DIY 5x7" film developer tank

[radiant]

I've used the taco shell method to develop my 5x7" sheets but I usually have 6 sheets to develop and I need to develop in two sets which feels a bit tedious. Also the chemical usage is really high on taco shell / paterson tank.

I saw similar design like drawn below and started to think if I should make one myself (wood).

Any experiences on designs like this? Is there a risk sheets sticking to eachother? If anyone has similar tank which is working, what is the distance between sheets?

And which notching would be better, the following views are bottom down (5" wide):

The area of one 5x7" is 22580,6 mm² and 36 frame 135 film is 58978,8 mm² - so one sheet need probably 2,6x less developer than 135 film, which is typically 250ml so single sheet needs approx 100ml of developer? So 6 sheets would go with 600ml of developer, that's really economical compared to taco shell method

 

[Ian Grant]

Ideally you need to support either end of the film as well. Have a look at the Dallan tank in this thread. I have a coulpe of these tanks, one like this the other newer, the inserts are the same though. Also look at how 7x5 film hangers aremade the ones I have are slip in 3 edges are in a channel, the idea is to stop the film sagging and falling out.

Ian

 

[radiant]

Do the pictures represent the tank itself, and you intend to close it and invert to agitate? Or do the pictures represent a “holder” which you then dip/dunk in an open tank?

One quick thought - I would not build this out of wood.

Yes that was just the profile for the "holder". Of course it has bottom and top

Water + wood is not the best combo, I know. But as milling plywood is peanuts for me, I really prefer wood. Next question would be: how to protect the wood from liquids. Epoxy would probably be best option but it is difficult to apply to all corners etc.

Maybe I need to consider POM or other plastic.. Much more expensive :/

 

[radiant]

Ideally you need to support either end of the film as well. Have a look at the Dallan tank in this thread. I have a coulpe of these tanks, one like this the other newer, the inserts are the same though. Also look at how 7x5 film hangers aremade the ones I have are slip in 3 edges are in a channel, the idea is to stop the film sagging and falling out.

Ian

Great tip. Yes I had in mind to support from bottom but then I need to reconsider how to circulate the developer from pouring inlet .. The Dallan tank looks a bit metallic masterpiece - not possible for me.

 

[radiant]

I’m still having trouble understanding - is the idea to load the film, pour chemicals in somehow and then use inversion agitation?

See this video of my design:

https://streamable.com/8ieazz

So maybe the sheets wont stick to each other. But how I should protect the wood? Linseed oil? Paraffin oil? Paint?

 

[tim48v]

Our very first prototype of the SP-445 was similar. Until we tried to load/unload it in the dark. That's when we came up with the film holders.

We also tried a larger version of our SP-445: https://shop.stearmanpress.com/blog...457s-have-arrived?_pos=2&_sid=9fa7592a2&_ss=r
Frankly, it had lots of issues (ignoring the production costs). It just got too big to seal well and was awkward to handle. The 8x10 version was even worse. That's why we ended up with the SP-8x10 Tray system: https://shop.stearmanpress.com/collections/photography/products/sp-8x10-daylight-processing-tray

 

[btaylor]

Are you averse to working in the dark? If not why reinvent the wheel and not use standard 5x7 film hangers? Just make 3 boxes the correct width for 6 hangers. There was a guy (Vinny I think) over at LFF who was making such tanks out of plexiglass. I use hangers and thin tanks for 8x10- works.

 

[radiant]

Our very first prototype of the SP-445 was similar. Until we tried to load/unload it in the dark. That's when we came up with the film holders.

We also tried a larger version of our SP-445: https://shop.stearmanpress.com/blog...457s-have-arrived?_pos=2&_sid=9fa7592a2&_ss=r
Frankly, it had lots of issues (ignoring the production costs). It just got too big to seal well and was awkward to handle. The 8x10 version was even worse. That's why we ended up with the SP-8x10 Tray system: https://shop.stearmanpress.com/collections/photography/products/sp-8x10-daylight-processing-tray

Thanks for the insights! I don't expect that my DIY version would come without problems and of course I'm questioning myself if this is wise at all

Can you elaborate what was the problem on loading? I trust in you but as an experimenter I would like to hear it, otherwise I probably end testing it myself and find the same things.

Are you averse to working in the dark? If not why reinvent the wheel and not use standard 5x7 film hangers? Just make 3 boxes the correct width for 6 hangers. There was a guy (Vinny I think) over at LFF who was making such tanks out of plexiglass. I use hangers and thin tanks for 8x10- works.

A bit. I don't want to spent 15 minutes in total darkness.

I need to 3D design + print film holder and think of that solution too. I guess the double opening (top/bottom) is pretty stupid idea. It should be closed from bottom, for sure.

 

[radiant]

Just asked prices for PVC sheet from local supplier and those seems pretty reasonable. PVC supposed to be good to glue.

Maybe plan would be build a box and light sealed lid with some liquid holding cababilities.. The groove system is really hesitating idea still .. Maybe I try making a wooden one and try loading that with sheets and check how it works!

 

[radiant]

@michael_r yes of course inversion / 90 degree tilt agitation is used.

I have to reconsider this for a moment. The stearman press experiences are too big to pass.

 

[grahamp]

Be careful about working out solution volumes. The critical part is the amount of actual developer stock or concentrate required for the film area, but you have to factor in your chosen dilution and the tank volume limits. It is not uncommon to need to use more volume of a higher dilution to be effective, or need more developer at a more concentrated dilution just to cover the film. With something like the Jobo you can also hit upper and lower limits on solution volume which constrains the amount of film you can process, even if the tank will take it.

If your design is limited to X volume per sheet, it is going to constrain your choice of developer and dilution.

 

[Mainecoonmaniac]

I made one out of a plastic ammo can. I used metal 5x7 film hangers inside. I stopped using it because I started using my Patterson Orbital. The ammo can required a lot of chemistry.

 

[paolod]

I use the infamous FR Adjustable Cut Film tank for 4x5 and smaller sheet film. It's somewhat similar, loading the film vertically in slots, but the slots are curved.


The film is loaded with the emulsion towards the concave side, and then the retaining clip pushes down on the film. This makes it curve outward so that the base side touches the slot but the emulsion side is kept away from the slot.

Also, it seems like holding the sheet curved around the horizontal axis makes it less likely to curve vertically - if the sheets were flat then then they might be more likely to flex and touch each other during agitation. The instructions do warn to only agitate parallel to the film to avoid knocking the sheets loose. I haven't had that happen accidentally yet.

There is usually some uneven development, a dark overdeveloped line on either edge of the negative along the slots. In almost every thread I've seen about this tank someone is complaining about this, I haven't found any solution.

 

[Mr Flibble]

I made one out of a plastic ammo can. I used metal 5x7 film hangers inside. I stopped using it because I started using my Patterson Orbital. The ammo can required a lot of chemistry.

Another vote for the Paterson Orbital. Very economical with chemistry. I've used as little as 175ml for 4 sheets of 4x5.
It will only hold 2 sheets of 5x7" at a time though.

 

[radiant]

Another vote for the Paterson Orbital. Very economical with chemistry. I've used as little as 175ml for 4 sheets of 4x5.
It will only hold 2 sheets of 5x7" at a time though.

Thanks for the idea but I need to develop more than three 5x7" at once; preferably 6 at time. That would be a quite large dish if it was done in Orbital way.

 

[Donald Qualls]

I'm pretty sure Mod54 now makes a 5x7 insert (holds six, IIRC) to fit the three-reel size Paterson tank. There's also the B&W King stainless tank system -- he makes one to hold six 5x7, just a little bigger than the ten 4x5 tank. Stainless tanks are a little slow to fill, but I used to use stainless a lot and it never seemed to cause problems. The B&W King is expensive up front, but ought to last approximately forever.

Yes, big tank -- but 6 5x7 is equivalent to three rolls of 120, so it's not unreasonable to use a liter and a half of developer. If that bothers you, set up a replenishment system. I can develop up to a dozen 4x5 in my Yankee Agitank, and even though it wants 1630 ml of solution, I only expend 210 ml of Xtol stock as replenisher. The rest goes right back in the bottle.

 

[radiant]

I'm pretty sure Mod54 now makes a 5x7 insert (holds six, IIRC)

I couldn't find such product from their web page.

fit the three-reel size Paterson tank.

Are you sure 5x7" fits in three-reel tank? Or do you mean three 120 reel tank? (I think it is called 5 reel tank?)

The B&W King is expensive up front,

Yeah and I don't know where to buy one. Buying outside Europe will probably even double the price in taxes+shipping.

I could think about making my own Mod54 but 5x7" film holder for paterson, actually. It is a bit tricky to load because the films need to overlap ..

 

[Donald Qualls]

I couldn't find such product from their web page.

Could be one of the other 3D printed products in the same market, then -- I'm pretty sure there is one.

Are you sure 5x7" fits in three-reel tank? Or do you mean three 120 reel tank? (I think it is called 5 reel tank?)

The 4x5 Mod54 fits with the 5" dimension upright; pretty sure the 5x7 one (whoever actually makes it) lays the film down so it's still only five inches tall (and should be room for fourteen inches to wrap around).

Yeah and I don't know where to buy one. Buying outside Europe will probably even double the price in taxes+shipping.

I could think about making my own Mod54 but 5x7" film holder for paterson, actually. It is a bit tricky to load because the films need to overlap ..

If you search for B&W King or "5x7 developing tank" on eBay you should find his stuff. I think that's the only place he sells outside Hong Kong. Since he's paying the Chinese postal system for shipping, that's quite reasonable (for the weight of the tank plus cage) -- can't help you with import/VAT at your end, though.

Measure the inside diameter of a Paterson tank, I think it's big enough for two 5x7 to wrap around, 5" dimension vertical, and not overlap, though the layers inside them might have to.

You could also replicate the Beyond The Zone System (BTZS) tanks -- just simple tubes, load them in the dark with developer in the upturned caps, install each tube in its cap as you load, then when all done, start timer, pick up and shake tubes (to get the whole film wet quickly) then lay the tubes horizontally in a water bath and roll them to keep the film covered with the tiny amount of develop (this is kind of like a print drum without the light tight pour-through). Once development is complete, you can open and stop and fix in trays in daylight (a few seconds from developer to stop won't result in any visible development of fogged halide) or, if that bothers you, open the tubes in the dark and transfer the film to stop bath in a tray before turning on the light. Once stopped, it's fine.

 

[Mainecoonmaniac]

Another vote for the Paterson Orbital. Very economical with chemistry. I've used as little as 175ml for 4 sheets of 4x5.
It will only hold 2 sheets of 5x7" at a time though.

I love my Orbital, but I find prewetting the film is necessary because I’ve gotten streaks. Also I can’t use the 10 secs per minute agitation scheme and use constant agitation only. They’re hard to find in the US. I got mine from an eBayer from the UK.

 

[radiant]

I don’t know of any 5x7 tank inserts that do 6 sheets. Both 20th Century Camera and B’s make 5x7 inserts that do 4 sheets.

I programmed a designer software to optimize the curvature and I think I can fit 6 sheets in 5 (135) reel Paterson. Probably going to mill a test piece to see if the design is usable at all. The loading might be a bit problematic

5x7 one (whoever actually makes it) lays the film down so it's still only five inches tall (and should be room for fourteen inches to wrap around).

Six films cannot fit Paterson in landscape mode with any kind of clearance, I simulated that.

You could also replicate the Beyond The Zone System (BTZS) tanks

Nice system but as one tube is for one film, it's too tedious to handle six tubes, I think.

 

[Mainecoonmaniac]

3D printing and scanning could be a way of making 5x7 tanks. Here's an idea, someone could scan a Yankee Agitank, the scan and scale it for 5x7 then print a new tank. I've been trying for years with varied success to make a daylight tank out of an ammo tank. I found out that my Paterson orbital doesn't allow stand development due to the curvature of the bottom. This month, I make an 8x10 daylight film tank out of an old 8x10 paper safe. I'm still testing it. It accommodates 1 sheet of 8x10 film and I could get chemistry in and out of the tank in daylight. I found out even if I wet the film before development, the sheet of film floats during my 1 hour long development. I'm trying experimenting with an old stainless steel 8x10 film rack to keep the film from floating. 3 features important in a film tank for me. 1. I must be able to use it in day light. 2. low chemistry volume. 3. Even development.

 

[Peter Schrager]

yes it's called a tray...

 

[radiant]

Let us know how it goes. I’ve been working on some 4x5 systems. Easier than 5x7 but still not easy.

Yes you can actually fit 6 sheets in one tank with circle curvature but there isn't too much room for liquid. B's 4 sheet 5x7" is probably the best idea. I probably will design 4 sheet version myself (similar to B's) and just crush my dreams of developing 6 at the time.

 

[Mr Flibble]

I love my Orbital, but I find prewetting the film is necessary because I’ve gotten streaks. Also I can’t use the 10 secs per minute agitation scheme and use constant agitation only. They’re hard to find in the US. I got mine from an eBayer from the UK.

I also do the pre-wash to 'warm up' the tank. I was lucky to get the motor base with mine.
Did you remove the fins from the lid? They're known to cause streaks where the developer sloshes against them.

 

[radiant]

Another cylindrical daylight tank option which may or may not be worth looking into for 5x7 is something like the Jobo 2550 Multitank 5. I don’t have the measurements but it seems like the tanks in the 2500 series have a larger diameter. If that is true, you might be able to design an insert like B’s etc. that fits 6 sheets.

It doesn't need to be much larger to fit 6 sheets actually, so Jobo tanks could enough large version for this.

Using commercial tank for base is really wise; water & light seals are so much better. Just build support for existing tank is probably the solution. 2550 is a bit pricey, tank only costs 150 euros..