Advice on drums for paper printing

[Sirius Glass]

Regarding the question of post #23:

I processed a 16" x 20" Ilford MGFB IV print in a Jobo drum. As the FB paper absorbed the solutions, it expanded—a lot. The ribs holding the ends in place forced the expanding print to buckle, causing the emulsion to kink sharply in a manner that couldn’t be ironed out in the usual method of flattening with a heavily-weighted, plastic-surfaced sheet of particleboard.

You can process an RC print in a drum, as it is, like color paper, totally encapsulated in waterproof plastic resin. The paper core stays dry.

What if one were to not tuck in the fiber paper one side into to rib?

 

[Ian C]

I didn't try that, so I don't know. Maybe it would work. After ruining a 16" x 20", which otherwise looked fine, I chose to reserve FB paper for tray processing.

 

[Fatih Ayoglu]

So you're recommending a drum for each size? Is that just to reduce chemistry usage, or for space considerations?



So you'd recommend against the simmar-roller?



So I need yet another drum for test strips?

Simma drums have a central ring which keeps the drums on the Simma roller, I have 8x10, 11x14 and 16x20 ones and they all have rings right in the middle.

I recommend drums as the work is clean, fairly well temperature controlled, you dont inhale much of the chemicals, use little chemicals etc. However what I have been told is, because everytime the drum shakes the chemicals inside quite a bit, the chemicals are one time use only. I usually use developer once, and blix twice.

 

[mshchem]

I've processed 5 8x10 fiber prints in a Jobo 3005. Before I put it on the processor I stood the drum on end filled it with water (with paper) to prewet the paper. This worked perfectly, also if the paper base is saturated with water doesn't absorb fixer.

 

[xkaes]

However what I have been told is, because everytime the drum shakes the chemicals inside quite a bit, the chemicals are one time use only. I usually use developer once, and blix twice.

If you have drums that are shaking that much, you've got a different problem! A bigger concern with tube rollers (or even table tops) is that they must be level.

I only use chemicals once in drums because they use so little -- and I'm a cheapskate!!!

 

[Paul Howell]

I have drums that range from 5X7 to 16X20, cibachrome and Bessler, and few off brand, avoid Unicolor, the seals are likely bad. I have used drums for both color and black and white, FB and RC. I use drums for black and white when printing just a few prints, only need a small amount of chemistry, I use my chemistry as single shot then dump it, results are very consistent. For larger batches I revert to trays which is much quicker as I don't need to wash and dry the drums between prints. The only issue with FB is the print sticking to the side of the drum and having to take time make I don't rip it getting it out. Color is petty straight forward, chemistry in a water bath at 100F, making sure the drum is very clean. I have a couple of Unicolor motor bases, the 16X20 drum just fits.

 

[btaylor]

Concur with Paul Howell on the Unicolor drums- the gaskets on the end caps fail and you can't buy new ones (although there surely would be a DIY solution, but why go through the hassle).

 

[DREW WILEY]

All kinds of drums work, some better than others. The simpler, the better. I have em all the way from 8x10 print size clear up to 30X40 inch capacity. Mix your chemistry fresh, just enough for each session, use it one shot, and keep your temperature at a standardized constant (I use 83F/30C for two-minute each Dev and Blix steps), less time needed for pre-wet, stop, and intermediate rinse; then I wash the print extra well.

 

[halfaman]

Does wrinkling occur with fiber based paper:?

I use them for RA4 printing so only RC paper. For B&W I still use trays.

 

[brianssparetime]

Credit to Ian C. for helping me get at what I wanted to know:

> There’s basically only two one-piece cylinder-and-base units: The 2820 Test drum that’s about 165 mm internal length and the 2830 with internal length 261.5 mm. Then there is the 2870 module, which is an extension cylinder—no bottom—with a cam-lock connection ring.

> I use the 2820 Test Drum for 1 or 2 prints of 4” x 5”, the 2830 for 1 or 2 prints of 8” x10”, the 2840 for a single 11” x 14” print, and the 2850 for a single 16” x 20” print.

https://www.manualslib.com/manual/1779771/Jobo-3012.html?page=12

Also helpful to know that a 2840 = a 2820 drum with 2870 extension and a 2850 is a 2830 drum with a 2870 extension.

 

[Randy Stewart]

Correct me if I am wrong, but I do not think any fiber-based color paper has been made in more than 40 years. It's all RC.

1. Drum/format size? Since chemistry is used one-shot if you want consistent print results, to consume chemistry efficiently, YES, you match the drum size to the print size.
2. Chemistry amount vary? YES, each size drum will use an optimal amount of chemistry: the least amount required to cover and process the print. This is usually determined by the amount of chemistry required to fully develop the size of print used.
3. Test strips? One small test strip would be pretty uneconomical to process in a drum. I commonly will make a full sized print, breaking it up into sections and exposing a number of trial strips on the one sheet. Also, color balance/exposure meters for home color printing used to be one of the most expensive items in a color darkroom. Now, really high-end ones sell for pennies if you can find one. Properly set up, they remove a lot of pain of repetition and wasted time from the process.
4. Drum brands: My personal preference is Cibachrome drums. They fully disassemble to be washed and fully dried in less than a minute. Many others only open one end and are harder to dry for reuse. Unicolor started it all, but there is practically no difference among the rest. Powered roller base for drum? YES. The Unicolor unit is bulletproof. It rotates a couple of revolutions, then automatically reverses direction to avoid standing waves of chemistry in the drum. Beseler sold one which could be switched from bi-directional to single directional. Other brands were usually single direction only. You used to be able to pick one up for $10, but I see they now go for about $100. The folks who bring you the Filmomat developing machine recently introduced a combined drum roller and unheated water bath tray for $600. A new definition for huts pa.

 

[brianssparetime]

Thanks - this is really helpful info.

When you talk about color balance / exposure meters, are you referring to something like the Besseler PM2? I didn't know those existed, and it was interesting to read up on them. I'm not sure how much it would help me though - I rarely have skin tones in my photos and I'm not sure what color/level I'd calibrate on.... Curious to hear how you use it.

 

[xkaes]

You'll always have color prints that come out with a color cast/tone stronger or weaker than reality. If you happen to like it, no problem, but if it's a little too much magenta, and you want to decrease it, that's where the color head or filter comes in. You first figure out how much magenta you want to remove (a different discussion) and then you use the color analyzer the make it happen (yet another discussion).

Of course, you can always use trial & error if you have time on your hands.

 

[brianssparetime]

You'll always have color prints that come out with a color cast/tone stronger or weaker than reality. If you happen to like it, no problem, but if it's a little too much magenta, and you want to decrease it, that's where the color head or filter comes in.

Yes. I'm familiar with the principles on color printing.

You first figure out how much magenta you want to remove (a different discussion)

Yes. I've read about using those RA4 color filter sets to judge color adjustment.

and then you use the color analyzer the make it happen (yet another discussion).

If you already know your color adjustment, I don't think you really need an analyzer.

From what I've read, you calibrate/zero out the analyzer on a good print at a particular point, and then, if you want to reproduce the tone of that point on a new print, you change your color mix until the analyzer again reads zero. Hence my question above: what kind of point would I calibrate on if most of my photos don't involve skintones? It's primarily useful for creating consistency across prints, and I'm less worried about that.

 

[koraks]

what kind of point would I calibrate on if most of my photos don't involve skintones?

Most of the time you calibrate an analyzer to neutral grey. This is commonly done (approximated) by taking an 'average' negative and placing a diffusor below the lens. The diffused image is taken as the basis for the analyzer's calibration. An alternative and better approach is to use a negative with a decently sized grey patch. You can easily make one.

When printing, the diffusor trick can be used to approximate the proper filtration, and/or you can use (more or less) neutral grey areas in a negative as a measurement target. Clouds often work well, concrete generally gets pretty close, too.

 

[brianssparetime]

Most of the time you calibrate an analyzer to neutral grey. This is commonly done (approximated) by taking an 'average' negative and placing a diffusor below the lens. The diffused image is taken as the basis for the analyzer's calibration. An alternative and better approach is to use a negative with a decently sized grey patch. You can easily make one.

When printing, the diffusor trick can be used to approximate the proper filtration, and/or you can use (more or less) neutral grey areas in a negative as a measurement target. Clouds often work well, concrete generally gets pretty close, too.

Thanks for the additional detail. That does make more sense than spot metering. Just to confirm, you are talking about color printing here, right?

 

[btaylor]

Yes, koraks is referring to color printing. When out shooting I will try to photograph a frame with an 18% gray card in it so I have a reference point in the darkroom. As long as I am using the same film stock and in the same lighting it will get me pretty much spot on once I make a test print that matches my card. I use the Kodak viewing filters to determine corrections. After that I am usually only dealing with small density and/or filtration decisions on a given print. I have a number of color analyzers that I have never used (maybe someday!). They require you to make "the perfect print" using a given film and paper combo to calibrate them. Being the impatient fellow I am, once I make that "perfect print" I just keep on printing! I have a bunch of test negatives of the films and lighting I usually use taped to the wall of my darkroom along with the corresponding "perfect print" of the gray card and the paper and filtration values I used to get there. Gets me really close to the print I want with minimal time and effort.

 

[koraks]

Just to confirm, you are talking about color printing here, right?

Yes, koraks is referring to color printing.

Certainly so.

 

[DREW WILEY]

When calibrating for any specific batch paper, I always start with a master negative, of a precisely exposed McBeth Color Checker chart, which includes a neutral gray scale all the way from white to black. These are much more precisely made than gray cards or DIY color patches. And by precise exposure, I mean under the exact K color temp lighting the color neg film itself is standardized to (with Kodak, this is 5500K daylight).

It helps to have a good color temp meter and a few cc filters. But if you don't, try to do it on a day with an even white natural "softbox" look, rather than an overcast day with bluish light, or in the shade under a deep blue sky. Then you just do experimental test strips or small prints, adjusting the colorhead, until the print matches as closely as possible the McBeth chart under the same viewing light (hopefully itself of high quality).

Color analyzers are not necessary. A good colorhead is. And those Kodak viewing filter sets can be handy for learning purposes, but realize that the cc values on those are rarely equivalent to the cc increments of colorheads themselves, nor are the response of the dyes in color paper completely linear. You have to fine tune everything by eye regardless, under a high quality viewing light. And then you only arrive at a starting point, since each shot you choose to print might differ somewhat in actual lighting and subject matter coloration, unless it was shot in a tightly-controlled studio environment.

No big deal. With a little experience, RA4 printing gets pretty easy. Just make certain your chemistry is fresh and used at consistent correct temperature.