• Welcome to Photrio!
    Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.
    Click here to sign up

Developing roll-film without a tank . . .

I used deep cream coloured stoneware tanks KODAK branded...clipped three films per bar 4 bars per tank and just dunked it down...we also had a fish gaff handy in case we dropped the films in the tank by accident... they were about 5' high and sat in a floor trough....brim full of ancient ID11, replenishment was rather visual as opposed to performance driven.....piece of cake, best of all we had a wooden platform to stand on...that you could hide unseen underneath and when the young apprentices were devving you could come out from underneath in the pitch dark and grab their ankles !!! I remember one got such a shock he fainted out cold, obviously collapsed and fell off the platform and I had to finish devving the films with a rather disturbing moaning noise coming from somewhere in the darkroom......no harm done just a very small gash to his forehead, when healed I always told him the scar gave him 'character' ...... I have had a lot worse done to me in my progression from apprentice darkroom technicial to photographer... but thats another story.

Simon ILFORD Photo / HARMAN technology Limited :
 
If I took the film and taped it by the ends to a flat surface and sponged on the developer, followed by sponging on stop and then fixer, what are the odds the film would turn out acceptable? I may have to give this a try. It could be interesting.
 
It could be interesting undoubtedly.....

It could also be a disaster, the chemicals need to access both sides of the film, not just the emulsion side.

Simon ILFORD Photo / HARMAN technology Limited :
 
There are films that got no layer on the base-side that needs processing.
 
Simon R Galley said:
It could be interesting undoubtedly.....

It could also be a disaster, the chemicals need to access both sides of the film, not just the emulsion side.

Simon ILFORD Photo / HARMAN technology Limited :
Click to expand...

AgX said:
There are films that got no layer on the base-side that needs processing.
Click to expand...

I take it we're referring to the anti-halation layer and it's removal? If so, shouldn't that come out in a wash? I'm thinking of that glass cylinder developing tool by Leitz that was mentioned earlier, as the back of the film would be against the glass in normal operation.
 
Several concepts have been used for "removing" an anti-halation layer, as they are built very differently.
 
I used the 3-tray hand-held see-saw loop method for many years in 1950's for 127 and 120 Kodak Verichrome film in kitchen.

Only problem was my mother complaining because she had to sit in our dark apartment with no tv on for half an hour.

/Clay
 
Quality is obtained by consistency. Rolling loop promotes damage and inconsistency, not saying it can not be done, but I would not try.

You can suspend it straight in a long pipe and agitate by moving up and down slightly. Lots of chemicals required. Total darkness required here to.
 
This is what I did when I had very little money after my divorce.

I went to the dollar store and purchase a water pitcher. Next I went to Walmart and purchase that plastic sofa covering, and cut it into a long 2.5 foot strip. I painted the outside of the pitcher black and tape one end of the film to the plastic strip,filled the pitcher with developer and carefully placed the film rolled in plastic into the pitcher and developed my film.

I did that for two years, just about. Until I was caught up on child support and back spousal support.

I then purchase a Paterson Tank and found out it was not easy to put the film on the reel. I went back to the pitcher method, and never looked back. I still have about 6 yards of plastic sofa covering, waiting to go to work.

#1 Son
 
#1 Son said:
I painted the outside of the pitcher black and tape one end of the film to the plastic strip,filled the pitcher with developer and carefully placed the film rolled in plastic into the pitcher and developed my film.
Click to expand...

I still got no idea what you are doing. Could you explain further?
 
I have used the see-saw method occasionally as an emergency measure when I've pulled film from the reel and found it not completely fixed in spots. It's no fun to do with the lights on, it must be extremely tedious in the dark. Entirely possible though. Wear gloves.
 
AgX said:
I still got no idea what you are doing. Could you explain further?
Click to expand...

It sounds like he is talking about a homebrewed "apron" system
 
I thought so too, but

-) why is the jar blackened when there is still a uncovered opening?

-) the apron systems are based on foils that got nipples (or alike) at their sides to keep the emulsion side off the foils, this would not be the case with a simple foil as used for coverage of furniture
 
I remember seeing a documentary where a war photographer explained how he developed his film in helmets at night in the field. I forget where but I saw it awhile ago. I guess whatever works when you need it then and there.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Thought I would experiment this evening. So, we wrapped the first test roll from my new Canon IIS2 around the outside of a plastic bottle that once held windshield washer fluid. Held in place with Duct-tape at each end, the tape adhered fantastically well through the developer, stop, and fixer. There were no scratches to the film since the bottle was wider at the top and bottom. The bottle also floated on the chemistry in open trays, as I spun it by it's cap-end. It worked quite well, with no surprises.
View attachment 76304
 
smithdoor said:
You may want to look in to Orthochromatic film this type of film can be Develop using a red light asa up tp 80 in 35mm 120 and sheet film

Dave
Click to expand...

That's a thought. If you're concerned about developing in the open-air and in the dark as I did here, worry not. It was actually quite easy. For one, I didn't have to load a reel, and I didn't have to do any of my usual inversions with a tank. I had the three chemistry trays lined up side-by-side of course, and at the correct time simply moved the bottle over to the next tray. Even though it was in complete darkness, I had the comfort of a glowing GRALAB timer directly in front of me, setting on a shelf at eye level.
 
AgX, yes I am talking about an apron system. As DannL shows in his photo, that you will not have a problem, because when you place the spool into the pitcher slowly, the liquid will keep the emulsion off the plastic and separated from it, as the solution surrounds the film and the plastic. The only problem of the two surfaces effecting each other, is when a very warm solution is used. But from 65 to 70 degrees, there is little chance of a problem.

The ripples in the aprons made by Kodak and others were there to keep the film from falling out of the apron during rough agitation. But tipping the pitcher from side to side, provides gentle agitation action and reduces the bubbles in the mixture. Almost like a semi-stand development cycle. You will only fill the pitcher with enough solution to cover 1.5 to 2 inches above the apron, to give you good agitation action by gently tipping the pitcher from side to side. To much solution in the pitcher will not give you any agitation to speak of.

When you wind the film in the spool of plastic, they have the natural tendency to unwind themselves, once it is released. When released; the two spools will form different curves and will not touch each other, giving each spool its own free space. Just make sure that you do not use a narrow bottom pitcher, but a wide bottom pitcher.

AgX, most Rubbermaid plastic pitchers come with snap on covers. The top is not left uncovered. You can buy plastic pitchers with black, red, blue, or even green top covers. If in doubt, paint it black.

#1 Son
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thank you for claryfying! An interesting concept. I never heard of that.

That plastic you used seems much more rigid than I thought, as you can form a spool (over here we do not know those couch coverings).
 
Here in America, millions of us as children had couches covered with clear vinyl plastic back in the 1950's, 1960's, and 70's. Our parents used it to keep them clean and to keep us off of them.

Sitting on the couch was very uncomfortable, because the plastic would get very warm from sitting on it, hours at a time, that it would stick to your pants or shirt, due to your body heat.

#1 Son
 
The plastic material you mention sounds a little like one of the coverings for shelving and picnic-tables, sold in shops such as Blokker here in NL. Whether the very thick and flexible, transparent material is exactly the same I have no idea - possibly it is too floppy. I have used the stuff successfully to make pseudo-double-glazing in a shed, which is not much of a recommendation for film development.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register