Film processor design

alex2293 · Mar 17, 2016

Hello everyone,

I've been reading here for almost two years and recently subscribed. This forum has been really helpful getting me started in analog photography.

I am presently studying mechanical engineering in college and five of my classmates and I decided to design an automatic film processor for our final design project.

This idea comes from the fact that I do B&W photography, develop my films and either scan or enlarge them. I really enjoy the manual process and it is quite rewarding, but sometimes developing a few rolls requires quite a bit of time. When I learned about JOBO processors I was amazed until I saw the price. I wish I could afford one, but it won't be possible during college.

Our goal is to design and commercialize a film processor that more analog photographers can afford and that fill your needs in terms of format, process, temperature control and level of automation.

So any input on what you are looking for in a film processor would be greatly appreciated.

Next week I'll post a survey to begin our market research.

I'll keep you updated on the progress of this project.

Thank you in advance for any help you can provide.

Alex.

MattKing · Mar 17, 2016

A film processor that allows you to retrieve and re-use your chemicals would be excellent.

I use developer in a replenishment regime, and "one-shot" processors are inconsistent with that.

alex2293 · Mar 17, 2016

We were already considering a system that can re-use the chemicals while still being able to use them one shot.
Thanks for your input Matt, you confirm this feature is needed.

mike c · Mar 17, 2016

I like the one shot idea as I develop film at different inconsistent intervals.

ic-racer · Mar 17, 2016

Automated film processing has been around for many, many years. A modern design would be quick to setup and use one-shot chemicals that can allow the device to remain dormant for extended periods of time. The antithesis of the historic E-6 machine that practically needed to run continuously 24 hours a day.

Realize that in the history of B&W photography, hand processing in a tank or tray was the norm for critical work and today hand processing is still the easiest and most economical method.

iandvaag · Mar 18, 2016

I agree with ic-racer, I enjoy hand processing b&w and with the volume I shoot I am satisfied with hand processing. OTOH, I dislike my janky method of colour processing (using hot water bath, pouring chemicals in at too slow a rate, etc). I'm not willing to buy a jobo at the prices I've seen, so if there are others like me there may be a market for it.

Features most important to me:
-chemical re-use
-ease/speed of pouring solutions in/out of the processor
-temperature control within +/- 0.5 degree Celsius
-accommodates 135, 120 and 4x5, bonus if it can take existing paterson reels

Non-automated agitation would be fine by me, such as using a crank. I suspect this could lower costs substantially.

Kevin Caulfield · Mar 18, 2016

Thanks for subscribing and good luck with the project. I believe there is a huge market for an automated development system. I am sure you will come up with some great ideas.

OzJohn · Mar 18, 2016

Kevin Caulfield said:
Thanks for subscribing and good luck with the project. I believe there is a huge market for an automated development system. I am sure you will come up with some great ideas.

Huge market? I don't think there's a huge market for anything to do with film photography because there are just not enough punters still devoted to the craft. There's probably a boutique market though for cleverly designed devices at a price that people will pay and I wish alex2293 well with the project. OzJohn

Kevin Caulfield · Mar 18, 2016

OzJohn said:
Huge market? I don't think there's a huge market for anything to do with film photography because there are just not enough punters still devoted to the craft. There's probably a boutique market though for cleverly designed devices at a price that people will pay and I wish alex2293 well with the project. OzJohn

It's all relative. Even if they sold 300 units, that could be a great result.

alex2293 · Mar 18, 2016

Thank you guys,
we really appreciate your input.

We'll truly take your needs in consideration.

It is input like yours that will help us design a machine with the best automation level and amount of features versus price ratio that suits the most consumers.

We understand that it is a niche market, we will do our best to make the best use out of today's technology to make a great processor and reach as much photographers through the internet and social media.

paul_c5x4 · Mar 18, 2016

alex2293 said:
This idea comes from the fact that I do B&W photography, develop my films and either scan or enlarge them. I really enjoy the manual process and it is quite rewarding, but sometimes developing a few rolls requires quite a bit of time. When I learned about JOBO processors I was amazed until I saw the price. I wish I could afford one, but it won't be possible during college.

Our goal is to design and commercialize a film processor that more analog photographers can afford and that fill your needs in terms of format, process, temperature control and level of automation.

It is worth looking at how others have approached the problem of small scale automated film processing. Searching for "Filmomat" turns up a neat little video:
Finally, do not underestimate the costs involved in sourcing and manufacturing all the parts required.

alex2293 · Mar 18, 2016

Thank you Paul for showing us this video.
We already watched it and communicated with the guy that made it. We studied the pros and the cons of this design and it will definitely help us. In fact, this video convinced us that it is possible to design a processor better suited to consumers than what is offered commercially right now.

Sal Santamaura · Mar 18, 2016

alex2293 said:
...I am presently studying mechanical engineering in college and five of my classmates and I decided to design an automatic film processor for our final design project...

As a retired engineer whose senior project was designed/built in 1974-1975, I think yours is among the most interesting I've heard about. Have fun with it -- you'll learn a lot.

alex2293 said:
...Our goal is to design and commercialize a film processor that more analog photographers can afford and that fill your needs in terms of format, process, temperature control and level of automation...

You'll learn both technical and business things in the course of this endeavor. If you pursue a career as an employee of an existing firm, the technical lessons will be most valuable. If you instead follow an entrepreneurial path, what you find out about business-related factors will be the most important information gleaned.

alex2293 said:
...any input on what you are looking for in a film processor would be greatly appreciated...

Sure. Jobo CPP-2, lift to go with it that's designed with adequate strength (unlike the original), Expert drums, all at about half their current market prices. Good luck!

MattKing · Mar 18, 2016

Look at a Phototherm Sidekick, and see if you can "borrow" any inspiration from it.

alex2293 · Mar 18, 2016

I looked up Phototherm's Sidekick and it is very different from most processors I've seen on internet. It is a fully automated machine as it transfers the liquids to tank automatically. Is this an interesting feature for most of you or do you generally prefer to do it manually and keep the price lower? Doing it manually prevents you from starting the cycle, go do something else and come back when it's done.

MattKing · Mar 18, 2016

I suggested that you look at the Sidekick to give you an idea about how many different approaches there are to small scale processor automation.

The thing that I find most desirable about the Sidekick is the fact that there is no need for a Lift, and that it measures and tempers the chemicals for you.

jvo · Mar 18, 2016

hmmm... a worthy effort! i'm not mechanically creative to suggest what might replace and improve a well worn process of putting film in a ss tank and pouring the chemicals in...

i would always be interested in something that would "improve" that task so support you in your quest... once you have a suggestion/prototype it will surely give something to rave about AND critique - best wishes - go for it!

jvo

mehguy · Mar 19, 2016

I wish you luck with the project! Will be very cool to see what comes out of it!

But here's a video of someone that made a Lego mind storms film developer machine.

Diapositivo · Mar 19, 2016

The problem I have with Filmomat is that it doesn't support 6-bath processing.
Also, it does not appear to take into account intermediate rinsing baths with water at controlled temperature.
Finally, I don't see the need of filling tanks with chemicals, when chemicals could be poured from their own containers. Filmomat increases the risk of contamination when flipping from E-6 to C-41 e.g. Jobo processors are better designed under this respect.

I find my Jobo CPP-2 with lift perfectly satisfies my needs of small scale amateur. I see no need, for instance, for automatic processing, pouring the chemicals manually would work perfectly well for me and I think that would greatly simplify the machine. If I found myself taking many pictures, I could manually process, with a Jobo CPP-2, several rolls at the same time, so the process would be, per roll, not very time consuming in any case. Automation is something that is really needed only for laboratories IMHO.

In designing the machine I would place great importance either in the compatibility with existing Jobo machines (shape of flasks, motors, heaters, tensions, tanks etc.) so that the machines can be cross-cannibalized, or in using things that can be found easily everywhere.

I would buy something new only if I see that I can service it very simply and find spare parts without having to order them at the manufacturer (which might well cease to exist).

Truzi · Mar 19, 2016

Just throwing out random thoughts:
Perhaps make it programmable to the point one can have more baths than "standard," with the ability to use as few as wanted, and to set whatever time wanted for each. There obviously would have to be a physical limit. Lets say someone wants to dev, stop, wash, fix, wash, rehal, dev, etc. Maybe someone wants to use the machine for split-developers, or whatever.

Also, it would be nice to have a roller-transport personal system, though I don't know it would be practical for small volumes of solution.

alex2293 · Mar 19, 2016

Diapositivo said:
The problem I have with Filmomat is that it doesn't support 6-bath processing.

Truzi said:
Just throwing out random thoughts:
Perhaps make it programmable to the point one can have more baths than "standard," with the ability to use as few as wanted, and to set whatever time wanted for each. There obviously would have to be a physical limit. Lets say someone wants to dev, stop, wash, fix, wash, rehal, dev, etc. Maybe someone wants to use the machine for split-developers, or whatever.

I thought the same thing however I never used a process requiring more than one developer, one stop bath, one fixer and some water to rinse with a final rinse using LFN Wetting Agent. Is 6 baths most people will ever need and is the 6-bath processing really popular?

Diapositivo said:
Also, it does not appear to take into account intermediate rinsing baths with water at controlled temperature.

It is a feature that should not be to hard to include, as once you have all the valves controlled by solenoids, it just a matter of programming the right sequence. If we go for a machine that transfers the liquids automatically, it is definitely something we will look into.

Diapositivo said:
Finally, I don't see the need of filling tanks with chemicals, when chemicals could be poured from their own containers. Filmomat increases the risk of contamination when flipping from E-6 to C-41 e.g. Jobo processors are better designed under this respect.

I totally agree. Minimizing the risk of cross contamination and leaking is a priority.

Diapositivo said:
I find my Jobo CPP-2 with lift perfectly satisfies my needs of small scale amateur. I see no need, for instance, for automatic processing, pouring the chemicals manually would work perfectly well for me and I think that would greatly simplify the machine. If I found myself taking many pictures, I could manually process, with a Jobo CPP-2, several rolls at the same time, so the process would be, per roll, not very time consuming in any case. Automation is something that is really needed only for laboratories IMHO.

In our future survey we'll definitely check the proportion of people who is interested in a semi-automatic machine versus a full automated one. At the same time we'll check how much someone is willing to pay for a semi-automatic versus an automatic one.

Thank you everyone for you input.

MattKing · Mar 19, 2016

alex2293 said:
I thought the same thing however I never used a process requiring more than one developer, one stop bath, one fixer and some water to rinse with a final rinse using LFN Wetting Agent. Is 6 baths most people will ever need and is the 6-bath processing really popular?

The standard E6 process is a 6 bath process.

From the Kodak website:

Film Processing E-6

KODAK PROFESSIONAL Chemicals, Process E-6, are used to process KODAK PROFESSIONAL EKTACHROME and ELITE Chrome Films, as well as other manufacturers' color transparency (chrome) films.

Process E-6 chemicals are offered in sizes designed for all types of processing operations—from small tank or rotary tube to large professional finishing labs and photofinishing operations. The chemicals are supplied as liquid concentrates for ease of handling and mixing.

First Developer — converts exposed silver halide to metallic silver. This is the most critical step in Process E-6.
First wash — stops the action of the first developer, and removes the first developer solution from the film.
Reversal Bath — reversal agent is absorbed into the film, preparing the film for the color developer step.
Color Developer — developing agent reacts with silver halide to form metallic silver.
Pre-Bleach — prepares the film for the bleach step.
Bleach — converts metallic silver back to silver halide.
Fixer — converts all of the silver bromide into soluble silver compounds.
Final wash — removes chemicals remaining in the film emulsion.
Final Rinse — promotes uniform drying.

alex2293 · Mar 19, 2016

Sorry guys, I never realized E-6 was a 6 baths process.

I've only done B&W this far using Rodinal and Xtol for negatives and Dektol for B&W RC paper.

I just ordered my first C-41 developing kit because I wanted to shoot some color negatives, but also to have a better understanding of the color process to design better machine.

EdSawyer · Mar 19, 2016

I have a super sidekick 4 , and it is a great machine, I can't think of much in the way of improvements. I wish I had the 8-roll Version instead of the 4 roll, but that is about it, really. It would be nice if the 4x5 holder held more than 4 sheets at a time too. The single-sided drive is not ideal, it would be better if it was driven from both ends, though that would complicate the design.

canuhead · Mar 19, 2016

Truzi said:
Also, it would be nice to have a roller-transport personal system, though I don't know it would be practical for small volumes of solution.

man I would love a roller transport processor. I miss using a Versamat 35 up to 4x5 sheet film. God that was nice machine to use....

Film processor design

alex2293

MattKing

Moderator

alex2293

mike c

ic-racer

iandvaag

Kevin Caulfield

OzJohn

Kevin Caulfield

alex2293

paul_c5x4

alex2293

Sal Santamaura

MattKing

Moderator

alex2293

MattKing

Moderator

jvo

mehguy

Diapositivo

Truzi

alex2293

MattKing

Moderator

alex2293

EdSawyer

canuhead

Film processor design

Moderator

Moderator

Moderator

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency