Adox's Rodinal... just because I couldn't resist. Plan is to use up the DD-X and switch to HC-110 as the "go to" assuming I like the output. Rodinal... dunno. It's there. Mystery is solved. I have no rush to go there.
Additional advice is always appreciated... even if my experience is still to green to know how to use it!! Thanks to all who offered recommendations earlier btw!
johnf04
Well-known
I use a Paterson clone - made by Jessops, with 2 x 35mm reels. My dark bag is big enough to hold that. I use Rodinal at 1:50 to develop.
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
One issue with really tall multireel tanks is that they get HEAVY and hard to handle when full of chemicals. When I was younger, I used 8-reel stainless tanks to process 120 film, because 120 reels are twice as wide as 35mm (so a 8-reel tank holds 4 rolls of 120). They were big, heavy, and hard to agitate.
I usually use 4-reel stainless tanks now. They hold four 35mm or two 120 reels. Its a good compromise between capacity and ease of use.
A Paterson 5 reel is probably bigger than I'd want to handle.
I usually use 4-reel stainless tanks now. They hold four 35mm or two 120 reels. Its a good compromise between capacity and ease of use.
A Paterson 5 reel is probably bigger than I'd want to handle.
I don't think you've mentioned which format(s) you're processing? I routinely double up rolls of 120 in my Paterson reels which is one way to get through a roll a bit quicker. There's really no down side providing you're aware of any minimum developer quantity considerations (Eg if using the HC-110 dilution"H" for example, where the minimum amount of actual developer is a factor, and not just the overall concentration or ratio). As you have mentioned HC-110 I have found this page to be very helpful during my initial use of it over the last twelve months or so. It cautions against mixing less than 6ml of concentrate per film regardless of fluid volume. Worth noting. I've used the dilution H with results I was very pleased with, and the economical consumption of developer is outstanding albeit at the expense of longer development times of course.
I purchased a slightly larger than usual changing bag (ex South Korea via eBay). I'm glad I did because I do develop a bit of film for other people and, when I have enough rolls of the same type or same developing time/type I will sometimes use a Paterson tank that takes five 35mm reels (or three 120). I don't have a problem with this but with a smaller bag it would be more of a tussle.
I've been using single 35mm/120 reel, 2 x 120/3 x 35mm and 3 x 120/5 x 35mm Paterson tanks for a number of years and haven't noticed any complications from the varying sizes. The main thing I would caution against is over or under filling your tanks. Too little fluid and you may not cover all your reels. Too much and there may be insufficient air space to permit adequate circulation of the fluid across your reels because when you invert, you need a certain amount of air space for the fluid to "vent" into the other end of the tank, in order to promote effective fluid circulation throughout the spirals.
I have never had to develop a single roll of film in my largest tank, and ideally, I never would. Not that I couldn't if for some reason it was imperative. But getting the best results from your development regime has much to do with consistency. How you invert, how vigorously, how may times, how frequently, which developer(s), whether you begin the clock when you start to pour or when the tank is filled, etc. and after a while this will all yield predictable results you'll have confidence in. Personally I can't tell any difference in quality between films I have processed in a single reel tank and others I've done in my five reel. It's most likely because I match the size of my tank to the number of films I need to process. It's common sense I think. But I could easily appreciate how my tonality and contrast might be different if Eg. I developed a single roll in my largest tank, because, with so little fluid in such a large tank, it is going to circulate much more freely and much faster than normal. If I inverted precisely like usually do, I would not be at all surprised to see a variation in my results, and, if push came to shove and I had to do it, I'd likely be a bit more gentle with the inversions to compensate. But I'd avoid the issue in the first place whenever possible. Not because it can't be done, just because consistency is the key, and it's not how I usually develop.
You should not interpret the above as meaning you should only ever process films if a tank is full. That's not what I'm suggesting at all. My first tank was the 2 x 120/3 x 35mm and I certainly developed a few single films in it without drama. I would simply be wary of using a very big tank nearly empty, as opposed to another tank that is half full. I hope this makes sense.
Whatever size tank is used, if it is not loaded to capacity, placing empty reels above your loaded one to the capacity of the tank, to act as spacers, will stop the loaded reel at the bottom of the tank from creeping out of the fluid as you invert and is a very good move. Some types have retaining clips, which may or may not work very well as an alternative. The Paterson clips are OK if they have not been stored on the centre column of the tanks. Paterson's instructions tell you not to do this with them because they'll lose elasticity. But every tank I ever find has the clip fitted on the column, and they never work very well as a result.
As far as which tanks/reels/brand, I'm afraid you're going to have to expect everyone to recommend the sort they use. Steel v plastic reels can be a much argumented topic. It's a personal preference. The truth is that neither type is perfect. Eg plastic reels can't be re-loaded wet. Steel reels can. But steel reels can also bend if they're dropped, and may then be scrap if they're distorted badly: films may no longer feed in correctly. Plastic ones will bounce and can crack if you are unlucky, but are often undamaged. I've glued a couple of Paterson ones with minor cracks and they have kept on going. Eventually they'll probably go again, but I have a couple of dozen, no big deal.
You should go with what you prefer, or are used to, but by all means try the alternative if it's presented, it's how we all learn, isn't it? I use Paterson simply because they're the easiest to find where I live, it seems, as I've acquired a number of tanks and reels nearly new (or even unused) for a fiver at recycling shops. Granted, I can't re-load them if they are wet. But I use a changing bag and wet reels in a changing bag just don't work no matter what they're made of, so, personally, I don't care a whit about that. Darkroom users may place more importance on it for legitimate reasons. Take on board different peoples opinions but beware of those who say "this is the only way", because that's patently not the case. I don't seek to convert anyone to Paterson, etc. It's simply a case of what I use, and why. Draw your own conclusions for your own situation from peoples comments.
Cheers,
Brett
nikon_sam
Shooter of Film...
I've used Paterson tanks & reels since high school...I have a single reel tank, several double and three roll tanks and one 5 reel tank (I have never used the 5 reel tank) plus a four reel stainless steel tank that I only use for 120 film (2 reels)...
I have never had any problems using any of these tanks outside of loading reels in the hottest times of summer...I also use the tent style changing bag which helps keeping the bag away from your hands, reels and film...
Be sure to always check how much developer and fix you'll need to cover your reels...on the Paterson tanks these numbers are on the bottom of the tank...
Clean everything when you're done and dry as much as possible before putting it away, don't rush anything and try to develop a system that you stick with every time, use thermometers and timers, proper measuring devices and stick to one type of developer until you feel confident then start venturing out to other types...
I've been developing film and prints for over 40 years now and I'm still amazed to see the negatives coming out of the final rinse and watching the prints come up in the trays...
I hope your experience is the same as most of us who love this whole process...
I have never had any problems using any of these tanks outside of loading reels in the hottest times of summer...I also use the tent style changing bag which helps keeping the bag away from your hands, reels and film...
Be sure to always check how much developer and fix you'll need to cover your reels...on the Paterson tanks these numbers are on the bottom of the tank...
Clean everything when you're done and dry as much as possible before putting it away, don't rush anything and try to develop a system that you stick with every time, use thermometers and timers, proper measuring devices and stick to one type of developer until you feel confident then start venturing out to other types...
I've been developing film and prints for over 40 years now and I'm still amazed to see the negatives coming out of the final rinse and watching the prints come up in the trays...
I hope your experience is the same as most of us who love this whole process...
kxl
Social Documentary
I have a few two-reel Patterson tanks, a 5-reel tank and an 8-reel tank. The two-reel tanks are perfect for me. I've used the 5-reel tank once, but I didn't like handling that much dev, stop bath, fixer, etc... (my darkroom is a small converted bathroom). I've never used the 8-reel tank.
roscoetuff
Well-known
Folks: Very helpful encouragement! Thanks.
FWIW, I'm using 35mm. The two-reeler or three-reeler looks like to get maximum use, and the two-reeler likely the most compatible with my changing bag size. So I'm thinking about that. Will probably stick with Paterson... because it's what I'm using now. Why mess with success?
DarkroomDave (Butcher) does 5 120-rolls at a time. He's a big guy. I'm more of the short stuff variety. So two or three rolls looks to be the outside limit of the comfort zone. He and Cris Crawford seem to use a very similar (comparatively) vigorous agitation rather than the swirl method often shown. I followed Dave and Cris for better (not worse).
Nikon Sam: Especially... thanks for the thought! I'm late to this game, a virtual geezer turning 60 this year, but sometimes you CAN teach an old dog new tricks. I did use a daylight tank to process movie (now "cine") film as a teenager... but that was long ago and far away... but the smell of fixer is familiar.
A thought buzzing in my head is that one of the very good things that developing and shooting seem to do for me is to cure/control a bit of the GAS through immersion and redirection of those energies into the creative process. And there's intangible with film of driving you to "finish a roll" so you can develop it. Post-processing of the scanned negatives leads to a much simpler routine, than with digital where the temptation can be to retouch every inch. Been there, done that... and learned to go light.
FWIW, I'm using 35mm. The two-reeler or three-reeler looks like to get maximum use, and the two-reeler likely the most compatible with my changing bag size. So I'm thinking about that. Will probably stick with Paterson... because it's what I'm using now. Why mess with success?
DarkroomDave (Butcher) does 5 120-rolls at a time. He's a big guy. I'm more of the short stuff variety. So two or three rolls looks to be the outside limit of the comfort zone. He and Cris Crawford seem to use a very similar (comparatively) vigorous agitation rather than the swirl method often shown. I followed Dave and Cris for better (not worse).
Nikon Sam: Especially... thanks for the thought! I'm late to this game, a virtual geezer turning 60 this year, but sometimes you CAN teach an old dog new tricks. I did use a daylight tank to process movie (now "cine") film as a teenager... but that was long ago and far away... but the smell of fixer is familiar.
A thought buzzing in my head is that one of the very good things that developing and shooting seem to do for me is to cure/control a bit of the GAS through immersion and redirection of those energies into the creative process. And there's intangible with film of driving you to "finish a roll" so you can develop it. Post-processing of the scanned negatives leads to a much simpler routine, than with digital where the temptation can be to retouch every inch. Been there, done that... and learned to go light.
I have an 8 reeler, 2 x 2reelers and a 3 reeler. Why? I got all these from camera fairs as you can't have too many reels and tanks. Also 2 changing bags, 1 very large which takes the big tank, and a smaller one just really for getting a film out of a camera in an emergency. This emergency has not happened in the last 40 years, but you just never know. I'll be ready when it does.
I do Stand Developing in the 2 and 3 reel tanks, but have not yet tried it in the big one; I just process with inversions in that and it doesn't happen with any regularity anyway.
I do Stand Developing in the 2 and 3 reel tanks, but have not yet tried it in the big one; I just process with inversions in that and it doesn't happen with any regularity anyway.
02Pilot
Malcontent
I used a two-reel AP tank exclusively for years before I acquired a four-reel Jobo setup last year. The Jobo is nicer to work with (pours cleaner, easier to handle) even if it is heavier when full. Great to be able to do two rolls of 120 at a time as well, though most of what I'm shooting these days is 35mm.
I'm working in a blacked out bathroom, so I don't need to use a changing bag (thank goodness - I hated working that way). Space would be an issue with more than a two-reel tank, at least in the bag I have.
I certainly wouldn't recommend doing multiple rolls at once until you have a handle on what you're doing. Nothing worse than screwing something up and ruining a roll; it's that much worse when it's more than one.
I'm working in a blacked out bathroom, so I don't need to use a changing bag (thank goodness - I hated working that way). Space would be an issue with more than a two-reel tank, at least in the bag I have.
I certainly wouldn't recommend doing multiple rolls at once until you have a handle on what you're doing. Nothing worse than screwing something up and ruining a roll; it's that much worse when it's more than one.
Steve M.
Veteran
Don't get too attached to how smooth things went in the beginning. I learned much more from my mistakes than my successes.
The problem w/ multi roll tanks is that a mistake, and they are inevitable, means you now have a formula for "mistake X 2, X 3, etc" instead of "one mistake". I learned that the hard way. It may be better to use a two reel tank and develop one roll at a time. The empty roll on top serves as a way to keep the chemicals from too quickly dumping back onto your film, which can cause problems.
The problem w/ multi roll tanks is that a mistake, and they are inevitable, means you now have a formula for "mistake X 2, X 3, etc" instead of "one mistake". I learned that the hard way. It may be better to use a two reel tank and develop one roll at a time. The empty roll on top serves as a way to keep the chemicals from too quickly dumping back onto your film, which can cause problems.
lynnb
Veteran
I use a 2x 35mm reel Paterson tank for the same reason Steve mentioned about compounding errors. I use an empty reel as a spacer because the Paterson plastic clips I had worked up the column during agitation.
I wouldn't mind a tank that took 2x 120 but can't be bothered, 600mls is easy to invert with 2 rolls of 35mm but 1 litre is probably getting a bit heavy to process 2x 120.
I use the Ilford rapid wash technique to speed wash time up, except I use 10, 20, 20, 20 inversions with each load of water (which still takes only about 5 mins - I'd rather have it well washed than not).
I wouldn't mind a tank that took 2x 120 but can't be bothered, 600mls is easy to invert with 2 rolls of 35mm but 1 litre is probably getting a bit heavy to process 2x 120.
I use the Ilford rapid wash technique to speed wash time up, except I use 10, 20, 20, 20 inversions with each load of water (which still takes only about 5 mins - I'd rather have it well washed than not).
giganova
Well-known
I use two Jobo tanks that hold two 35mm rolls each (for a total of 4 rolls of film), and develop them back to back with the same one-shot developer, adding 10% more time to the second tank.
J enea
Established
i have the 2 roll 3 roll and 5 roll patersen and use them all. the 3 roll gets the most use as its 1 liter of chems in it and when i mix up e-6 i mix in 1 liter batches. I would use the 5 roll as it holds 3 rolls of 120 but it takes a while to pour back them chems into the bottles and with e-6 im a little nervous about the few extra seconds. does not take much to blow out highlights with e-6. for B&W its not an issue, at least for me. others may disagree
MikeMGB
Well-known
I have 3 two reel Patterson tanks. I can fit all three in my changing bag and will regularly process 5 or 6 rolls of film in one sitting. I can have the films in all three processed in an hour from set-up to clean-up because as soon as one is fixing I can start the dev on the next.
roscoetuff
Well-known
Steve: Thanks for the cheery news! Yes that's reality, smooth will lead to rough more often than not... but gee... can't a guy enjoy the moment? LOL.
Ah... then there's this... which ain't a toss off, but reality, too:
And in case I'm inclined to think that's a fluke:
Okay, so this means 1 shot of chemistry (enough to cover 1 reel) in a 2-reel tank. Do you ever do 2-reels in the 2-reel tank, or did you just determine that this helped assure that your agitation was adequate... because it sounds like it simply adds more sloshing and therefore more active agitation... which might be accomplished in a number of fashions.... ergo some others do (or don't) follow this routine? And did you decide to scratch the whole multi-reel thing 'cause it kills two rolls not one? Believe me, I completely understand THAT... and would share the same fears. But I'm not sure I understand what drove the change in procedure... fully.
FWIW, Youtubes I watched had whole host of agitation methods, but this is the first I've heard of consciously using a larger size tank to derive a certain benefit of this sort. Makes sense. But then some folks seem to use a very gentle swirling sort of agitation, while others are more vigorous. I like to think I followed the latter "with vigor". But this leaves me wondering whether your objective is more vigor in agitation, or perhaps you're using a double helping of chemistry for 1 reel, and assuring more chemical contact?
Giganova... I still need to get in touch... and will. I look at the Jobo tanks... and they look sweet.
Mike: I can't even keep my name straight, much less imagine the one-armed paper hanger you seem to be able to manage effortlessly. Bravo!
Ah... then there's this... which ain't a toss off, but reality, too:
And in case I'm inclined to think that's a fluke:
Okay, so this means 1 shot of chemistry (enough to cover 1 reel) in a 2-reel tank. Do you ever do 2-reels in the 2-reel tank, or did you just determine that this helped assure that your agitation was adequate... because it sounds like it simply adds more sloshing and therefore more active agitation... which might be accomplished in a number of fashions.... ergo some others do (or don't) follow this routine? And did you decide to scratch the whole multi-reel thing 'cause it kills two rolls not one? Believe me, I completely understand THAT... and would share the same fears. But I'm not sure I understand what drove the change in procedure... fully.
FWIW, Youtubes I watched had whole host of agitation methods, but this is the first I've heard of consciously using a larger size tank to derive a certain benefit of this sort. Makes sense. But then some folks seem to use a very gentle swirling sort of agitation, while others are more vigorous. I like to think I followed the latter "with vigor". But this leaves me wondering whether your objective is more vigor in agitation, or perhaps you're using a double helping of chemistry for 1 reel, and assuring more chemical contact?
Giganova... I still need to get in touch... and will. I look at the Jobo tanks... and they look sweet.
Mike: I can't even keep my name straight, much less imagine the one-armed paper hanger you seem to be able to manage effortlessly. Bravo!
Last edited:
roscoetuff
Well-known
Agitation videos I found "mostly" helpful (Hi Chris! Thanks!):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?list=PLsQTNpmJWGmQVQkSP8oYYgNDqLsxh_ix9&v=tOUUO3dDLqA
And Darkroom Dave (Butcher) former Ilford chemist:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RGCR-uMdxVY&t=72s
Fairly different, and yet compared to the Ted Forbes (?) gentle demos on his Art of Photography TV blogs... a lot more vigorous. Not sure how you can tell whether you're really doing something wrong here or not. The inversion approach appeals... we're not handling nitroglycerine on one hand so not too gingerly... but we're trying to not form bubbles by over-stirring things up... otherwise we wouldn't be banging the tanks all the time to dislodge them. Sounds like the chemical reaction tends to yield itself to bubbling anyway to some extent. I'd guess that the truth is that it's harder to tell what you did right and easier to identify what you (might) have done wrong. That'd be my case at the moment.
Reason? I'm painting a work table in the basement where my scanning set-up goes... so this involves a few evenings off the schedule. So I haven't had a chance to look at my work in positive yet. Ain't blissful ignorance nice? Yep.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?list=PLsQTNpmJWGmQVQkSP8oYYgNDqLsxh_ix9&v=tOUUO3dDLqA
And Darkroom Dave (Butcher) former Ilford chemist:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RGCR-uMdxVY&t=72s
Fairly different, and yet compared to the Ted Forbes (?) gentle demos on his Art of Photography TV blogs... a lot more vigorous. Not sure how you can tell whether you're really doing something wrong here or not. The inversion approach appeals... we're not handling nitroglycerine on one hand so not too gingerly... but we're trying to not form bubbles by over-stirring things up... otherwise we wouldn't be banging the tanks all the time to dislodge them. Sounds like the chemical reaction tends to yield itself to bubbling anyway to some extent. I'd guess that the truth is that it's harder to tell what you did right and easier to identify what you (might) have done wrong. That'd be my case at the moment.
Reason? I'm painting a work table in the basement where my scanning set-up goes... so this involves a few evenings off the schedule. So I haven't had a chance to look at my work in positive yet. Ain't blissful ignorance nice? Yep.
Scrambler
Well-known
Your plans sound good to me.
I use a three roll tank (Paterson) myself - it will also do 2 x 120 rolls.
Enjoy!
I use a three roll tank (Paterson) myself - it will also do 2 x 120 rolls.
Enjoy!
nikon_sam
Shooter of Film...
If you practice and feel confident enough you can get two rolls of 120 film on one Paterson reel...do that times two reels in a three reel (35mm) tank and you use half the developer than doing a single roll on each reel... so that comes out to 1 liter for four rolls of 120 film...
