How does Ilford do it?

[Sirius Glass]

The humidity is too low. Hand the film in the bathroom and run a hot shower to relax the film.

 

[MattKing]

And definitely don't squeegee the film!
Use something like Photo-flo, diluted carefully, and if possible hang it to dry in a shower that has been pre-humidified.

 

[Lee Rust]

It's been my understanding that Kodak no longer manufactures their own acetate film base and have outsourced this material in recent years. Does anybody here know for sure? This could be a factor with the Tri-X cupping.

 

[Anon Ymous]

Curling - cupping can be eliminated if you load the - preferably uncut - film in a reel with the emulsion side facing outwards. Leave it there for some days and it will be gone. Prevention of cupping is preferable by hanging the film to dry overnight in the bathroom, after running some hot water to create steam as Sirius glass said.

 

[markbau]

Curling - cupping can be eliminated if you load the - preferably uncut - film in a reel with the emulsion side facing outwards. Leave it there for some days and it will be gone. Prevention of cupping is preferable by hanging the film to dry overnight in the bathroom, after running some hot water to create steam as Sirius glass said.

I have just started messing around with bergger Panchro 400 in 120 and it has to be the worst film I've seen for curling. Was left to hang for over 24 hours and in the neg sleeves it rolls into a cylinder.

 

[mpirie]

..... on one small island not quite as big as Texas ....
pentaxuser

And about to become an even smaller island later tonight!

Mike

 

[Lachlan Young]

It's been my understanding that Kodak no longer manufactures their own acetate film base and have outsourced this material in recent years. Does anybody here know for sure? This could be a factor with the Tri-X cupping.

No, it's not who manufactures the triacetate (as far as I know it's the same company who supply Ilford etc - and I think was ORWO's triacetate plant) but a combination of the back coated anti-curl layer (and far more importantly) the RH and heat of the drying environment in the end user's darkroom. There's only so much the manufacturers can do to combat inattentiveness on the part of the users!

 

[AgX]

...as far as I know it's the same company who supply Ilford etc - and I think was ORWO's triacetate plant.

That casting plant went under in 1990.

EDIT: see post #37

 

[Lachlan Young]

That casting plant went under in 1990.

It may have changed hands at several points between 1990 and 1998, but it's been run since 1998 by Island Polymer Industries, is located on the old ORWO site in Bitterfeld-Wolfen & explicitly refers to itself as as a 'former manufacturing plant of AGFA-Wolfen'.

 

[pentaxuser]

And about to become an even smaller island later tonight!

Mike

Give Nichola a big enough saw, show her the Tweed and it might be an even smaller island

pentaxuser

 

[pentaxuser]

Based on another thread just launched, Ilford even save you money on its ID11 compared to D76 in terms of minimum quantities needed to develop a 35mm film

pentaxuser

 

[AgX]

It may have changed hands at several points between 1990 and 1998, but it's been run since 1998 by Island Polymer Industries, is located on the old ORWO site in Bitterfeld-Wolfen & explicitly refers to itself as as a 'former manufacturing plant of AGFA-Wolfen'.

Yes, you are right of course.
Sorry, I misinterpreted what you wrote and got lead astray.
Anyway, the Orwo basemaking got split. The extrusion part moved to another terrain, the casting part is situated at the old terrain.

 

[Henning Serger]

It may have changed hands at several points between 1990 and 1998, but it's been run since 1998 by Island Polymer Industries, is located on the old ORWO site in Bitterfeld-Wolfen & explicitly refers to itself as as a 'former manufacturing plant of AGFA-Wolfen'.

You are correct, Lachlan.
Production of Triacetate (TAC) never stopped at Wolfen: https://www.islandpolymer.com/
AFAIK they are one of / or the supplier of TAC for Ilford.

There are also several other companies as well in Wolfen which have been founded by former ORWO employees, continuing production of photo products, photo services, chemical products, foils / plastic sheets etc.
So lots of products / production have indeed survived there, just often under different company names.

Best regards,
Henning

 

[Bikerider]

I have never had HP5+ "cup" when drying. I hang a clip on it and it dries completely flat. My relative humidity is never below 65% and usually closer to low 70s for most of the year. I live in the Midlands of the U.K. I even managed once on my night-school course to wash for quite a few seconds with really hot water and it came out unscathed. It is a well behaved film in my opinion .

pentaxuser

It is a fair while since I used Kodak film and that was Tmax 100 and had no problem of the film, it always dried flat. Then and now I dry the film after a long soak in final rinse with wetting agent and hung up where there is a cool but light draft. No dust problems

at all either, You just have to remember it will take a while to dry this way.​

 

[Smaug01]

I'm pretty sure Kodak doesn't think you're dumb, and they definitely want your business. In my opinion they make the finest range of films in the world, and are priced to keep the company afloat.

That goes both ways. Maybe the needed a cost increase to support the company and maybe even to support some growth. But increase the cost too much (which in my opinion, they did) and people will buy elsewhere. Kodak films are good, but so are Ilford, Foma, Fuji, etc. (though Fuji is quite expensive too, except for the mass market C-41. Velvia is $18 a roll now, for example)

As for the cupping, I assume you're putting the negatives in sleeves, right? If you press them in a book overnight you should find flat negatives in the morning. My humidity swings may not be as large as yours but whatever cupping I see from any brand is easily remedied with patience and gravity.

I do put them in sleeves. But what I've been doing is scanning, hanging to dry overnight. Then, they hang all the next day while I'm at work, then I cut and scan them the next night. What I will try is to take them down and cut them, put them in sleeves and press for the day, THEN scan them the next night.

Thanks for the great tip!

 

[Smaug01]

And definitely don't squeegee the film!
Use something like Photo-flo, diluted carefully, and if possible hang it to dry in a shower that has been pre-humidified.

I use Photo Flo for the final rinse, then squeegee, then hang dry.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I use Photo Flo for the final rinse, then squeegee, then hang dry.

I do the same but without the squeegee. Ditch the squeegee and avoid scratches and marks. Instead use a paper towel to draw off the excess fluid from the lowest corner of the hanging film.

 

[Lachlan Young]

You are correct, Lachlan.
Production of Triacetate (TAC) never stopped at Wolfen: https://www.islandpolymer.com/
AFAIK they are one of / or the supplier of TAC for Ilford.

There are also several other companies as well in Wolfen which have been founded by former ORWO employees, continuing production of photo products, photo services, chemical products, foils / plastic sheets etc.
So lots of products / production have indeed survived there, just often under different company names.

Best regards,
Henning

I take it that I am correct in understanding that no industrial scale coating of photosensitive materials can/ does take place on the Bitterfeld-Wolfen site currently?

 

[AgX]

There was no such since the demise of the Orwo filmplant.

 

[MattKing]

I use Photo Flo for the final rinse, then squeegee, then hang dry.

The squeegee may be contributing to the cupping because it may leave you with more moisture on one side than the other - and they cause scratches!

 

[Henning Serger]

I take it that I am correct in understanding that no industrial scale coating of photosensitive materials can/ does take place on the Bitterfeld-Wolfen site currently?

Yes, Lachlan.
FilmoTec is producing their own emulsions in their factory, but they don't have their own in-house industrial coating line. For their production coating runs they are cooperating with a partner who is coating for them.
The converting / finishing of their films is then again done in their factory in Wolfen. Converting of the formats they offer. They don't have 135 cassettes and 120 photo film converting machinery.

Best regards,
Henning

 

[jvo]

"t-max to contrasty" - i use it exclusively and have to process to get the higher contrast i want!

i'm convinced that modern day films are all good and can be processed to get what you want and searching for that holy grail is a fools errand! the difference is in quality control and ilford and kodak lead the pack.

yup, all anecdotal, but there it is.

p.s. i use weighted clips when drying 35mm and 120 - never had a cupping issue?

 

[foc]

The squeegee may be contributing to the cupping because it may leave you with more moisture on one side than the other - and they cause scratches!

Matt, I have used a squeegee for B&W films for the last 35 years and never once scratched a film.
Most people using a squeegee try and gouge the film with the amount of pressure applied.
Instead, be gentle, the squeegee should just kiss the film.
It should be a good quality squeegee and should be soaked in tepid water (with a drop of wetting agent) prior to use and washed and cleaned after use.
In the correct hand, a squeegee is your friend.

 

[NB23]

There is absolutely no need to squeegee a film.

Squeegeeing film has more to do with an obsessive compulsive disorder than anything even remotely necessary.

okay, your film might dry 1 minute and 32 seconds faster, but then you lose 1 minute and 32 seconds in the whole process of gently squeegeeing, carefully dipping the squeegee with loving care and whatnot. So there’s that.

 

[pentaxuser]

There is absolutely no need to squeegee a film.

Squeegeeing film has more to do with an obsessive compulsive disorder than anything even remotely necessary.

.

Sounds more serious than I thought

pentaxuser