Alternatives to tray processing for 8x10

Andrew O'Neill · May 28, 2007

Even though I develop most of my 8x10's in a BTZS tube, tray is the best way...one sheet at a time.

JG Motamedi · May 28, 2007

I have tray developed hundreds of negatives. However, I recently switched to 8x10 developing tubes orginally from J&C and can't imagine going back. I can only do four at a time (used to be able to do six to eight in a tray) but I have yet to scratch a negative, they use very little developer and yet have very even development.

The J&C tubes were welding-electrode storage tubes:
http://www.rodguard.net/products.htm

gr82bart · May 29, 2007

I remember my high school teacher (this was a loooong time ago) using film hangers for developing his 8x10 and 11x14 negatives 'standing up' or vertically. I think he used several vertical 'print washers' as the trays - I guess he plugged them or something. Don't really remember. I do recall him saying he uses more chemical than using a tray, but he made it into a production line. My first introduction to dip and dunk. He was the only one I have ever seen or heard doing this. I don't know if anyone else does?

Regards, Art.

Scott Peters · May 29, 2007

To keep negatives from 'sticking' - remove negs from holders and stack one on top of the other on a lint free cloth...when you have remove all film and stacked then spread the negatives so there is a 1/4 inch 'lip' if you will between each negative - knd of like a fan, but not shaped like a fan, but in a straight line (hard to explain). Then take one at a time with your fingers and place in water and immerse, FULLY. Then because your fingers are now wet, you grab the 1/4 inch on the next neg and then place in water and immerse until all negs are in water. This will ensure no sticking...

Remember one at a time until all are immersed in water. The emulsion backing coming off will provide plenty of slipperyness to avoid any further sticking.

greybeard · May 29, 2007

gr82bart: "He was the only one I have ever seen or heard doing this. I don't know if anyone else does?"

Well, there's always me, and probably a few hundred others scattered around the world.....It is actually a very nice way to develop film--economical, flexible, and reliable. What more could one ask?

Curt · May 29, 2007

Some guy named Michael Kadillak wrote an article for View Camera magazine this month called "Gasseous Burst Agitation" It's in the May/June magazine.

Although I don't use nitrogen burst I do use tanks and hangers and they work very well.

Alex Hawley · May 29, 2007

Threads On Brush Development

Two threads on brush development with Jorge.

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

http://photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=003imv

jmdavis · May 29, 2007

Alex Hawley said:
Two threads on brush development with Jorge.

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

http://photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=003imv

Now to try to find a 5 inch hakke brush. The largest I've found is 3.5 inches.

Mike

Alex Hawley · May 29, 2007

jmdavis said:
Now to try to find a 5 inch hakke brush. The largest I've found is 3.5 inches.

Mike

Yep. I'm going to Emporia Thursday and I'll see what the art supply store there has. If they have something larger than 3.5 inches, I'll let you know. However, I don't see why a 3.5 inch brush wouldn't suffice.

jmdavis · May 29, 2007

Alex Hawley said:
Yep. I'm going to Emporia Thursday and I'll see what the art supply store there has. If they have something larger than 3.5 inches, I'll let you know. However, I don't see why a 3.5 inch brush wouldn't suffice.

I agree that it should work fine, especially for 8x10. But, I can be somewhat obsessive about the strangest things.

FYI, when I'm at my farm one of the closest town's is also named Emporia. Of course it's at least a thousand miles from your Emporia.

Mike

Black Dog · May 30, 2007

Are the BTZS 8x10 tubes still around?I know Silverprint used to stock them IIRC.

Michael Kadillak · May 30, 2007

Curt said:
Some guy named Michael Kadillak wrote an article for View Camera magazine this month called "Gasseous Burst Agitation" It's in the May/June magazine.

Although I don't use nitrogen burst I do use tanks and hangers and they work very well.

After hearing people experiencing difficulty with tray processing as described here and reading about the challenges facing JOBO I felt it prudent to explore options in processing. I can tell you that of all of the processes I have used to develop sheet film, Gaseous Burst Agitation is by far the easiest and most flexible as it is absolutely consistent and can accomodate a wide range of development objectives in a single processing run using Development By Inspection. Flip a switch on the interval timer and pull the sheets when the processing time is completed.

Although it was industry standard for over 40 years, many photographers have never heard of the technique or had the pleasure of experiencing its results which is a real shame. The problem of large tank size is being worked on as we are going through the last phase of testing small tanks for specific LF formats as we speak. Alistair Inglis is capable of building these tanks and the article has all of the other details. Next time you drop off sheet film transparencies for E6 processing at your local lab, ask them how they are developing your film - if they have a gas burst line set up. You might be surprised at how many of these systems are still operational.

If if is good enough for the professional labs it should be plenty good for us.

Cheers!

DrPablo · Jun 3, 2007

All right, it's time for me to get a completely non-tray related system. I've now gone through about $160 of 8x10 film, literally two full 25-sheet boxes, and only two negatives turned out well enough to print. They all have streaks, scratches, blotches, etc.

So I'm not going to waste my money on 8x10 film anymore if I can't find a way to develop it successfully. And if my only solution is to develop one sheet at a time, I have nothing to lose with one of the systems that only allows 4 sheets at a time.

juan · Jun 5, 2007

I've used brush development for four or five years. I use a three inch (or so) hake brush for 8x10. I vary my brush strokes from side to side and up and down. I also use an 8x10 tray, rather than a larger one.

I resorted to this method due to my frustration with scratching Efke films - since I began using a brush, I don't recall scratching a negative. Yes, it's slow, but I have a good bit of variation in development times, so individual development works best for me.
juan

Harrigan · Jun 5, 2007

Instead of giving up on 8x10 why not take the advice given here and use tubes? I run film in the old inexpensive beseler color and unicolor print tubes. These are very common and can be had for only a few bucks. You can get 8x10 tubes to do one sheet at a time or 2 sheets in 11x14 tubes and so on. They use the minimum amount of chemicals and provide even develpment as long as you do some very minimal had agitation to avoid surge marks. I have never scratched a sheet of film using these tubes except once I scratched a sheet with my fingernail taking it out of the tube. Also once loaded you can work in the light.

Nitro burst is the second method that will totally avoid scrathces and has several advantages. The disadvantage is the large tanks requiring 2 gallons of chemicals or more. I ran a nitro line at a lab and never ever had a single scratched negative. Awesome system to process film, especially large quanity and apparently good for stand as well.

Lastly switch to a film less prone to scratches like TMAX. I can run 10 sheets of tmx or tmy in a tray without any scratches. Most of the cheaper films like EFKE and the film coming out of China are very prone to scratching.

Alternatives to tray processing for 8x10

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency