Ilford HP5+ - uneven development results

Ian Grant said:

Why is your dev tank so much colder than the rooms you live in ? Maybe store in a warm place. In the UK in the winter I just warm my tank after loading under a mixer tap to ensure there's no drop in the dev temp after filling. I guess I do it without thinking and I keep the whole process less than + or - 1ºC of the chosen process temperature with little effort.

Ian

Click to expand...

Ian, I live in Minnesota, where it's sometimes -35 degrees C outside. It's bloody cold here.
The basement, where my darkroom is, is about 8 degrees C during the coldest days of winter.

I wish I had the resources to build a darkroom that's heated, but I don't. So I try to work around it.
The prewash has worked brilliantly with every film I've used, except this brick of 120 HP5.

I can't process in the kitchen sink, because we have three curious cats that want to 'help', and we only have one bathroom.... I'm stuck with the basement.

Thomas Bertilsson said:

Sorry, but how do you do that?

The tank is the same temp as the basement. When I pour chemistry in it, the temperature of the developer is lowered between one and five degrees, depending on how cold the room is.

Click to expand...

Sure the temperature of the developer will be effected by the tank temperature, but when you pour it in it reacts first with the film. Over the short period of development it should not make much difference, unless you have kept your tank in the fridge.

I develop HP5 in D76 too, but my procedure is totally different. No pre soak (I don't do that w/ any film), and I use the D76 full strength at 68 degrees for 7 minutes. Comes out great. I've also developed HP5 in Acufine w/ excellent results. Have a roll in a camera right now and it's going into Rodinal, just to see. Good film, but I prefer Tri-X. My experience w/ D76 is it has to be fresh. After 3 weeks mine has too much contrast, and it's not a consistent contrast, so out it goes. I'm using TD-16 now which is supposed to be nearly exactly the same, but it's stable for 6 months.

I wouldn't worry about Tri-X going away any time soon. Even if Kodak went away, and it appears they have their film business back on track now, it's such a great film I'm sure someone would buy the formula and reproduce it.

If you consider the heat capacity of the tank and reel as compared to that of the water in the developer the first is inconsequential compared to the second. This is true no matter the material used to make them even if the tank and reel are metal. Has anyone considered doing a test to what effect there is. It will be too small to seriously effect development.

cliveh said:

Sure the temperature of the developer will be effected by the tank temperature, but when you pour it in it reacts first with the film. Over the short period of development it should not make much difference, unless you have kept your tank in the fridge.

Click to expand...

Clive, if you had read the whole thread, you would see that my darkroom is about 45 degrees Fahrenheit during the winter (8 degrees C). Other times it's 15-16 degrees C, when it's not winter. My house is old, the basement is not insulated.

The temperature of the tank is the same as the room, about 8 degrees C. When I pour the developer in, it immediately drops about 4-5 degrees. That DOES make a difference, and what's worse is that it's not consistent with when it's warmer in the room.

My idea, which has worked perfectly up until this point, is to make sure that the tank, along with its contents, is exactly 68*F/20*C when I pour in the developer, regardless of room temperature. That way my film is always processed under exactly the same conditions. I like repeatability. I can't stand the opposite.

Gerald C Koch said:

If you consider the heat capacity of the tank and reel as compared to the heat capacity of the water in the developer the first is inconsequential compared to the second. This is true no matter the material used to make them even if the tank and reel are metal.

Click to expand...

Jerry,

The temp of the developer drops drastically when I pour it into a cold tank. 4-5 degrees. Stainless steel tank and reels.

momus said:

I develop HP5 in D76 too, but my procedure is totally different. No pre soak (I don't do that w/ any film), and I use the D76 full strength at 68 degrees for 7 minutes. Comes out great. I've also developed HP5 in Acufine w/ excellent results. Have a roll in a camera right now and it's going into Rodinal, just to see. Good film, but I prefer Tri-X. My experience w/ D76 is it has to be fresh. After 3 weeks mine has too much contrast, and it's not a consistent contrast, so out it goes. I'm using TD-16 now which is supposed to be nearly exactly the same, but it's stable for 6 months.

I wouldn't worry about Tri-X going away any time soon. Even if Kodak went away, and it appears they have their film business back on track now, it's such a great film I'm sure someone would buy the formula and reproduce it.

Click to expand...

I don't think Kodak is going anywhere either. But I want HP5+ because it's the same in all formats; sheets, rolls, and 35mm. Kodak doesn't have that in ISO 400 and with a reasonable price tag.

My D76 never gets old. And I could happily develop TMax 400 one day prior and one day after the HP5 that failed. It's not the developer.

And, again, my presoak is not about trying to improve the developing process. It is only, and only, about getting the tank to the same temperature as the developer.

Thomas Bertilsson said:

Jerry,

The temp of the developer drops drastically when I pour it into a cold tank. 4-5 degrees. Stainless steel tank and reels.

Click to expand...

Your situation appears to be an extreme case. For the average person working in a heated room there should be no problem. Have you considered using a tempering bath during development? If it is as cold as you say the developer will cool off just from contact with the cold air. I have the reverse situation here in Florida where the air temperature is often in the 90's. I personally have only seen a rise of less than a degree.

I would try to tempering the tank before you load the film. Once you feel the tank is tempered, dump the water out, turn lights off, load the film onto the reels, load the tank, and then pore the developer into a tempered tank.

Gerald C Koch said:

Your situation appears to be an extreme case. Have you considered using a tempering bath during development? If it is as cold as you say the developer will cool off just from contact with the cold air.

Click to expand...

Yes.

I temper the tank and its contents with about 72*F water. After two minutes presoak, the water comes out at about 68*F.

Then I pour in 68*F developer, and use a 68*F water bath for the developing tank, so that the entire process is as close to 68*F as possible.
If it's off by a little I don't care, like half of a degree. You are right that it doesn't make any real world difference.

But several degrees will make a difference, and if I subsequently lower a tank with 64*F developer into a 68*F water bath, the outer part of the tank will warm up and the film closest to the tank wall will develop faster than what's at the core of the tank, which in itself would lead to unevenly developed negatives.

My goal is to keep the process as consistent as possible, and as close to an ideal state as possible. I dislike slop in any process.

But, when I get home today, I will run a roll of HP5+ through without presoak. I'll start with 72*F developer, and run the process outside the water bath for the first two minutes, at which point it should be roughly 68*F. To compensate for the initial heightened temperature, I will shave a minute off the developing time.

FWIW, the automatic JOBO's do a five-minute presoak on all processes, B&W and color, and at least on my ATL-1000 there is no way to disable the presoak. I've processed thousands of rolls through this machine, and never had a problem with uneven development. I do agree with one of the previous comments that too short a presoak is probably worse than no presoak.

Thomas, I think you are in danger of getting sidetracked here with the answers you are getting. My understanding is that Simon Galley's position is that a pre-soak is not needed but does no harm. I think Ilford wouldn't want to have a film like HP5+ which is affected by whether a pre-soak had been used when Kodak has a similar film that appears to be unaffected.

I'd expect Simon to appear here by tomorrow and ask for details of this film and probably suggest you send it to Ilford.

If he doesn't appear I'd contact Ilford if I were you. If you had success with HP5+ in the past and nothing has changed in your process then it points to your film being at fault NOT I hasten to add to HP5+ per se.

I too have never experienced any problems with HP5+ .

pentaxuser

cjbecker said:

I would try to tempering the tank before you load the film onto the reels. Once you feel the tank is tempered, dump the water out, turn lights off, load the film onto the reels, load the tank, and then pore the developer into a tempered tank.

Click to expand...

If my darkroom was entirely dark, that would have been a really good idea! It's dark enough for printing, but not dark enough for taking film out of a daylight tank and expect it to not be fogged.

I know, I'm a problem child.

Seriously, thanks to everybody that's trying to help out. It's either the presoak (99.99% chance), or there's something wrong with the film (0.01% chance).
If I eliminate the presoak I am faced with another problem - temperature. It's that simple. I just have to find a way to work around this new problem. I'm used to this situation, and had a pretty nice equilibrium going in the darkroom.

The other thing I love about the Ilford films is that they dry flat, no matter how dry the air is. (Relative humidity levels in Minnesota in the winter is 'bone dry'). Kodak Tri-X and TMax 400 cups, so that it's damned near impossible to get the film to lay flat in a scanner. HP5 - not a problem, it just lays flat right away, without any effort.

I too think it's simpler than it appears, and I'm just trying to answer everybody that is so kind to chime in with their experience and knowledge.

My guess is that I should do the following:

1. Avoid the presoak.
2. Find a different way of tempering the tank and its contents before I pour the developer in.

Now, of course, I don't have any more of the batch of film I had the trouble with, so who knows if I'm actually going to solve any problems or not. I'm perfectly willing to just write it off as 'science fiction', shred the negatives, and move on. I'm not bitter or disappointed, just a bit surprised, since I've had such a rock solid process going for years now. I love Ilford and support them with all of my paper purchases, I use their fixer, and selenium toner too. Recently I've bought about 70 rolls of 35mm HP5+, 20 rolls of 120, and a box of 5x7 sheets. I've also sampled FP4+ with about 20 rolls of 35mm, and a number of rolls of Pan-F+ for my pinhole camera. The products are great, and I've had no problems at all. Until now.

Thanks for weighing in.

pentaxuser said:

Thomas, I think you are in danger of getting sidetracked here with the answers you are getting. My understanding is that Simon Galley's position is that a pre-soak is not needed but does no harm. I think Ilford wouldn't want to have a film like HP5+ which is affected by whether a pre-soak had been used when Kodak has a similar film that appears to be unaffected.

I'd expect Simon to appear here by tomorrow and ask for details of this film and probably suggest you send it to Ilford.

If he doesn't appear I'd contact Ilford if I were you. If you had success with HP5+ in the past and nothing has changed in your process then it points to your film being at fault NOT I hasten to add to HP5+ per se.

I too have never experienced any problems with HP5+ .

pentaxuser

Click to expand...

Thomas, I got into the habit of presoaking when I used my Jobo, and still do it. I always use 3 minutes with vigorous agitation. I understand however, that Ilford does not recommend this practice. If you need to bring your tank up to temp prior to use, run it under warm water after you load film, just before you pour in the chems.

OK, lets try this. Store the tank and your chemistry where it is warm (upstairs rather than in the basement.) When you get ready to process, put on your foul weather gear (or not) and take everything to the basement, load your film and process it. Plan B. Send your partner to the movie with friends, take your warm tank to the basement and load it. Return to the only bathroom and process your film. You might also find working with a patterson tank less of a problem. Bill Barber

Thomas,
I have not experienced such issues with HP5+ (120 and 4x5) in Thornton's, D23 or Pyrocat HD.
I DO use a presoak. I presoak for around 5 minutes with intermittent agitation (every minute or so) as I get other things ready in the darkroom.
Good luck!
Shawn

Could you post a picture of the problem?

This discussion has been very interesting to me. I have the same issue....cold darkroom in a cold basement. I've worried that I'm spending time making sure my developer is precisely at temperature, only to have it drop several degrees when it hits the cold tank/reel. I like the idea of pre-warming the tank in warm water.

Bob Carnie said:

Could you post a picture of the problem?

Click to expand...

Here you go.

This is after I processed TMax 400 successfully, and then after I processed TMax 400 successfully - shot in the same camera, at the same time, at the same location, under the same circumstances.

Pardon dust and sloppy scans, I didn't prep the negs or do anything to them after they were scanned on 'everything auto'. Just wanted to see what was there.

Thomas, this time of year my darkroom is about 55 degrees. I use a hot bath to heat my chemicals up to 70 degrees. Right before I pour the developer into the tank I dip the entire tank into the hot water. So the tank is hot now but the reels are not. It all evens out when I pour the developer in. I've tested this and find it to be true for my darkroom. I then sent the tank on a tray heater for the remainder of the development time to maintain temperature. If you do not have a tray heater you could hit the tank with warm water again half way through development. I've done this with longer development times. This all sounds very wishy-washy but every time I pour the developer out of the tank I throw the thermometer into it and it's right on 70 degrees.

Sorry, are those both TMY400 examples? I'm confused...

Andrew O'Neill said:

Both examples look uneven to my eye, so it's not the film.

Click to expand...

How do you conclude that? It's blatantly obvious that the densities are uneven, but look at the picture I posted using TMax 400 film earlier in the thread. Everything the same way.

I just can't fathom that ten rolls out of ten with the same brick of HP5+ 120 has uneven densities, and every other roll of film since five years have been perfect. What am I missing here?

Sorry I edited my post. Yes, I stated that they are uneven. I didn't say they weren't.

This is after I processed TMax 400 successfully, and then after I processed TMax 400 successfully -

Click to expand...

I was confused with this. Are they side-by-side comparisions of TMY and HP5?? Clarify.

Thomas Bertilsson said:

Here you go.

This is after I processed TMax 400 successfully, and then after I processed TMax 400 successfully - shot in the same camera, at the same time, at the same location, under the same circumstances.

Pardon dust and sloppy scans, I didn't prep the negs or do anything to them after they were scanned on 'everything auto'. Just wanted to see what was there.

Click to expand...

Thomas, I was testing a new(well to me anyway) Hasselblad 553ELX I just got to make sure it was up to snuff in the TTL flash area. I took a roll of the cheapest film I had on hand, which was Arista EDU 200/Foma 200, and ran it through the camera. I had just the day before mixed up a liter of Beutler A-B developer. I used a presoak for 3 1/2 minutes and then ran it through the Beutler 1:1:10 with 30sec initial agitation and then 2 slow inversions every minute thereafter. There was a center strip where the density looked fine but the outer edges looked just like yours only not quite as wide. It was a test roll and I new the camera was fine and laid blame on the agitation scheme or lack there of. Never in a million years would I guess the presoak might have something to do with it, but I an't no rocket scientist so who knows. The only reason I used a presoak is so I could penetrate that anti-halation backing on the Foma films. The only other times I presoak are with Pyro/WD2D+ and Pyrocat-MC where it is recommended and there was no problem there.
As for cold temps? You could move! Seriously, you could load your tank and take it upstairs and let it set on the kitchen counter while you have a beer/coffee or two. Then just use the kitchen sink with a shallow bowl of tempered water. I did that for years before I got serious and built a real darkroom. I'm sure millions still do, will maybe thousands now that digital is here. If your better half say, "Outta here" then just do the same routine, bring your take upstairs, coffee/beer and in an hour or so back down to the dungeon and in to a tempers shallow bowl and develop it. I have a very nice darkroom, but I still use a Tupperware 8x12? storage container that allows just enough water to come up to the seam on my tank. Works great and I don't see changing it, but I will look into this "presoak thing" a little closer. Oh, and if you do use a Tupperware container just make sure it isn't one of your honey's favorites. Ask me what happens if you do. JohnW