Capacity of Fuji Hunt C41 X-press kit

[benOM]

I cant quite understand why your having so many problems working this one out. In my instructions for the fuji hunt kit it says max amount of rolls for 120 in 5 liters is 32, so in 1 ltr 6.4 rolls in 250ml 1.6 rolls. But the times are based on reusing and extending the times to suit. So 8 rolls in 5 ltrs before adjusting times or 1.6 rolls in 1 ltr. Hence 2 rolls in 250ml would be over the recommened limit but even 2 rolls in 500ml of fresh chemical might need a time adjustment. Personaly with my limited experience with this kit it's possible to get more out than recommened by extending the times, So if you went for what would be 5x use rather than 4 on the chart that would give total 40 rolls per 5 ltr or 2 in every 250ml and a time extened to around 4 mins.

 

[Tom Kershaw]

Developed two (ISO 160) rolls in 250mL of chemicals.

The negatives turned out thin, and the colors are off. (blue turned mangenta, white is too cyan)

Have you printed the negatives with the RA-4 process?

Tom

 

[jrydberg]

benOM: That sounds sane.

What got me confused was people stating that they get perfect result with running two rolls in 250mL without any time adjustments.

 

[jrydberg]

Have you printed the negatives with the RA-4 process?

No, I have not! I just did a quick scan. With the same settings as for a lab-developed roll (same kind of film).

But by just looking at the negatives you can tell that they are not fully developed. The brand name and the other frame information is really faded.

 

[Tom Kershaw]

Have you checked the temperature of the solutions and / or water bath in the Jobo?

Tom

 

[benOM]

Checking the temps is a good idea as well. But in ref to 2 rolls in 250ml I believe from what I remember about the tetenal kit it had a higher capacity per ltr, I'm not sure about the kodak I've not used that one yet.

I'd check the temp and try it a 3.50 to 4 mins for 2 rolls and see what happens.

 

[Tom Kershaw]

I've run a reasonable amount of C-41 through my Jobo (perhaps 100 rolls), and have never needed to use more than the standard 3 minutes 15 seconds development time. On the advice of Photo Engineer I did however increase the wash time between the bleach and fix stages. When developing two rolls of Kodak Portra 800 together I erred on the side of caution and used 470ml solution for the two rolls in a Jobo 1530 tank (3 rolls of 120 max, single loaded)

Tom

 

[mtjade2007]

Despite Kodak (and Fujihunt) says that you can reuse without replenishment the developer with extended development time I have found that films processed with fresh developer with standard time of 3 min 15 seconds being the best. Films processed with used developer with extended time is simply inferior some what. I have processed hundreds of rolls in over 10 years of time before and after getting my Jobo ATL-2300.

I stopped reusing my developer. I tried to find a way to replenish it for my ATL-2300 rotary processing. It never worked. I guess I did not try hard enough though.

 

[pentaxuser]

In my instructions for the fuji hunt kit it says max amount of rolls for 120 in 5 liters is 32, .

I make that to be 156.25 mls per 120 ( 5000mls divided by 32). The Jobo 1520 tank for 120 needs 240mls for coverage so 156 isn't enough for coverage. However it would appear to be enough according to Fuji-Hunt for satisfactory development.

240mls is required for coverage in a 1520 tank for 120 film so that indicates that you "waste" developer in a 1520 simply to meet what the Jobo tank design requires for coverage. However the 1510 tank solely for 35mm film, does only require 140mls and as a 35mm film is about equal to 120 in terms of area then this suggests that 150/155mls for either film is about correct.

However the 1520 tank and reel can take two120 rolls onto one reel and still from a Jobo coverage aspect requires only 240mls. The question is: is this enough for 2 x120 films or should we use 156mls x2( say 300mls) to be on the safe side when attempting 2 x 120 films?

Or is Fuji-Hunt being very conservative with 156 mls per 120 and can you get away with an extra 90-100mls making 240/250mls when developing 2 x 120.

I don't know. If Fuji-Hunt is right about 156 mls per 120 then it is, as has been said, 32 films per 5 litre. The simplest way to achieve this would be 2 films per tank with 300mls. However from a developer useage aspect it suggests that if you use 300mls in a 120 tank for a single 120 film then you have only "half exhausted" the developer and you could presumably save the developer in an air expelled bottle for a second 120 film several days or a couple of weeks later depending on how long the developer retains its potency in a bottle from which all air has been expelled.

So Fuji-Hunt says 32 films presumably on a use once and dump basis. Interestingly Firstcall Photographic a big UK mail order retailer says 60-80 films. So twice as much. This may be on a re-use and additional development time basis but this must be based on something in text form that the retailer has obtained. I do not believe he has plucked these figures out of thin air. AgPhotographic another UK based retailer also says upwards of 60 films. Again not plucked out of thin air, I am sure. However it would be interesting to reconcile 32 with the 60-80 mentioned. Is it re-use plus additional time?


pentaxuser

 

[Tom Kershaw]

Well pentaxuser,

As stated before I get around 30 rolls per kit which is enough for my usage. As I'm not running dozens of rolls a week of C-41 it's not worth the time and expense for me to conduct a thorough experiment into capacity beyond what seems to work and is within specification (possibly a self-defined hunch, I'll admit)

Tom

 

[mtjade2007]

I make that to be 156.25 mls per 120 ( 5000mls divided by 32).
pentaxuser

Are you sure that does not include reuse of the developer? The number would be 64 if you reuse the 5 lier developer one more time. Fujihunt does say not to reuse the developer for rotary processing if consistent professional result is desired. Kodak does not recommend reuse of the developer for rotary processing. It does not recommend replenishment either.

 

[benOM]

I can only go by what my manual says, 32 rolls of 120 asa 400 where as it says 72 rolls 35mm 36exp asa 400 Both reusing the developer several times not on a 1 shot basis. More rolls for lower asa, 96 rolls for 100asa 35mmm 36exp. I suppose it looks better from a marketing point of view to only state the max rolls at a low asa.

You can even get a 160 rolls out of it ! if you shoot 110-12exp..

 

[jrydberg]

as benOM says, the manual states that you can only do 8 rolls of 120 ASA 400 film in 5L without reusing the chemicals.

I did a new test yesterday; a single roll 400NC in 750mL chemicals, and the negative turned out equally thin as the earlier test. Which makes me believe I've managed to mix the developer incorrectly.

I measured the temperature in the JOBO and it looks good, even though the washing water drops quite a few degrees since it has to stand in the hose for a while. But the manual states that it can be anywhere between 24 and 41 degrees.

 

[hrst]

I have deducted that the ridiculousness in the manual is just some sort of error. It makes no sense no matter what. All other chemistry always makes a correlation that 135-36 = 120 with no difference or little difference. Fuji chemistry just cannot behave differently than all others. It's about the surface area of film, and the ISO has also some effect. But there is no difference in 135-36 and 120 that would more than double the replenishment ratio. So, I don't like wasting my chemistry, and so I use my common sense, 135-36 is the same as 120 for me and there has been definitely no problems (surprise???).

 

[pentaxuser]

It seems to me that hrst has made an excellent point and it does appear as if the manual has got a serious error. It would appear that some successful users of the kit here on APUG and Fuji-Hunt's figure of 32 rolls agree and that seems to be a very persuasive argument for keeping the maximum number of rolls to 32, be it 35mm or 120.

I can only assume that the retailers themselves have used the figures quoted in the manual which would seem to be the most likely explanation. After all if you sell the stuff and assume not unreasonably that most use 35mm film then you might quote 60-80 films. Certainly looks better on the sales literature. Pity that it would seem to be wrong and that it might lead users to overuse the chemical if they were 35mm users.

pentaxuser

 

[jrydberg]

I mixed a new set of chemicals and re-did my test with two rolls of 120 ISO 400 (Kodak 400NC) in 250mL, but this time I extended the time to
3:45 (just to be safe).

The result was a lot better; but they had a lot of grain/noise. I'm not sure what to expect of 400NC though, since I mostly used to Fuji film.

 

[Tom Kershaw]

I don't understand how you can be having so many issues with processing C-41 film. Kodak Portra 400NC should give very fine grain for a 400 ISO film. However the type of scanner used (better discussed on Hybridphoto) can have a major effect on apparent image quality.

Tom.

 

[mtjade2007]

There is really only one issue in my point of view. It is an issue of developer capacity. I just developed a short strip of 400VC with 470 ml of developer. The strip is only a foot long. It came out beautifully. No hassle to scan at all. To me it has been very difficult to get a 220 negative this perfect without using as much as 850 ml or more of developer. I did this test for testing a Camerz long roll camera for a poster project for a friend's shoe store. The camera worked surprisingly well.

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4038/4312576355_6020626d27_o.jpg