Foma's technical documents suggest developing at either 20C (68F) or 30C (86F), so at the very least I would suspect the emulsion can stand 90F (or more) without any problems.
Ilford provides recommendation to process at 20 C, so not sure what you mean. Essentially, everything outside of that is not coming form manufacturer., that' how they test it. As I said earlier, there was a time when few to nobody was seriously discussing anything but 20 C for B&W processing. Obviously when there was a problem maintaining 20, one had to do something with time.Can I ask where I might read in Kodak, Ilford and Fuji publications that pertain to present their present range of films, information on what temperature is the beginning of a dangerous level for pre-wash? It would sound as if from your experience that the hardening applied to C41 film which enables it to be subjected to 100F does not apply to b&w films is this correct?
Thanks
pentaxuser
I have used a lot of Fomapan both 200 and 400, in 35mm and 120, it is my main film for at least 25 years, and I have never ever pre soaked, don't need to, the green anti halition layer normally comes out in the developer, I use either ID11 stock or Rodinal 1/50,the developer is green when poured out, stop bath is very slightly green, fixer is clear, Ilford wash method water is perfectly clear when poured out, , green in ID11 does not affect the developer at all, I just go on using it as per Ilford instructions, gets greener the more 129 I develop, I simply can't see the need for a pre soak
In the Summer month's I have developed Fomapan, both 200 and 400 at 24 or 25, which can be the temperature of the water coming out of my tap, or with ID11 the temperature of the stock in the bottle, with no ill effects, so I can say with certainty that 200 and 400 can happily take this slightly raised temperature24C is certainly found as a recommendation in a lot of Kodak documentation, for a lot of different combinations.
But I don't think I would subject a film from a manufacturer who, in the past, has problems with soft emulsions, and who is currently having problems with anti-halation layers, to a temperature even that high.
Unless I saw specific manufacturer's recommendations.
I have not used it for as long but there is absolutely no need to pre soak. This applies to both roll film and 35mm. If the anti halation does not come away in the developing stage it will have gone by the time you come to the final rinse and soak in a water bath with a drop of wetting agent. I think you are either miss-reading the development instructions or have been listening to some mumbo jumbo passed around on the web.
OP wants to experiment with trying to solve the issue with the film he/she owns.
Would the above apply to films that have harder emulsions such as Kodak's Ilford's and Fuji's. I had asked the question: If C41 films's emulsions are hard enough to withstand a developing temperature of 100F then what differentiated them from b&w films from the same makers and the answer seemed to be that those C41 film makers had taken the same steps with their b&w films so they too were able to withstand C41 temperaturesThe only practical advantage of a hot presoak or development is that you would in fact be over-softening the top coating to such an extent that you are partially melting it in order to release any unwanted particles embedded in it;
Unless OP has dozens or more Foma 120 rolls from the faulty batch, his question is primarily of academic interest and any solution to his problem isn't going to save him a lot of time.
He should first try Foma's suggested method and verify that the method does give him perfect negatives. It's not clear to me he has done this verification yet.
The only practical advantage of a hot presoak or development is that you would in fact be over-softening the top coating to such an extent that you are partially melting it in order to release any unwanted particles embedded in it; yet due to that, you might very well also create little craters in their place. I've seen it happen. Pick your poison. To me, that's an unacceptable film manufacture issue. Are we trying to create hot ramen noodles here, or pictures?
Why should I provide any kind of verification? How is this preventing you or anyone else from answering a simple question: "what is the highest safest water temperature for a B&W emulsion?" Should I also report on my teeth flossing habits to "unlock" the answer?
Huss - you're example with Delta 3200 isn't a push or plus at all if you in fact rated it at 1000. I routinely use 800 for this film and dev it in PMK pyro, and could easily achieve that kind of result at 20C using dev time alone. Is that the old Fredrickson's Hardware in SF, or some other city? It is a nice shot.
Why should I provide any kind of verification? How is this preventing you or anyone else from answering a simple question: "what is the highest safest water temperature for a B&W emulsion?" Should I also report on my teeth flossing habits to "unlock" the answer?
Should I also report on my teeth flossing habits to "unlock" the answer?
Apologies if you felt so because of my post. I see that you are very new to photrio, haven't been around even for a month, and hence new to photrio community's often exasperating ways of responding to technical questions such as yours. This is not quora or stack exchange and it takes a bit of time to get used to the banter and lectures. Sorry again for my lecturing lapses and I hope you'll find the precise technical answer to your question soon. Have a great week ahead.
the manufacturer has development charts for 86F
I have formed an opinion that more effort is put into worrying about technicalities which have no real bearing on the process of taking a photograph and developing it.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?