• Welcome to Photrio!
    Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.
    Click here to sign up

Add Photoflo to Diafine?

bvy

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Jul 22, 2009
Messages
3,280
Location
Pittsburgh
Format
Multi Format
I'm still struggling with airbells in Diafine. I've done five clip tests now, and I've only produced one clip that seems free of them. Apparently that was an anomaly because a second clip doing everything the same produced them again. You can read some of the background here, but I thought I'd start a new thread since I think I know what kind of spots they are now:
(there was a url link here which no longer exists)



To cut to the chase, I've tried both stick and inversion agitation (once a minute) and both three and five minute development times in each bath. I'm still getting airbells. I'm using a Paterson tank and a short clip of 35mm Tri-X (about two frames long) placed toward the core of the reel. I'm knocking the bottom and side of the tank rather briskly after each inversion cycle.

What can I try next? Should I add some PhotoFlo to the developer? If so, add it to both baths or just bath B? I mixed it with distilled water...
 

Attachments

  • clip4-5min,a,b-1min,1invert.jpg
    177.9 KB · Views: 284
Last edited by a moderator:
Many years ago I remember that Kodak advised against adding Photo-Flo to developers. The problem may not be with what PF will do to the developer but with what the developer will do to PF.
 
Photo Flo in the developer can actually increase air bells or air bubbles.

The best solution is the use of a prewet. This always has cured it for me.

PE
 
Photo Engineer said:
Photo Flo in the developer can actually increase air bells or air bubbles.

The best solution is the use of a prewet. This always has cured it for me.

PE
Click to expand...

Also thump the tank one a linoleum block [http://www.usartsupply.com/SPE-4308.html?gclid=CKWagvnMo8ICFY2Tfgodj3AARw#.VHu4QslTnuc] immediately after filling the tank with each chemical. The will break air bubbles free from the film. Per Volquest told me about this. I have found it quite effective when included with prewetting.
 
IIRC, pre-wetting is expressly discouraged with Diafine (and other two bath developers?).
 

The prewetting recommendation is a general recommendation. Prewetting should not be used with XTOL or replenished XTOL when using a Jobo processor, therefore I do not use prewetting for my black & white processing. I do prewet the film when processing C-41 film.
 
I've thumped, rapped, knocked, banged, etc. I'm still getting spots. For my next trick, I tried constant, gentle agitation for bath A, and a quick initial stick agitation for bath B, followed by a gentle inversion after one minute. Again, 3+3 at 70F. Still have a few small spots, but now I'm seeing some streaking. That may have been there all along; the scan was enhanced for contrast to make it more visible. These are flashed shots of a white wall. (Pardon the overlapping frames, as I had to manipulate the film in the dark to advance.)


I'm about to do the unthinkable, and start with a prewet. I also wonder if a warmer developing temperature (85F?) will help the developing agent (bath A) soak into the emulsion.
 

Attachments

  • img922.jpg
    256.6 KB · Views: 324
MattKing said:
IIRC, pre-wetting is expressly discouraged with Diafine (and other two bath developers?).
Click to expand...
This is true, but there was a diafine fanatic over at flickr a few years back who always pre-soaked his film, so who knows? I've never pre-soaked with it, but then I've never gotten air bells with it either.
 
Another clip test forthcoming. This time I repeated the previous test exactly (as best I could in terms of times, temperatures, and agitation) -- the only difference is that I started with a one minute prewash in distilled water.
 
The clip is drying; I'll post it later. But inspection with a loupe shows the damn things are still there. Even with a one minute prewash. Could these be something other than airbells? What else can I do?
 
MattKing said:
IIRC, pre-wetting is expressly discouraged with Diafine (and other two bath developers?).
Click to expand...

I have no direct experience of Diafine but extensive experience of other two-bath developers and teaching a number of people using a wide range of developers. In addition, I have assisted a number of colleagues in troubleshooting exposure/development problems.

Despite what manufacturers and other photographers state, I have found that on every single occasion that someone has presented streaking and/or air bubble problems, the solution that has always worked was:
  • Use a pre-soak of at least two minutes ensuring that this is at exactly the same temperature as the other chemicals.
  • Make sure all chemicals are at exactly the same temperature (I always use 20˚ C).
  • Use four very gentle inversions (you invert the tank as though following the sweep of a lower case letter 'n' and do so over a period that is the equivalent of saying Mississippi one slowly in your head) in the first half minute for all chemicals (pre-soak, developer, stop and fix) followed by one gentle inversion every 30 seconds thereafter.
  • Always tap the bottom of the tank after the inversion BUT only once the solution has fully drained down to the bottom of the tank (this is very easy to hear with Paterson tanks).

Let us know how you solve your problem.

Bests,

David.
www.dsallen.de
 
Attached is the clip -- Diafine with and without prewash, all other variables the same (within my ability). The streaking is gone, but there are actually more airbells in the prewashed clip. That could be just coincidence though (i.e. not enough evidence or testing to suggest that the prewash introduced airbells).

This perhaps will be of more interest to folks who wonder how the discouraged prewash affects development. The clips were scanned together (side by side in a single pass) with no corrections.



Next, I'm going to try developing at 85F and perhaps moving the clip away from the core of the reel. I may also try a run with a conventional developer. I hate to have to switch to a stainless tank and reels, but that might be a last resort.
 

Attachments

  • img924.jpg
    458.4 KB · Views: 217
Last edited by a moderator:
I ran another clip at 85F, no prewash, everything else the same. This time, no spots at all and no streaks at all. What's most striking is how it has affected the density. I plan to try a second clip at high temperature and bring the agitation back to something more in line with the instructions.

 

Attachments

  • img926.jpg
    319.6 KB · Views: 185
Those dots look too small to be airbells on the film surely? And how are airbells supposed to cause streaks?

Are you cleaning the tank and filtering the solutions before use? If you are loading the reel in a changing-bag, give it a good shake out and vacuum-clean the inside if possible. If you are loading in a darkroom make sure the work-surface is spotless and completely dry. If you think your hands sweat at all during loading the reel, then wear nitrile gloves in case tiny drops of sweat are causing this (which would indeed be mitigated by a pre-soak as you saw).
 
Michael R 1974 said:
...it is fairly important the emulsion comes into uniform contact with the second bath.
Click to expand...

I meant to acknowledge this. It's consistent with other things I've read. There's not a lot of control with the Paterson (daylight) tank I'm using, short of taking it into the darkroom or just pouring quickly but gently.

David Allen said:
Firstly, 1 minute pre-soak is too short.

Secondly, stick agitation is also not a good method.

Inversions as described in my previous post are better.
Click to expand...

Your previous post was very helpful, and I'm inverting as you describe. The only time I'm using the stick is as an initial agitation to Bath B, as there's not enough time to get the flimsy lid on the Paterson tank securely enough to do inversions (takes 15 seconds or more).

As far as the water presoak, how will water prep the emulsion better or more differently than, say, more time in bath A? I'm agitating bath A continuously, so I'm not sure what more time in water will accomplish.


Airbells causing streaks? I don't see how. Two different problems. I also thought they were too small to be airbells, so maybe something else is going on.

Yes, everything is clean. I load the film with antistatic gloves. I'm not filtering the solutions, but I don't see anything floating around in it either. I did filter bath A after prepping it, as there was some residual something-or-other that wouldn't dissolve.
 
Photo Engineer said:
Photo Flo in the developer can actually increase air bells or air bubbles.

The best solution is the use of a prewet. This always has cured it for me.

PE
Click to expand...

Diafine specifically recommends against a pre wet, in rather emphatic terms.

I've never tried it to see if the warning is justified because I've never, ever, had airbells with Diafine, and I've used a lot of Diafine going back to the late 70s. No idea why the OP is having this problem.
 

Wellll...if you cut the time in the second bath short I can see that. But it normally just goes to completion anyway, so any unevenness would even itself out.

The OP might try extending the time in the second bath. This is absolutely harmless and won't affect the results as far as speed, degree of development etc.
 

See my next post on this subject. I agree with you but made the suggestion in the face of a real problem.

Now, looking at the streaks, I know that there are at least 2 problems going on here and which I did not fully acknowledge before. The streaks are caused by poor agitation somewhere along the line in this process.

PE
 
Diffusion in and out of chemistry is a function of temperature. Change temp. and change the nature of Diafine totally wrt bath 1 and bath 2. Also, fog goes up with temp. So, what you see is what you deserve with the change in temp.

PE
 
I have a Diafine headache. 85F is at the high end but still within the temperature range suggested by the instructions.

I've run several more clips -- maybe I'm getting carried away. I think my image posts must be getting tiresome, so I'll just cut to the chase as to my perceived findings:
- Increasing temperature increases density (and introduces some fogging)
- Constant agitation of bath A at 85F increases density (versus "gently for 5 seconds each minute" as prescribed)
- Increasing the temperature to 85F caused my spots to disappear. I ran three clips at 85F with no spots; I ran a fourth clip at 70F and the spots reappeared.
 
I finally put some real film through the Diafine, and the results are not disappointing. Looking at the negative, these are the inkiest blacks (highlights) I've ever gotten out of Pan F. I wish it had done more for the shadows, but that's a function of exposure and a lesson learned. Still, the contrast is good, and I'm looking forward to printing some of these.

Also, I processed these at 85F for about three-and-a-half minutes in each bath -- constant gentle inversion of bath A, near stand in bath B. With a good rap of the tank, of course. No spots that I can see with the loupe, but we'll see how the scans look.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register