Inversion agitation instead of a Jobo rotary development

[pentaxuser]

Here are a few more:

Do you twiddle?

Way back in the early 70's I was experimenting with various development techniques and equipment. I was looking for the least amount of grain and the best sharpness I could get from Panatomic X and TriX both rated at box speeds. Up until that point I had always developed my film in Honeywell...

www.photrio.com

Twist agitation - has anyone ever done tests?

I know this subject has been discussed about a million times before, but I'd like to get to the root of it. Has anyone ever run actual tests to verify that twiddle stick agitation causes uneven development or is inferior to the inversion method? I've read a fairly large number of threads...

www.photrio.com

Further useful threads, Craig and I have had a quick look but it would seem to lead to the conclusion that there are sources for both methods and you pays your money and makes your choice

Can we or any forum do other than present a balanced set of info. Probably not. Can we avoid a twirlers v agitators scenario- recurring evidence would suggest not

This state of affairs is "written in the stars for all eternity"

pentaxuser

 

[mshchem]

Like a bad penny, it keeps coming back...

 

[mshchem]

I did use the original Lab-Box, the Rodinax 35U tank, and it offered good results. I even had it motorised which is smoother than the specified stop-and-go half-turns. No development drag.

Nowadays I have a DIY horizontal tank rotator jig, but just for the fixing stage. Allows for 50% less fixer usage. Added a motor since then.

DSCF7504 by Olivier, on Flickr

That's pretty cool. Thomas Edison! Excellent point using continuous agitation for fixing, especially with tabular grain films.

 

[MattKing]

I use a Beseler or similar continuous, reversing rotary agitator for the first 30 seconds of development and every other step (pre-rinse, stop bath, fixer, rinse, HCA) except the wash.
In addition to reducing the volume of chemistry required, that means, for all those steps:
1) my agitation regime is essentially the same for each and every roll of film; and
2) it frees me up to do other things while the tank is on the agitator, I can be prepping the following chemicals, or doing the necessary housekeeping steps to speed clean-up and put away at the end of the session. That means more to us who have temporary darkroom facilities than it might for someone with a dedicated space - I use the kitchen to develop film.
The Paterson Super System 4 tanks that are sized to hold three 135 reels or two 120 reels work perfectly for this - just need to add a thick rubber band to keep the tank centred.
I could use the agitator for the entire development stage, but my preference for developing two 120 films on the same reel means that that doesn't work well, because when I do that films seem to want to migrate and overlap in the reels during the development step. That doesn't seem to happen during the other steps.
I can even do this with steel reels - if I can put up with the noise