Pherdinand
the snow must go on
hi all,
I got my hands on some very old brovira rolls and i have an idea or two.
I tried googleing it but did not get results.
Did you ever do or heard of someone doing something like this:
expose the paper normally, then develop it not in a tray but by wiping developer opn the paper with a soaked sponge or rag?
Yes i realize this will give uneven development (which is part of the idea) but i wonder about two things:
-is it even going to do any development as the amount of developer per area will be considerably lower than in a tray or drum;
-how to do fixing as the same method might lead to insufficient fixing which will only show up later as a degradation
the reason, besides looking for a special effect, is of course also that i dont have large enough trays nor the space and utilities to develop rolls of 1.27m (50") width anywhere, even if i limit the length to 2/3rd of the width. meaning a 24x36 format with 1.27m on the wide side (=about 80x120cm)
Any ideas experience or remembering seeing such action?
I got my hands on some very old brovira rolls and i have an idea or two.
I tried googleing it but did not get results.
Did you ever do or heard of someone doing something like this:
expose the paper normally, then develop it not in a tray but by wiping developer opn the paper with a soaked sponge or rag?
Yes i realize this will give uneven development (which is part of the idea) but i wonder about two things:
-is it even going to do any development as the amount of developer per area will be considerably lower than in a tray or drum;
-how to do fixing as the same method might lead to insufficient fixing which will only show up later as a degradation
the reason, besides looking for a special effect, is of course also that i dont have large enough trays nor the space and utilities to develop rolls of 1.27m (50") width anywhere, even if i limit the length to 2/3rd of the width. meaning a 24x36 format with 1.27m on the wide side (=about 80x120cm)
Any ideas experience or remembering seeing such action?
Rob-F
Likes Leicas
I think if you keep applying the chemicals continuously and generously, it ought to work. Or maybe you could maybe use a half-inch deep amount of chemical in the bathtub.
drewbarb
picnic like it's 1999
It'll work but the mess doesn't sound like fun to deal with; and you'll be very hard pressed to get anything like even development. Worse still, getting the prints properly fixed and washed will be even harder.
For prints larger than you have trays to process try wallpaper paste trays. They are six or eight inches wide and come in a range of lengths to accommodate different width paper (think 3 or 4 feet wide, or longer) you just run the paper back and forth by hand in a curve.
For prints larger than you have trays to process try wallpaper paste trays. They are six or eight inches wide and come in a range of lengths to accommodate different width paper (think 3 or 4 feet wide, or longer) you just run the paper back and forth by hand in a curve.
retinax
Well-known
I've read about this being done and no, it won't give uneven development because paper is usually developed to completion. You could use more concentrated developer to speed up the process (wear gloves!). Agree with the worry about fixing though, so I'd invest in the means to test for residual silver halides.
Canyongazer
Canyongazer
Laaarge prints
Laaarge prints
Back when I was teaching we occasionally would make 4 by 6 foot prints just for fun.
Fortunately, we had lots of hands and a large sink available.
After removing everything from the sink we'd treat it as a giant tray.
Two swabbers, one on each side with sponge and a bucket of developer. I found mixing Dektol 1-3 rather than 1-2 gave more even results.
After development, hose print down for a bit, emulsion side up.
Two fixing crew members, one on each side with dedicated sponges and buckets.
Hose it down for a just few minutes (It was RC paper)
Hang from light stands in the studio to dry.
We used Beseler 23C in horizontal mode. The most difficult part was focusing. It is tough getting it sharp in the center and four corners. The paper was taped to a wall about 8' from the enlarger.
They usually did it with 120 but now and then with 35mm, just to show off ;-)
and, of course, the neg needs to be SHARP!
Laaarge prints
Back when I was teaching we occasionally would make 4 by 6 foot prints just for fun.
Fortunately, we had lots of hands and a large sink available.
After removing everything from the sink we'd treat it as a giant tray.
Two swabbers, one on each side with sponge and a bucket of developer. I found mixing Dektol 1-3 rather than 1-2 gave more even results.
After development, hose print down for a bit, emulsion side up.
Two fixing crew members, one on each side with dedicated sponges and buckets.
Hose it down for a just few minutes (It was RC paper)
Hang from light stands in the studio to dry.
We used Beseler 23C in horizontal mode. The most difficult part was focusing. It is tough getting it sharp in the center and four corners. The paper was taped to a wall about 8' from the enlarger.
They usually did it with 120 but now and then with 35mm, just to show off ;-)
and, of course, the neg needs to be SHARP!
Bob Michaels
nobody special
This 111' x 32' print was developed by wiping it down with 600 gallons of developer and 1,200 gallons of fixer.
Pherdinand
the snow must go on
Thanks guys for the ideas and stories, gives me hope
I'll have to look at those wallpaper trays too, for the fixing step, maybe.
For washing i can bring it to the bathtub or shower cabin.
I'll have to look at those wallpaper trays too, for the fixing step, maybe.
For washing i can bring it to the bathtub or shower cabin.
john_s
Well-known
Agfa used to make a paper developer called Metinol which was recommended for this sort of work because it was slower working and gave more time to even out unevenness. I made a tray from a timber frame and a chipboard base and placed in it a length of plastic film, enough to make a makeshift tray. It has to be able to be lifted and emptied and then a stop (might stop staining) then fixer. The amount of liquid doesn't have to be much at all. In my experience concentrated paper developer can be more prone to staining. I would do it in a cool location if possible to slow down development and maybe a tendency of the developer to oxidise.
Metinol was a metol-only developer. It might produce slightly lower than normal contrast: I don't remember because in those days my negs were overdeveloped anyway. This was in about 1972.
It's worth having a look at Lloyd Erlick's recommendations for single tray processing:
http://heylloyd.com/technicl/technicl.html
It's an old site but some things don't change(!)
edit: There are formulas on the www for "Metinol U" but mine was definitely just "Metinol". The formulas are contradictory: some have hydroquinone, and some only metol. Agfa were odd with names: remember Rodinal and Rodinal Special which were totally different. I'm sure I remember Metinol being metol only.
edit2: Metinol was actually metol hydroquinone developer according to a photo of the packet on Google. My memory must have been playing tricks on me (forgiveable at my age).
Metinol was a metol-only developer. It might produce slightly lower than normal contrast: I don't remember because in those days my negs were overdeveloped anyway. This was in about 1972.
It's worth having a look at Lloyd Erlick's recommendations for single tray processing:
http://heylloyd.com/technicl/technicl.html
It's an old site but some things don't change(!)
edit: There are formulas on the www for "Metinol U" but mine was definitely just "Metinol". The formulas are contradictory: some have hydroquinone, and some only metol. Agfa were odd with names: remember Rodinal and Rodinal Special which were totally different. I'm sure I remember Metinol being metol only.
edit2: Metinol was actually metol hydroquinone developer according to a photo of the packet on Google. My memory must have been playing tricks on me (forgiveable at my age).
Last edited:
rulnacco
Well-known
I once went to an exhibition in South London by a fellow who used to work for NME magazine. He did an exhibition of really huge prints of famous musicians that he'd shot mostly with an Olympus OM1--and even though they were from 35 mm, they looked great.
He said that he laid the prints on the floor and used a wet mop to spread the chemicals over the paper. It seemed to work great; not sure about the longevity of the prints, as he'd done them only in the weeks leading up to the exhibition.
I've also heard of people rolling the exposed paper and then unrolling it through the chemical bath in the trays and rolling it back up on the other side--and going back and forth until the process was completed.
He said that he laid the prints on the floor and used a wet mop to spread the chemicals over the paper. It seemed to work great; not sure about the longevity of the prints, as he'd done them only in the weeks leading up to the exhibition.
I've also heard of people rolling the exposed paper and then unrolling it through the chemical bath in the trays and rolling it back up on the other side--and going back and forth until the process was completed.
Nokton48
Veteran
Pherdinand
the snow must go on
Yeah. That's inspiring but i have no space for mega trays thats why the question.
I'll see what the wiping method will give on a smaller format first.
If a print ain't properly fixed, how long till it shows? Not fixed at all i have seen with test prints that ine night is enough but how about an insufficient fix?
I don't have ten years to wait for test results
I'll see what the wiping method will give on a smaller format first.
If a print ain't properly fixed, how long till it shows? Not fixed at all i have seen with test prints that ine night is enough but how about an insufficient fix?
I don't have ten years to wait for test results
john_s
Well-known
.....
If a print ain't properly fixed, how long till it shows? Not fixed at all i have seen with test prints that ine night is enough but how about an insufficient fix?
I don't have ten years to wait for test results
It can take years unfortunately. I've seen large mounted photos (e.g. at my daughter's school) with brown stains appearing in pale areas (possibly more unfixed silver there?)