Hand development with jobo 1500 tanks?

Per Bjesse · Jan 22, 2019

I am currently developing 120 in Patterson tanks and live it but shoot enough that I often have between 4 and 8 rolls I need done at a time I have been experimenting with double loading Patterson reels with films taped together at the end but get occasional misfires where the tape glue dissolves during development and I run some frames due to overlap. I was thinking whether the jobo 1500 series reels and tanks (where the reels are designed for double loading) could be a solution. I dont think I can justify the price of a Jobo processor though so here is my question: what experiences do people have using the 1500 series tanks with the inversion caps like a Patterson tank (without a jobo processor)? Good/bad?

mshchem · Jan 22, 2019

Jobo stuff is expensive! It works fine, just like Paterson for inversion. Loading 2 120 films on a Jobo reel can be very difficult. Paterson reels can be spooled with 2 120, but as you have found it's not problem free. I would look for a bigger Paterson tank and use your existing reels. You can buy 3 Paterson reels for the price of 1 Jobo. I use Jobo processor now, but I still use a Paterson setup now and then.
When I was using big Paterson tanks I replenished my developer, that's as reliable as it gets. Hc-110 or XTOL. Use a 2 liter bottle and replenish to Kodak instructions.

koraks · Jan 22, 2019

Yeah, I'd just get a bigger tank. There are Paterson 4-reel tanks that cost significantly less than the jobo without being all that much inferior. Especially for hand development I personally wouldn't shell out the cash for the jobo stuff.
Loading two films onto one reel is always a chore in my experience and I therefore and ways avoid it. I'd rather do several processing runs instead of trying to do it all at once with the risk of messing it up.

Mick Fagan · Jan 22, 2019

The Jobo 1540 tank, which is the 1510 tank (single 135 film) plus a 1530 extension attached (three 135 films) is probably the best thing for what you wish to do.

That combination is a 1540 tank, which will hold 4 x 135 film and/or 4 x 120 films. With this configuration you can develop either by inversion and use approximately 1 litre of chemistry, or by rotation on a flat surface and use approximately 500ml of chemistry.

The red rings, when in that configuration, allow one to roll the tank perfectly well on a flat surface, I know this from a recent experience. I was developing some 135 films on my Jobo machine and was at the stop bath stage when my Jobo processor died. I was able to demount the tank, pour in fixer, then continue on rotary developing by rolling it back and forth between my hands in my darkroom sink.

I do know that placing 2 rolls of 120 on a reel isn't as easy as anything, but it certainly can be done and I have done it quite a few times in the past doing C41. If you buy secondhand reels, ensure you get the red locking tab with each reel; this is a must for placing two 120 rolls on a single reel. The red locking tabs are quite small and are inserted into a small hole and are often lost over time by owners.

Mick.

R.Gould · Jan 22, 2019

I often put 2 rolls of 120 0n paterson reels with no problem, load first roll, when roll is fully onto the reel keep ttwisting the reel using your thumbs untill the film cannot go any further, carefully hold film gently with your hand and make sure it won't go in any further, then start the next roll then stop loading as soon as the end ofnthe film is ijust inthe reel, it sounds harder than it is, I have used this method for more years than I care to remember, never had kinks, and much easier than trying to tape the ends of film in the dark, Patterson nake tanks for up to 5 35mm reels, but these will only take 3 120 films, but the multi reel tanks are around £30 GBP over here,

Huub · Jan 22, 2019

I do exactly the same thing as R. Gould. I make sure the first film gets as far in as it gets. Then i load the second film and stop loading as soon as the film has entered the reel completely. Never had an issue.

Pieter12 · Jan 22, 2019

I use the inversion method with Jobo 1500 tanks all the time. The sealing ring can be a little fussy to use and sometimes weeps a little, but overall I like the system. I also have Paterson tanks and like them and the reels but the lids can take longer to remove and replace, making changing solutions not as quick as compared to Jobo. As an aside, it was recommended to me not to put 2 rolls on a reel, the savings in chemicals was not worth the possibility of uneven development from poorly loaded film.

AgX · Jan 22, 2019

see here too:
https://www.photrio.com/forum/threads/jobo-reels-old-style-versus-new-style.103951/

Per Bjesse · Jan 22, 2019

R.Gould said:
I often put 2 rolls of 120 0n paterson reels with no problem, load first roll, when roll is fully onto the reel keep ttwisting the reel using your thumbs untill the film cannot go any further, carefully hold film gently with your hand and make sure it won't go in any further, then start the next roll then stop loading as soon as the end ofnthe film is ijust inthe reel, it sounds harder than it is, I have used this method for more years than I care to remember, never had kinks, and much easier than trying to tape the ends of film in the dark, Patterson nake tanks for up to 5 35mm reels, but these will only take 3 120 films, but the multi reel tanks are around £30 GBP over here,

Well, I this method is not working for me. I have ruined several rolls. Loading is never an issue, nor is taping together the ends. The issue is that the glue in the tape dissolves one out of ten times, and then I get frame overlap with ruined results in the overlaps. Question for you: How do you agitate (swizzle stick/inversions), and how long are your development times when you do not have problems?

Per Bjesse · Jan 22, 2019

Huub said:
I do exactly the same thing as R. Gould. I make sure the first film gets as far in as it gets. Then i load the second film and stop loading as soon as the film has entered the reel completely. Never had an issue.

Yeah, this does not work for me; the films bunch up on each other. What films are you doing this with, how do you agitate (swizzle stick/manual inversions), how often do you agitate, and how long is your development times?

Per Bjesse · Jan 22, 2019

Pieter12 said:
I use the inversion method with Jobo 1500 tanks all the time. The sealing ring can be a little fussy to use and sometimes weeps a little, but overall I like the system. I also have Paterson tanks and like them and the reels but the lids can take longer to remove and replace, making changing solutions not as quick as compared to Jobo. As an aside, it was recommended to me not to put 2 rolls on a reel, the savings in chemicals was not worth the possibility of uneven development from poorly loaded film.

I am not trying to save money, I am trying to save time. If I need to do six rolls of 120 then if I don't double load that is 1.5 or more hours of work instead of 30 minutes. It is hard to me to find that kind of time. Double loading works great in terms of development when the frames don't overlap, and the construction of the 1500 jobo reels should make that impossible.

canuhead · Jan 22, 2019

Mick Fagan said:
...That combination is a 1540 tank, which will hold 4 x 135 film and/or 4 x 120 films...

did you mean 2 x 120 rolls ? Can't remember my combination of tanks (bottom one is tank for 2 x 35) but my overall set up is 3 x 120 reels. iirc

Per Bjesse · Jan 22, 2019

koraks said:
Yeah, I'd just get a bigger tank. There are Paterson 4-reel tanks that cost significantly less than the jobo without being all that much inferior. Especially for hand development I personally wouldn't shell out the cash for the jobo stuff.
Loading two films onto one reel is always a chore in my experience and I therefore and ways avoid it. I'd rather do several processing runs instead of trying to do it all at once with the risk of messing it up.

The biggest tank can take three 120 rolls, which is not a lot more than two. I'd rather spend an extra minute loading (which is all it takes for me, and I don't kink the film) than spend an hour more developing.

R.Gould · Jan 22, 2019

Per Bjesse said:
Yeah, this does not work for me; the films bunch up on each other. What films are you doing this with, how do you agitate (swizzle stick/manual inversions), how often do you agitate, and how long is your development times?

for first film remove from backing paper and load from that end, for second film load from free end, I have loaded tthis way for 65 years, never a problem, trick is to make sure that first film is completely in to fhe center of the reel then load the second film untill just into the reel, I have used this method over the years with Agfa,Ilford,Kodak,Efke, and for the last 15 or more years with Fomapan, as far as agitiation, with doudle loaded reels never use the twiddle stick always invert as the twiddle stick can cause the films to move in the reel,I develop all films in RO9?one shot, formally Rodinal, at 1/50 and for fomapan120 I develop for 18 minutes, with continius agitation for first minute the 2 or 3 inversions every 30 seconds,

Per Bjesse · Jan 22, 2019

R.Gould said:
for first film remove from backing paper and load from that end, for second film load from free end, I have loaded tthis way for 65 years, never a problem, trick is to make sure that first film is completely in to fhe center of the reel then load the second film untill just into the reel, I have used this method over the years with Agfa,Ilford,Kodak,Efke, and for the last 15 or more years with Fomapan, as far as agitiation, with doudle loaded reels never use the twiddle stick always invert as the twiddle stick can cause the films to move in the reel,I develop all films in RO9?one shot, formally Rodinal, at 1/50 and for fomapan120 I develop for 18 minutes, with continius agitation for first minute the 2 or 3 inversions every 30 seconds,

I take what you say it to mean that you load the two films in different directions (one film starts is loaded with the end first that is the deepest into the roll, the second roll is loaded from the end that is on top of the roll). I am not sure why that would make a difference. Do you have a theory? I do use swizzle stick agitation, and that may be a strong contributor to my problems as the centrifugal force in the fluids may push things together just like you say (even though I load push the first roll as far in as it goes, and have the second only in as far as it needs to go to be on the roll). Now that I have been bitten repeatedly, I am unsure if I want to keep experimenting with double loading patterson reels, but maybe I should just put on my big boy pants.

AgX · Jan 22, 2019

Per Bjesse said:
Well, I this method is not working for me. I have ruined several rolls. Loading is never an issue, nor is taping together the ends. The issue is that the glue in the tape dissolves one out of ten times, and then I get frame overlap with ruined results in the overlaps.

Both types of reel at least for a part came with a blocking clip, to be released after the first 120-film has ben loaded and pushed to the end.

Per Bjesse · Jan 22, 2019

AgX said:
Both types of reel at least for a part came with a blocking clip, to be released after the first 120-film has ben loaded and pushed to the end.

That to my knowledge has never been true for Patterson reels (which was the context of my failures, and why I am contemplating jobo reels). Certainly if there were clips available for patterson reels I would be all over it.

MattKing · Jan 22, 2019

I develop two 120 rolls in a single reel frequently.
I use the AP manufactured reels that are compatible with Paterson tanks. They are the ones sold as "Arista Premium" by Freestyle Photographic.
If you use the swizzle stick for agitation for anything but the first seconds of development, you are not following Paterson's directions, and you are greatly increasing both the chances of uneven development and the likelihood that the films will travel within the channels of the reel.
I previously experimented with rotary agitation and the Paterson tanks, and found that if I used rotary agitation for anything more than the first 30 seconds of development, two rolls would inevitably move in the reels, and usually overlap.
I don't bother with the tape - I can't reliably attach it anyways.
I use R. Gould's method of loading the two rolls.
One thing I do that nobody has mentioned so far is that I pre-soak the film for three minutes before development. I've learned that when the film is in water, stop bath or fixer, it is much less likely to move around than when it is in developer - it is slipperier (?) in developer!
So what I do is:
1) load the reels with two rolls as mentioned, without using tape to attach the films;
2) pre-soak the film in room temperature tap water for three minutes, using continuous rotary agitation;
3) develop the film in room temperature replenished X-Tol, using rotary agitation for the first 30 seconds, and inversion agitation using the Kodak system (5 seconds every 30 seconds) for the balance of the development time;
4) put the film through the stop bath, fixer, rinse and HCA steps using continuous rotary agitation.
The result: no film overlap.
I think (but cannot prove) that the reason that this works is due to the pre-soak. I think (OK, I remember) that film introduced dry into developer is very, very slippery. Whereas, after three minutes in tap water, film isn't nearly as slippery, even after it is transferred to developer.
I expect that this benefit is at least partially related to the ph of the rinse water - most tap water is at least slightly acidic.
However, there is at least a possibility that some of the benefit might be related to differences between the Paterson reels and the AP compatible reels.
I would suggest to the OP that he/she try the pre-soak and inversion agitation during development, to see if that resolves his problems.

Pieter12 · Jan 22, 2019

My guess is the emulsion swells with the soak and that may be enough to keep the film in place better.

AgX · Jan 22, 2019

Per Bjesse said:
That to my knowledge has never been true for Patterson reels .

With both "types of reel" I referred to the Jobo reels. See my link.

mshchem · Jan 22, 2019

Pieter12 said:
My guess is the emulsion swells with the soak and that may be enough to keep the film in place better.

+1

Per Bjesse · Jan 22, 2019

MattKing said:
I develop two 120 rolls in a single reel frequently.
I use the AP manufactured reels that are compatible with Paterson tanks. They are the ones sold as "Arista Premium" by Freestyle Photographic.
If you use the swizzle stick for agitation for anything but the first seconds of development, you are not following Paterson's directions, and you are greatly increasing both the chances of uneven development and the likelihood that the films will travel within the channels of the reel.
I previously experimented with rotary agitation and the Paterson tanks, and found that if I used rotary agitation for anything more than the first 30 seconds of development, two rolls would inevitably move in the reels, and usually overlap.
I don't bother with the tape - I can't reliably attach it anyways.
I use R. Gould's method of loading the two rolls.
One thing I do that nobody has mentioned so far is that I pre-soak the film for three minutes before development. I've learned that when the film is in water, stop bath or fixer, it is much less likely to move around than when it is in developer - it is slipperier (?) in developer!
So what I do is:
1) load the reels with two rolls as mentioned, without using tape to attach the films;
2) pre-soak the film in room temperature tap water for three minutes, using continuous rotary agitation;
3) develop the film in room temperature replenished X-Tol, using rotary agitation for the first 30 seconds, and inversion agitation using the Kodak system (5 seconds every 30 seconds) for the balance of the development time;
4) put the film through the stop bath, fixer, rinse and HCA steps using continuous rotary agitation.
The result: no film overlap.
I think (but cannot prove) that the reason that this works is due to the pre-soak. I think (OK, I remember) that film introduced dry into developer is very, very slippery. Whereas, after three minutes in tap water, film isn't nearly as slippery, even after it is transferred to developer.
I expect that this benefit is at least partially related to the ph of the rinse water - most tap water is at least slightly acidic.
However, there is at least a possibility that some of the benefit might be related to differences between the Paterson reels and the AP compatible reels.
I would suggest to the OP that he/she try the pre-soak and inversion agitation during development, to see if that resolves his problems.

Yes, moving away from swizzling may be the key. I presoak. As for swizzling being bad for eveness of development after the induction phase, I have developed hundreds of rolls and never seen an issue. However, if inversions and no swizzling would let me double load then I'd happily give it up.

Now as for the "R.Gould loading method", are you loading one film reversed (free end last) as seems to be indicated in that post? Because I don't get why that would make a difference, and it seems like it would be a significant hassle......

MattKing · Jan 22, 2019

Per Bjesse said:
Now as for the "R.Gould loading method", are you loading one film reversed (free end last) as seems to be indicated in that post? Because I don't get why that would make a difference, and it seems like it would be a significant hassle......

Sorry, I should have specified that I was referring to R. Gould's post #5.
No, I'm loading each film "folded-tape-over-end-first", just as I load individual rolls.
But I'm advancing the first roll in the way that R. Gould describes in his first post.

cmacd123 · Jan 22, 2019

FWIW, I just did 9 Jobo tanks worth of film by inversion this afternoon. (tanks bought long ago before the price went through the roof.)

the little red tab keeps the film from wandering if you put 2 120 films on one reel. My normal config is a 1520 tank with a 1530 extender.

5 135
2 120 plus 3 135
4 120 plus 2 135 (but that is a tight squeeze)
6 120

I did try a 1520 with TWO 1530 once and while it worked it was awkward to handle. even more so that the long discontinued 8 reel Paterson tank.

As far as paterson, the current flat top ones I find very dificult to use. the AP (arista and others) CLASSIC style are easier to fill with the small fill cap. Unfortunatly the 3/5 reel version does not seem to exist any-more.

R.Gould · Jan 23, 2019

MattKing said:
Sorry, I should have specified that I was referring to R. Gould's post #5.
No, I'm loading each film "folded-tape-over-end-first", just as I load individual rolls.
But I'm advancing the first roll in the way that R. Gould describes in his first post.

Per Bjesse said:
Yes, moving away from swizzling may be the key. I presoak. As for swizzling being bad for eveness of development after the induction phase, I have developed hundreds of rolls and never seen an issue. However, if inversions and no swizzling would let me double load then I'd happily give it up.

Now as for the "R.Gould loading method", are you loading one film reversed (free end last) as seems to be indicated in that post? Because I don't get why that would make a difference, and it seems like it would be a significant hassle......

Two reasons for loading the first film tape end first, you are pushing the first film all the way into the reel anfd the taped end helps with a little mor stiffness to get the film in, second if there is a very slight over lad then there is normally slightly more of a gap at the start of the film, as for swizzling the reel, I aleays do it with one film, for the first minute and invariably the film moves further to the center of the reel, in fact a few times I have used this method for the entire film development and found the film enbed up right tothe centerof the reel, If you read the instructions for the Paterson tank they say use the stick for the first agitation then replace with inversion, as for uneven development with the stick, never happened to me, back in the late 50,s early 60's,and earlier, most tanks only came with a stick for agitation, it was the norm untill Paterson came out with the tank cover, back then everyone said inversion was nonsence, it gave uneven development, nothing changes,

Hand development with jobo 1500 tanks?

Per Bjesse

mshchem

koraks

Moderator

Mick Fagan

R.Gould

Huub

Pieter12

AgX

Per Bjesse

Per Bjesse

Per Bjesse

canuhead

Per Bjesse

R.Gould

Per Bjesse

AgX

Per Bjesse

MattKing

Moderator

Pieter12

AgX

mshchem

Per Bjesse

MattKing

Moderator

cmacd123

R.Gould

Hand development with jobo 1500 tanks?

Moderator

Moderator

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency