welll.... okay.. I'm a habitual soaker 'cause of superstition about
uneven development, especially when there's short development times,
and a belief (however irrational) that if I pre-soak the film it'll
eliminate any reaction between the antihallation layer (washed off)
and the developer as well as pre-saturate the emulsion with water so
the development will be more even and there'll be less likelihood of
air bubbles sticking to the emulsion.
Once I establish a baseline, though, how does one accommodate pre-soak
as well as developer dilution when doing additional tests?
Alternately, am I just completely whacked in thinking that if I
slow down the development by dilution, I might be more likely to get
more recognizable steps in my strips as well as a tiny bit more edge
definition?
[OBVIOUS DISCLAIMER]
Clearly, I'm speaking way out of my expertise, here, and wanting to stand
on the shoulders of giants (APUG variety) to accomplish what I want.
Hope none of you giants mind being stood on.
[END OF DISCLAIMER]
A quick recap for those who have read this far and want to be saved the
trouble of going back in the thread to see what the heck I'm trying to do.
Caught, as I am, between the demise of the previous darkroom and the
christening of a new one; having recently learned that a friend of mine
might be interested in processing his own film if I can boil it down
to the lowest-maintenance proceedure possible; and finally, wanting to
have an "un-darkroom in a dairy crate" that I can take on road trips and
process the day's film in a motel room, I've been trying to boil down a
film processing workflow that uses very long-lasting chemistry, requires
no temperature control and not very much time control, and can all fit
in a diary crate, ammo box, or some other easily portable container.
I've identified two developers, Ansco 130 and Diaphine, that aren't
temperature finicky. I've previously read that Ansco 130 isn't even
time-sensitive past a certain point when used as a separated developer
for paper. Hopefully, that holds true for film as well.
That brings the story forward to this test. Since I couldn't find
archived discussion of advisable times to use with separated Ansco 130
and film (in this case, Tri-X), I did the previously-mentioned test but,
as you can see, put two and two together and got five.
The "deliverable" I hope to come up with are my optimum exposure indexes
and development times for Tri-X in Diaphine and Tri-X and a lower-speed
film (probably fp4) in separated Ansco 130. No densitometer or
sensitometer available.
I actually typed up my reply yesterday, but had to run somewhere else
and got paranoid about losing the contents of my textarea box, so I saved
it in a gmail "draft" to myself. This morning, I've installed the mozex
extension in my firefox browser so now I can use gvim (vi) to edit all my
textarea text and happiness abounds. Now, let's see if I start getting
good results on my strip tests.
Tom and others -- Thanks VERY much for your wisdom and guidance
throughout this process.
-KwM-
Kevin W. Mullet
"It is better to conquer yourself than to win a thousand battles.
Then the victory is yours. It cannot be taken from you,