Eliminating air bubbles when processing prints

[Ektagraphic]

Hi Guys- I have figured out that I am processing my prints wrong and air bubbles have caused blotches. I have tried putting the prints in upside down and I do agitiate. How do you develop your prints? What should I do? Thanks

 

[Ian Grant]

Upside down agitate first 15 seconds then turn over rock every 15 secs roughly but if full immersed a bit less. Are you using enough developer ?

ian

 

[Ektagraphic]

I am using a lot of developer. I'll try less.

 

[Ian Grant]

It's the first 15 second that really make the difference, constant agitation until the papers absorbed developer and begun development evenly.

Ian

 

[Ektagraphic]

Well, I need to re-think my printing times. I was doing a 5X7 for 16 at f/8 and the print is totally developed at around 20 seconds of development. The developer is mixed right and the bottle says 2 min. This happens with all of my papers and I have no reason to think they could possibly be contaminated.

 

[Ektagraphic]

I have agitated and was careful but no matter what I do it doen't make a huge diffrence. I have been close to perfect.

 

[Ken N]

You may have a PH problem with your water. There should be little to no bubbling.

 

[Ektagraphic]

I do but I have also tried distilled water. I am using a Cesco tray...I'm not sure if that could add to the problem.

 

[Ian Grant]

Paper and temperature are reasonably critical, as long as you can compensate though it's not too important. However 16 seconds at f8 sounds rather like over exposure for a 7x5 print.

Ian

 

[Ektagraphic]

Well I need to re test exposure. I have a Kodak exposure calculator that you place over the print and expose. I'm going to do it again and I am going to develop the print for the whole 1.5-2 min that the bottle says and see what happens. I'll also do a temp check. I thought I was at 22C, but you never know.

 

[Anon Ymous]

As Ian says, 16'' sounds too much. Pick a reasonable development time for your paper, 60 is ok for RC paper at 20 degrees Celsius, and see what happens. If prints get too dark, reduce exposure. In fact, I'd find 8 seconds to be normal for a 5x7 print.

 

[Ian Grant]

You need to put a blank frame of film in the carrier do a step exposure -2 second increments,at say f11, process for 2 mins at 20°C that's your minimum exposure time. to get a D-max.

Ian

 

[Anscojohn]

Well, I need to re-think my printing times. I was doing a 5X7 for 16 at f/8 and the print is totally developed at around 20 seconds of development. The developer is mixed right and the bottle says 2 min. This happens with all of my papers and I have no reason to think they could possibly be contaminated.

******
You are overexposing your prints. Aim for minimum 90 second developing time with Dektol-type developers.

 

[tkamiya]

******
You are overexposing your prints. Aim for minimum 90 second developing time with Dektol-type developers.

Will you please elaborate on 90 seconds comment? The bag Dektol comes in says usable range is 3/4 to 3 minutes. I recently did an experiment and between 60 and 90 seconds, I saw absolutely no difference.

Thank you.

 

[David Brown]

Will you please elaborate on 90 seconds comment? The bag Dektol comes in says usable range is 3/4 to 3 minutes. I recently did an experiment and between 60 and 90 seconds, I saw absolutely no difference.

Thank you.

I'm sure John can (and may) answer for himself, but:

If the useful range is 45 sec (3/4 min) to 3 minutes, then 90 sec is the middle of that range. Doesn't that seem like a reasonable place to start as a target?

If you are using RC paper, then they may very well be developed at 60 seconds. In most cases, however, FB will not. Papers are different - that's why there's a "range".

 

[tkamiya]

I should have qualified my statement. I use RC paper. I asked because John specifically said 90 seconds at _minimum_ meaning anything less is unsatisfactory. I am trying to learn from his experience as to why he is recommending 90 seconds or greater. While my problem isn't the bubbles on paper, I am having issues with contrast - which I am experimenting with exposure and development time. I thought this would be a learning opportunity....

My apology for the intrusion.

 

[Ektagraphic]

I have been working and I almost have it. I think the problem is that the developer is a little too strong. I just added a hair of water and we'll see. I found that the image was really, really effected by the way that I put it in the pan....

 

[ic-racer]

Emulsion down will trap the bubbles. Try emulsion up.

 

[Martin Aislabie]

I slide my paper to the tray of Dev with the Emulsion side up

Also, I try to slide the print in, so that it goes down to the bottom of the tray and runs along the bottom.

I then use one hand to rock the tray and the other to "drown" the print as it comes up for air.

Emulsion side down has always given me uneven development as the paper seems to trap pockets of air

Martin

 

[Rick A]

I always bow my prints (emulsion side up)down in the center, then push the print into the developer followed quickly by the sides(all one motion) then rock the tray for constant agitation for the time recommended by the manufacturer. Ilford mg fb calls for 3 minutes development, while Kodabrom rc 90 secs. My normal soup is Dektol 1+2(as per Kodak) You should definitly make a step strip to determine correct exposure.

Rick

 

[Ektagraphic]

Through the help you guys I finally have it near perfect! Tonight I will print again. I took some great shots today.

 

[jfish]

air bubbles? on prints? I've never heard of such a thing.

 

[dancqu]

Use Both Hands

air bubbles? on prints? I've never heard of such a thing.

That makes two of us. Some special technique perhaps.

Emulsion up the paper is slipped in. The left hand wetted
with developer assists. Periodically the paper is pulled
over itself, back to front - right to left. The developer
is very stirred. The only way when using very dilute
one-shot chemistry. I process single tray. Dan

 

[ozphoto]

Here's my technique:

• Slip paper in emulsion side upwards
• Rock tray for 30secs to cover and agitate developer
• Rock at intermittent stages for remainder of processing time
• Remove and put into stop bath for 30secs, again rock tray to cover print
• Slip into fixer and rock tray to cover print
• Fix for 1-2 minutes
• Remove print and wash for 5 mins (RC) or 30 mins (FB) in print washer

Have been using this same method for about 20 odd years and only problem I've had during that time was using some off fixer - left lovely gray swirls all over my prints.

Took me a while to figure out the problem - but once I did, it hasn't happened again.

Find a technique that works for you and stick to it; helps should you ever have further processing/printing problems as your processing technique will be a constant and tracing a problem will be much easier.

 

[MattKing]

I think I know where Anscojohn is coming from when he suggests a developing time of 90 seconds "at a minimum".

I find that if I use developer that develops more quickly, it is more difficult to get repeatable results, especially if I am developing more than one print at a time (e.g. the postcard exchange). A 10 second variance either way isn't particularly important if the target is 90 seconds, but could be really important if the target is 30 seconds. In addition, longer developing times help correct for uneven development early in the developing process.

Matt