• 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

All you D76 1:1 users- do you use a larger tank or do you increase time?

NB23

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Jul 26, 2009
Messages
4,307
Format
35mm
135 and 120 film fit on 8x10 inch paper to make contact sheets.

Absolutely!
Well actually i always struggle with the last row of 36 exposures, it never fits, it's always cut in half. But it's more a matter of spacing ersus the film itself. That's why i always bulk roll about 30 exposures...
 

Bill Burk

Subscriber
Allowing Ads
Joined
Feb 9, 2010
Messages
9,476
Format
4x5 Format
HiBill

Some reels will do and Patterson provide a spring circlip to secure them when new in box.

If you don't have a clip you need to fill the tank with reels or not invert.

Noel

I bought a Paterson tank when it first came out.

I even filled out the product registration card. You know how I can tell?

They mailed me a clip.
 

baachitraka

Member
Joined
Apr 6, 2011
Messages
3,649
Location
Bremen, Germany.
Format
Multi Format
Absolutely!
Well actually i always struggle with the last row of 36 exposures, it never fits, it's always cut in half. But it's more a matter of spacing ersus the film itself. That's why i always bulk roll about 30 exposures...

I stop at 35th frame for all B+W. Its easy for contacts as well as the storage.
 

Xmas

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Sep 4, 2006
Messages
6,398
Location
UK
Format
35mm RF
I bought a Paterson tank when it first came out.

I even filled out the product registration card. You know how I can tell?

They mailed me a clip.

There has always been one in my box.
 

MattKing

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
55,260
Location
Delta, BC Canada
Format
Medium Format
If you use less stock per roll than the amount recommended by Kodak you aren't risking problems with overall contrast - you can correct for most of that by extending development.

Your problems are most likely to be related to localized developer exhaustion. If you have a bunch of high key images, or others that would lead to dense negatives, there may not be enough chemical activity available in your developer to fully develop all parts of the negative.

Other developers have more chemical activity available in each millilitre of stock, so you are less likely to run into the problem.

The volumes printed on the bottom of the Paterson tanks only indicate how much liquid will be necessary to cover the film. They say nothing about how much developer is necessary to fully develop the film.

If you use less stock for each roll, it will work inconsistently - full development for some rolls, slightly incomplete or uneven develop for others.

Kodak builds extra safety margin into their recommendations - but I am inherently conservative in such matters, so I follow them.

Considerations like this are why I recommend a replenishment regime.
 

JRoosa

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Jul 31, 2014
Messages
112
Location
Colorado, US
Format
35mm
I just figured out why sometimes I need to use a 4.5 grade filter to get reasonable prints from my negatives. Thanks APUG!

I just ordered a 4-reel tank so I can do two reels with more dilute developers.

J.
 

Xmas

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Sep 4, 2006
Messages
6,398
Location
UK
Format
35mm RF

Kodaks D76 data sheet text which I have a PDF of...
'
Don’t reuse or replenish the diluted
solution. You can develop one 135-3 roll (80 square inches)
in 473 mL (16 ounces) or two rolls together in 946 mL
(one quart) of diluted developer. If you process one
135-36 roll in a 237 mL (8-ounce) tank or two 135-36 rolls
in a 473 mL (16-ounce) tank, increase the development time
by 10 percent (see the following tables).
'

It does not say 473mls is a minimum for complete development, badly written (I'll give you) eg first 135-3 should read 135-36.
Ilfords data sheet for ID-11 is better written and additionally provides times for 1+3.
The other clue is using a litre of stock you can process 10 films (135-36) so there is enough capability in 100 milli litres of stock for one film.
My Agfa daylight loader only needs 200 mls {or less) for 35mm (135-36), Ive done 1+1 ID-11 in it with no detectable contrast difference, but it does need continuous rotation.
The only problem with using 1.0l stock for ten films (Ive found) is needing to filter 'debris' from earlier films, which is just as likely with replenishment... I use a coffee paper filter.
Note most of my film is Kodak cine negative, and when I use D76 it is a scratch mix D76d, pH buffered for stability/longevity, Kodaks commerical packing may be very similar.
If you are not getting contrast for grade 2 - more time is needed.
 

Bill Burk

Subscriber
Allowing Ads
Joined
Feb 9, 2010
Messages
9,476
Format
4x5 Format
I just figured out why sometimes I need to use a 4.5 grade filter to get reasonable prints from my negatives. Thanks APUG!

I just ordered a 4-reel tank so I can do two reels with more dilute developers.

J.

Funny, I found myself thinking about this on my way to the dentist yesterday.

JRoosa, Since you suspect you are getting under development, don't be surprised if the concentration "isn't the only reason". I hope you can find a way to evaluate the contrast of your development.