Assistance: Neopan 400, Jobo, and DD-X

[Baisao]

In a bit of a fog I loaded an important roll of Neopan 400 into a cogged Jobo tank, having never developed this film with constant agitation. I could invert, I guess, but I'd have to replace the cog (which hasn't wanted to budge so far). Sigh.

I normally develop Neopan 400 in DD-X(1+4) @ 20° for 8 min. after a 5 min presoak. Box speed. I understand the 15% rule of thumb but in practice this appears to be highly variable.

Does anyone have experience with this combination and feel generous enough to share their time and temp for continuous agitation with Neopan 400 in DD-X?

Thank you,
Jim

 

[pentaxuser]

I hope there is someone here who has experience of this but if not two thoughts strike me.

1. Isn't there a special cap for the cogged lid to allow inversion

2. Even if 15% isn't quite right I don't think that say 5% either side of this will be the difference between success and abject failure

If you can sacrifice any one of the frames then you could cut a section off and develop for 15% less then use that to get very close to the correct reduction for the rest of the film

Best of luck

pentaxuser

 

[Richard S. (rich815)]

I develop for 70% of development times for JOBO constant agitation vs normal SS tank with 1 minute inversions.

 

[RobC]

A big cork if there isn't a special cap. And obviously for inversion you need a lot more chemistry so that film is covered when its on end.

Also, since Jobo recommend a pre-soak which slows development, then I'd say 15% reduction will be too much compared to your normal dev which is already using a pre-soak. So if you go for the jobo processing I'd hazard a guess of 5% to 10% reduction in time to mitigate the extra contrast due to constant agitation.

Unless anyone can tell you how much time difference a pre-soak makes to normal inversion processing.

 

[Richard S. (rich815)]

I forgot to add that I do a 5 min presoak before using my JOBO and constant agitation. And I still have found 30% reduction in development time vs normal SS tank developing as even when is presoak with the SS tanks I only did short 1 min presoaks. Just my experience but this is with 3-4 different films and using D-76, Rodinal and HC-110, though I cannot see DD-X being much different.

 

[BradS]

Is it not possible to go back into the dark and load the film into what ever reel and tank you normally use?

 

[Baisao]

Isn't there a special cap for the cogged lid to allow inversion

I have the caps but unlike my other 2000-series tanks the cog has been a bugger to remove.

Is it not possible to go back into the dark and load the film into what ever reel and tank you normally use?

I thought of this but wanted to avoid scratching the film by pulling it off and reloading it onto another reel. I just went through that.

Otherwise, both would have been great alternatives.

 

[Baisao]

I develop for 70% of development times for JOBO constant agitation vs normal SS tank with 1 minute inversions.

Also, since Jobo recommend a pre-soak which slows development, then I'd say 15% reduction will be too much compared to your normal dev which is already using a pre-soak. So if you go for the jobo processing I'd hazard a guess of 5% to 10% reduction in time to mitigate the extra contrast due to constant agitation.

You fellas have touched upon the reason for my confusion: rule of thumb estimates range from 0%-15%-30% reductions. These reductions in time would, I suppose, result in up to a 1 stop difference over nominal development. Massive Dev gives a time of 7 minutes (no pre-soak adjustment) so a 30% reduction would be just short of 5 minutes.

Considering that this is pretty fast I may just roll the hard six and develop it at 7 minutes (15% less than my 8 min. and no adjustment from Massive Dev). I'm conflicted but 5 min. seems too fast. This is why some folks dilute 1+9 for using DD-X with constant agitation.

 

[Baisao]

Thank you to everyone for lending their help. I developed the rolls in DD-X(1+4) @ 20° for 7 min. and found that the result was acceptable. The grain was more pronounced than usual but the tonality was close enough. I noted more base fog than usual. Perhaps it was the result of something in the dev or perhaps it was aged and I didn't realize it. I got better results with constant agitation using a dilution of 1+9 on a roll of Acros. If I try Neopan 400 again I may just try the increased dilution and increase my time to 9:30.

 

[Xmas]

My Neopan best before 2011 not fridged shows no sign of any fog...
Rodinal stand 1:100 60 mins 20c.

 

[pentaxuser]

I have the caps but unlike my other 2000-series tanks the cog has been a bugger to remove.

Just curious but I can't make sense of this. Why if you have the cap for the cog top would you want to remove the cog.? Do you mean the cap is difficult to remove from the cog? Thanks


pentaxuser

 

[Baisao]

Just curious but I can't make sense of this. Why if you have the cap for the cog top would you want to remove the cog.? Do you mean the cap is difficult to remove from the cog? Thanks

I can see why this may seem odd. It was suggested that I remove the cog lid, place the cap on, and develop using the inversion method since I have a successful process for inversion. The tank is old and well used. I suspect that is the reason I could not get the cog lid off. The early tanks have an O-ring that can dry out over time and collect scale, or so I've observed.

 

[pentaxuser]

Thanks It was just that I too have a cog-lid but no cap. I know there is a cap and I assumed that instead of having a smooth round lip as the normal red caps do the cog-lid cap has a serrated edge that fits the cog serrations.

Yes I think that the cog-lid can be removed and a normal lid with the normal deep dish shape that accepts the smooth round caps can be fitted but it might be cheaper to get the cog-lid cap?

A cork could be fitted as someone has said instead

pentaxuser

 

[RobC]

I think 2000 series tanks use a lot of chemistry for inversion processing. And I think taking the cog lid off doesn't leave a fitting for the standard cap without using a normal lid. If you have normal lid then just change the whole lid otherwise for a one off get a cork/rubber bung that fits.

 

[Baisao]

I think 2000 series tanks use a lot of chemistry for inversion processing. And I think taking the cog lid off doesn't leave a fitting for the standard cap without using a normal lid. If you have normal lid then just change the whole lid otherwise for a one off get a cork/rubber bung that fits.

Thanks for that. It's moot at this point since I bit the bullet and developed them w/ rotary processing. I will probably just use inversion processing with Neopan 400 from now on. I have a finite amount of stock and don't want to spend rolls on testing for rotary processing when my inversion processing is already dialed in.