BTZS tubes - light handling technique

[pellicle]

Hi

being superstitious (or perhaps just stubborn) I've been cautious about light handling. I've previously done mainly tray processing, but after trying the JOBO 2553 - 2905n systems for a bit went to the Tubes for a variety of reasons.

Now, when it comes to opening them and disgorging the spent developer (there's only 55ml in there after all so I reckon it'll be depleted ohh ... and I use D-76 with ADOX sheets mainly now) I am told that this can be done in full light (eg http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TMXQO5ATgiY by Fred).

This is the bit that makes me feel cautious, that I can open the tubes after development and stop bath them in full light. So far I've been doing it in very subued light to minimise any fogging.

I guess that this makes sense to me logically as I expect that 1) with no developer present any additional photo reaction will be small if detectable 2) after fixing no photosensitive material will remain in the emulsion.

so, here's my question ... is anyone else using just normal room light (as in that video) for the disgorging / stop bath step before going on to fixing?

Thanks

 

[jeroldharter]

I use a dim amber safelight, just enough to be able to read my cheat sheet for developing times for each tube.
I dump the spent developer and cap into a container and then place the tube into a tray of stop with the opening facing away from the light source. I spin the tubes in stop bath every 30 seconds while the other tubes finish developing.

Then I remove each sheet of film and place in fixer. I use a slosher tray which holds 6 sheets of 4x5. I give the fixer a swirl for about 10 seconds and then flip on the room lights. It is kind of fun to watch the images clear in the fixer.

I have never tried to do it in full room light. Seems like hubris. I have never had any problems with fogging or increased B+F.

 

[edtbjon]

While Fred proves his method does work, most of us are tought that this shouldn't be done. Using a subdued light like Jerold does simply feels better. I havn't used BTZS tubes, but had good use of this piece of knowledge when "speeding up" the drain/fill sequence for a HP CombiPlan. (I lift the lid and drain the developer, just like pouring of the hot water from a saucepan with potatoes, holding the lid to keep the film holder in the tank. Then shortens this sequence by about a minute.)
I havn't done any actual measuring of b/f, but the negs sure look alright. If the light would have caused damage this damage shouldn't be even, but stronger on the outer sheets and on the top end of the films. The light I use is a normal yellow/green darkroom light. I do try to cover the tank/film from direct light.
Also, if I remember correctly, the older version of the web instructions explictly said "subdued light". (Before the YouTube days, the instructions was a series of pictures with text.)

//Björn

 

[trexx]

I did a batch Thursday, that was not of great importance. So after loading the tubes in the darkroom I carried the whole set up to my sunny kitchen counter. ( the darkroom was cooler then I wanted to be ). I processed as normal for BTZS tubes, my float water is also my stop bath. When time was done I uprighted the tubes, unscrewed the developer cup, and placed in the stop. While I did not point the tubes or place them in direct sun light i did not try to shield them either.

When compared to similarly developed neg I could tell no increase in BF. And this does make sense. You do a clip test, the leader of a roll of 35mm, and it has bee in all sorts of light. but because of no developer, no image. So the only time for development is the time from removing the developer cup to getting in and fully immersed in stop. For me that is under one sec. One second of developing time in 5min of development is .33% of the time. All my times for BTZS are more in the 9-11 minute range.

TR

 

[pellicle]

Trexx

thanks for doing the experiment (which i've been too slack to do)

as I said :

I guess that this makes sense to me logically as I expect that 1) with no developer present any additional photo reaction will be small if detectable 2) after fixing no photosensitive material will remain in the emulsion.

and then you said:

And this does make sense. You do a clip test, the leader of a roll of 35mm, and it has bee in all sorts of light. but because of no developer, no image

which all makes sence

I think I'll be less anal about this from now on!