Just tried developing film (4x5) for the first time

[Dwayne Martin]

Thanks! It is very dry here. The scratches are mostly just the light in the photo though, those are barely visible in real life.

I get tiny scratches like those on my negs too, they never seem to show up in scans or under the enlarger. I think mine come from loading the sheets into jobo spools.

 

[trondsi]

I noticed my developer-water mix has a very slight hue after a few days in the bottle. Is it oxidation? It worked fine again today though, but perhaps I should keep it in a smaller bottle (less air) or int he fridge something?

 

[Donald Qualls]

Some developers will tend to darken (turn brown to a greater or lesser extent) as they age. In a working solution, I'd surely do a leader test (time how long it takes to fully blacken a clip of leader in the light, compare to time recorded for freshly dilute developer) before using discolored developer -- but the color formation alone doesn't mean it's gone bad.

If you're going to store working solution for reuse beyond the same day, you should at least ensure there's as little air as possible in the bottle (ideally none -- glass marbles make a good inert filler to bring the level up), and use bottles made of impermeable materials like glass or PET, not polyethylene accordion bottles or similar.

 

[NB23]

This is one of the better ones. I dried it like a champ by holding it in one corner and shaking View attachment 288053

whaaaaat?

 

[Tel]

whaaaaat?

Ditto that: The right way to dry sheet film (or any film) is to hang it up in the air, a purpose-designed clip being the only thing it comes in contact with. The mottling (and possibly the scratches too) on that second sheet are most likely because you dried that one in contact with paper. Never do that again!

 

[Donald Qualls]

I found magnet clips from Office Depot (good size round magnet with a bull clip mounted to it) work fine for 4x5 and 9x12 (also for 120 and 35mm, where a second such clip acts as a weight to keep the film straight as it dries). If you have a steel surface to mount them on, great; if not, you clip them around a wire or string running from point to point. MUCH cheaper than dedicated film hanger clips.

 

[trondsi]

It looks like some of the issues came from the water starting to dry on the film as I poured it out of the tank, opened, took out the 54, removed the sheets, and then let the film dry. The water droplets were already uneven across the surface by that time. Instead I now tried immediately dropping the sheet in a bowl of distilled water, then hanging it up from one corner to let it drip off. It seems to work.

 

[Donald Qualls]

It looks like some of the issues came from the water starting to dry on the film as I poured it out of the tank, opened, took out the 54, removed the sheets, and then let the film dry. The water droplets were already uneven across the surface by that time.

This is where doing the final rinse with distilled water, still in the tank, and/or adding a wetting agent like PhotoFlo in the last tankful of rinse water helps -- the water won't form drops, but rather sheet off the film (or drops formed with distilled water won't leave a mark because they have no mineral load to deposit as they dry).

 

[trondsi]

This one should ideally have been a bit sharper, but otherwise came out OK

 

[Donald Qualls]

What lens do you have, and what aperture did you use for this?

 

[trondsi]

What lens do you have, and what aperture did you use for this?

Nikkor-W 150 mm, I believe I used 1/2 sec at 9

 

[Donald Qualls]

Most large format lenses are expected to be stopped down for depth of field. Down to f/22 or so they usually get sharper (some of the larger ones improve to f/32 or even f/45).

Edit: should have also said, for wide open, I see nothing to complain about.

 

[trondsi]

Most large format lenses are expected to be stopped down for depth of field. Down to f/22 or so they usually get sharper (some of the larger ones improve to f/32 or even f/45).

Edit: should have also said, for wide open, I see nothing to complain about.

I should have uploaded a larger image. I can see a tiny amount of movement when looking through the loupe I think the camera moved slightly. But this lens is really nice, and I'm just nitpicking here.

 

[wiltw]

On a side note: since so far I've been developing two sheets at a time (don't want to ruin six photos if I mess up), but the tank holds one liter, I think it's a waste to throw away the developer and fixer every time. So I have put the mixtures in bottles with labels. I have some info on how long I can use the fixer (50 sheets apparently), but what about the developer?

The issue of storage of developer in working dilution is not merely capacity of developer (how many square inches of film can be developed per Qt of solution) but also the fact that developer oxidizes in the presence of air...so use of flexible plastic bottles so excess air can be squeezed out is a means of prolonging the working dilution a bit.

Back when I was photo editor in my high school newspaper (over 5 decades ago!) all film was processed in HC-110. HC-110 came in concentrate form, and it could last a very long time as a concentrate. Mixed to working dilution, it would be used and thrown out, never attempted to keep working dilution. The formulation of HC-110 has been changed since I used it, so I omit mention of storage life of the current concentrate.

I would shoot Friday nite football games on 4x5 film using a Speed Graphic. All films were tray processed, not in a tank. I would put maybe 0.5 - 0.75 inch of developer into a tray, then place wetted film individually into a stack in the developer tray, then leaf thru the stack continuosly so renewed developer was in contact with the emulsion. All of this done in total darkness, of course, then move film to stop bath and then fixer, and not turn on lights until about 1/2 way thru fix time. Knowing how many fluid ounces of developer were in the tray would determine the number of sheets of 4x5 could be done with that much developer...again, it was simply thrown out, with no attempt ever to store working dilution from one darkroom session to another. We kept stop bath and fixer and photoflo working dilutions in bottles and would use test kits to determine when to throw out and start over with a new solution.

 

[Donald Qualls]

My solution to a tank that needs 1.6+ liters for one or more sheets of 4x5 has been to run replenished Xtol stock (now in process of switching to EcoPro, since Sino Promise still hasn't gotten me replacement Xtol). One sheet uses only 17.5 ml of replenisher -- small enough amount it's a little tricky to measure (yes, I have syringes, but half a milliliter plus or minus is guesswork). Fortunately, it's not that critical, and measurement errors tend to cancel out over time. But if I've been very busy, I can process a dozen at once -- and still only use 210 ml of replenisher.

 

[250swb]

I've never had any luck with the MOD54 or any other methods of processing 4x5 in a Paterson tank. No matter what agitation method at least one sheet would come out of the MOD54, or stick to another sheet, but I was using the original design, maybe now it's better. So I adapted a Paterson 8x10 print developing tray (the type for colour printing) to take four sheets of 4x5 film, and emulsion side up get no scratches or uneven development, and additionally it generally only needs 500ml of developer.

 

[Nicholas Lindan]

For a small number of sheets I find it is hard to beat tray development. For large quantities I use a Jobo. I do the final wash in a large tray with water changes and occasional agitation. My final rinse is photo-flow & isopropyl alcohol in a small tray. I make up a pre-dilution of photo-flow in 91% alcohol such that a working solution is 1 oz of pf/IPA to 7 oz of water; the IPA concentration is enough to produce 'tearing' as you see in a wine glass. For hangers I use Patterson clips - the ones with the little needle points - and hang the negatives so they drip down to one corner, occasionally touching a towel to catch any hanging drops. For a squeegee I wet two fingers in the tray of pf/IPA and run the negative between fingers.

 

[trondsi]

Dang latest attempt was a total flop. Just a bare ghost of an image on both sheets. Looks a bit like when I mistook the developer for the fixer on an earlier sheet but I'm certain that I didn’t do that this time. Very strange

 

[Nicholas Lindan]

Just a bare ghost of an image on both sheets.

Is the edge printing faint? If so then I would chuck the developer. 1 liter of developer for 4 sheets is a bit expensive - I think HC-110 is the cheapest developer you can buy. If you are only doing a few sheets then consider using a tray with 8oz of developer. 1oz of full strength developer will develop 20 square inches of film.

 

[trondsi]

I’ll mix new developer to be on the safe side (still it’s weird if it went from good to completely unusable in a couple of days, it worked twice and then not at all?)

 

[grat]

I've had good luck with the 20th Century Camera reels in Paterson tanks. Still takes a liter, but you get 6 sheets.

The Mod-54 always looked a bit fiddly to load to me.

 

[drmoss_ca]

I disliked the Mod54, and ended up using the Stearman SP-445. Easy to load and not a lot of chemistry used up. Before I had them I made a divider from a plastic coated coat hanger and developed two sheets at a time in a tall metal tank. Given that the Mod54 and the SP-445 both sold in my relapse/panicked sell-off, I still use it on the rare occasions I get out the Chamonix. Details are at LFF here.

 

[Tel]

Dang latest attempt was a total flop. Just a bare ghost of an image on both sheets. Looks a bit like when I mistook the developer for the fixer on an earlier sheet but I'm certain that I didn’t do that this time. Very strange

Could be contamination.

 

[wiltw]

Hello there!
I have been handing my development to a lab for years, but I got a Paterson tank for my birthday, with a matching Mod54 4x5 insert.

My film is Ilford Delta 100 and developer is Lmax (T-max), with Kodafix fixer. That is literally all I have

I have some issues: First off, the film sheets seem to shift when I am developing, sometimes touching each other or dropping out of the slot altogether. I have never filled the whole thing with six sheets though, so maybe it works better that way? Or maybe I agitating the tank too vigorously?

I have some small pinholes in the darker areas of the negative (bright sky) are these likely dust particles that got washed off?

Finally some images had some vague blotchy areas. I also don't have a squeegee, maybe this is water drops that dried?

taken from the web page about L-max, I was looking for information about storage life of working dilution, but found this instead:

"Legacy Pro LMAX Developer is specially formulated for processing TMAX films and can be used to process many standard black and white films. It is liquid black and white film developer that offers enhanced shadow detail in normally processed and push-processed films. Do not use this developer to process sheet film."
​

As for your second attempt at processing, If you mistakenly pour in Fixer rather than Developer, you have ruined the film and NO IMAGE forms at all.

 

[MattKing]

T-Max developer is also unsuitable for sheet film, due to problems with dichroic fog. A similar warning comes from Kodak Professional.
T-Max RS developer is suitable for sheet films, but it is no longer packaged in anything other than commercial lab sized packages - 25 litres and up, I believe.