Manufacturing an insert for Jobo 3063 Drum

I’m trying to gauge the interest level among ULF film users for a precisely manufactured insert for the Jobo 3063 drum. The proposed product would allow even development of sheet film between 8X10 and 12X20—something I haven’t been able to achieve consistently with the 3063 alone.

Because I was dissatisfied with the results of film developed in the 3063 drum, used as provided, I started experimenting with an insert based on the design of the Jobo professional drums, with the film wrapped in cylinders within the 3063. Since there isn’t any standard tubing of any kind that has the right dimensions, it took awhile to come up with a prototype, but I recently finished and tested an insert that allows development of two 12X20 films. There are two thin-walled (but strong) tubes with an inner circumference of 12.25 inches. Fitting two tubes of this size in the 3063 requires that they be slightly oblong, but this appears not to affect the evenness of development. The agitation is vigorous and random enough by this method to produce neutral areas--such as open skies--that are smooth and free of the “banding” characteristic of the negatives I developed in the standard 3063. I should add that I have quite a bit of experience using Jobo drums and that I worked hard to produce good negatives with the unmodified 3063—succeeding infrequently, and not knowing quite why when I did. In short, the results weren’t predictable.

As constructed, the insert would weigh, in combination with the 3063, no more than the 3005 drum, and have some slight relief running the length of the cylinder walls so the antihalation coating would be released—probably a splined pattern with just enough depth to support the film well, while allowing solutions to circulate under it. The user would slide the insert into the drum and put a bead of caulk around the top edge with silicone to seal it. (Silicone is durable, but can be removed so the insert could be taken out if desired--though the enhanced performance would likely make it unnecessary.) The insert would use a maximum of 1000mm of solution and would require a lid from one of the other Jobo professional drums (3005, 3006, or 3010)--the lid supplied with the 3063 won’t work because the cup underneath projects too far into the drum.

The prototype I made was intended only to see if the configuration would work. Having determined that it will, I’m interested in having a long-lasting version injection molded. By the way, it would be helpful to find out what kind of plastic the Jobo 3000 series drums are made of, if anyone happens to know. I only need one insert, but, due to the cost of production, the only way for me to do this would be if other ULF users wanted such a product, too. I don’t know yet what the setup costs would be, but if there’s enough interest I would explore it further and come up with a price. For now, send me a personal message on APUG or at jps924@gmail.com and tell me if this is something you would buy if priced within reason. If there’s enough interest, I’d have computer-generated drawings made and send them to a fabricator for pricing on molds and manufacture. Then I’d need to collect some money to go forward. I’ll try to answer any questions you may have. Thanks.

John,

In an earlier post on the subject I wrote "I am trying to develop three sheets of 7x17 at a time in a 3063 drum. Currently I do two sheets at a time in combined 2560 & 2830 tanks. My goal of course is to develop more sheets in the same amount of time with the same quality." If you can do that I am interested.

John Powers

I’m interested in developing 7x17 in the Jobo. I applaud your efforts on the design, but I wonder if you are making this too difficult. Earlier thought was to fabricate some sort of screen with tabs to hold various formats, which would slide into a standard Jobo 3063. There was a discussion on a LFF thread, but nothing came of it. But regardless of the design, I’m interested in whatever you come up with. Thanks John!

jp80874 said:

John,

In an earlier post on the subject I wrote "I am trying to develop three sheets of 7x17 at a time in a 3063 drum. Currently I do two sheets at a time in combined 2560 & 2830 tanks. My goal of course is to develop more sheets in the same amount of time with the same quality." If you can do that I am interested.

John Powers

Click to expand...

I had JOBO make me two polycarbonate inserts for JOBO print drums while they were available. One for 11x14 and another for 12x20 and only used each about twice. The reason was simply because it took so much time to develop each sheet of film and efficiency was paramount to me in my quest to make photographs. Many of us have families and full time jobs so we do not have unlimited time to spend in the darkroom.

I soon discovered that I needed to learn to tray develop sheet film with precision to get the most out of my darkroom time and once I figured out how to accomlish this objective things started to kick into gear. I shortly got to the point where In 30 minutes I could process 12 ULF negatives (12x20, 11x14 or 8x20) in two batches of six with no scratches or other problems. I would be lucky to get two processed with the inserts in that time and while the inserts would certainly do a good job, the trays accomplished the stated objective every bit as well.

At the end of the day it is about accomplishing the objective of making photographs and as we all know there are many diverse ways to get this done.

Just my $0.02

Michael,

Sorry for the delay. I didn't see your post. Yours is an argument that I have heard often from people I respect and believe. Using the Jobo for me, though slower than the tray method, helps to isolate me from the chemicals which are causing some allergic reactions even with Nitrile gloves, face mask and filters, and a hurricane ventilation system. If the problem gets worse I would have to quit film altogether and learn that other stuff. Just another factor I have to consider.

Thanks,

John

Possessing a 3063, I too would be interested in any kind of insert you could make that would enable 2 12x20 or 4 11x14 sheets to be developed at the same time.

John,

Would it be possible to process 14x17 film in this drum/insert combo? It doesn't sound like it would be (based on the 12.25" inner circumference of the inserts), but if it is, I'd definitely be interested.

Kerry

John,
I would be interest in such an insert for my 11x14. Since we are are in the same "neighborhood," I would be glad to test your "prototype"!

Jon

kthalmann said:

.....Would it be possible to process 14x17 film in this drum/insert combo? It doesn't sound like it would be (based on the 12.25" inner circumference of the inserts), but if it is, I'd definitely be interested....

Click to expand...

The Jobo 3063 has a inner circumference of about 25" and is about 21" high.

Kerry,

I was able to *repeatedly* develop 14x17 ADOX CHS 100 film in a Jobo 2850 combo. In the endless debate re: developing ULF film in 2800 drums, i.e., "I get bands" - "I don't" - "I get bands" - "I don't" ... I personally ended up in the "I don't" category

It works just fine for me then with ADOX film, that is. Maybe with some other film the raised ridges do wreck the development, who knows.

But as I have also a 3063 I am certainly interested in a 14x17 insert - better safe than sorry.

Cheers!

jp80874 said:

Michael,

Sorry for the delay. I didn't see your post. Yours is an argument that I have heard often from people I respect and believe. Using the Jobo for me, though slower than the tray method, helps to isolate me from the chemicals which are causing some allergic reactions even with Nitrile gloves, face mask and filters, and a hurricane ventilation system. If the problem gets worse I would have to quit film altogether and learn that other stuff. Just another factor I have to consider.

Thanks,

John

Click to expand...

Understand completely. Make your own inserts.

Here are the dimensions:

12x20
25" wide and 18" high
3 buttons on the sides and 4 buttons on the top and bottom.

2" cut out at each corner at 45 degrees

11x14
25" wide and 14 1/2" high
3 buttons on the sides and 4 buttons on the top and bottom.

2" cut out at each corner at 45 degrees

Buttons are placed slightly longer in the width direction to accomodate the rolling of the sheet film (emulsion side in) on the panel to put it in the drum. The buttons are raised to allow flow behind the sheet film (really not necessary) and to allow the back button attachments to not get in the way (again not really necessary). Anyone that works with sheets of clear materials would be able to find one of the correct chemical resistance and durability to work. Plastic rivet buttons can be acquired with some simple checking at Small Parts of elsewhere. I bet you could do this for under $10.

Good Luck!

Having absorbed comments here and by email, clearly there’s enough interest to make drawings so I can get pricing info. I suspect there are more photographers out there who would be interested in using the 3063 if they could get better results—simply. To elaborate on a few things, while it’s true that some of us don’t have a lot of time to spend in the darkroom, it’s also true that some of us don’t have darkrooms, explaining one attractive feature of a daylight processor like the Jobo. Since the traditional darkroom isn’t essential for working with many alternative processes, I’m loading film at night and developing it the next day when I’m better rested and not as prone to making mistakes.

I have the demands of daily life and family as well; however, for me, maybe the predicament is reversed: it’s easier to find time to develop negatives than to get out and shoot them, so any technique or innovation that will help insure my success seems worth thorough investigation—and I’ve considered many of them.

I’ve heard mention of the elusive “screen” material, but I’m trying to avoid use of tabs, clips, buttons—anything that can alter the flow of developer within the drum resulting in a predictable pattern. That’s one of the problems with the 3063 as it is—the developer flows through the gaps in the ridges used to hold the film in place and causes unevenness. If the film is wrapped within another sheet of material,developer can rush in through spaces and at the far end of the drum, causing similar problems. I can’t see that these approaches would improve upon the basic drum, though I’d be interested in hearing results.

If it were just a matter of speed and quantity maybe I could live with a tray, but there are other factors to recommend the Jobo. For me, it all comes down to repeatability and less worry: precise temperature control, use of smaller volumes of solution allowing “one-shot” development, freedom from concern about damage from corners and other unforeseen possibilities. And, as mentioned, there’s also the matter of toxicity.

The idea of having six sheets of 12X20 film—that is, ten square feet—exposed and vulnerable in a tray makes me uncomfortable—especially with the long development times (in some cases up to twenty minutes) required to provide the proper densities for the printing processes I’m using. My hat is off to those who can complete such an operation to their satisfaction, but my results with 4X5 and 8X10 were never so impressive that I want to take the risk to a higher level. At $13.00 a sheet I don’t feel like I have the luxury of practicing. How consistent is tray development batch to batch? Warmth of fingertips, variations in ambient room temperature—surely, these must affect the evenness and consistency. The only way to test this would be to make identical negatives, develop them in different runs, and read them for consistency. What I want is a constant that I can rely on and adjust as needed. I prefer developing one or two negatives under controlled conditions, with the opportunity to adjust density as required. Though it may take more time, I’d rather fine-tune a negative in hopes of saving time and frustration in printing later.

Some have asked about variations that will accommodate other film sizes. If it’s practical to produce this one and sell it successfully, maybe I could move on to other dimensions: 14X17 would require tubes with larger inner diameters making them even more oblong. (I didn’t mention before that the tubes for 12X20 are only .25 inch out-of-round.) The question that would have to be answered is at what point the elliptical shape of the tube would start to affect evenness of development as the drum turns—or would it?

So far I’ve tested FP4 and TMY, both in D-76, and the results are encouraging to me. I wish I could place the prototype with others to test, but it’s made of mylar and various glues and is nearly at the end of its life. I need to come up with the manufactured version if possible, so I’ll keep you posted….

John,

Should you get to a second prototype that you want to test with pyro instead of D-76 I would be happy to help. I use Bostich & Sullivan's Rollo Pyro on T Max 400, Ilford FP4 and HP5. As mentioned above I am presently doing two 7x17s at a time in combined 2560 & 2830 tanks. I have a new unused 3063 if you want to make a test 7x17 version that will do three sheets.

John Powers

Michael Kadillak said:

Understand completely. Make your own inserts.

Here are the dimensions:

12x20
25" wide and 18" high
3 buttons on the sides and 4 buttons on the top and bottom.

2" cut out at each corner at 45 degrees

11x14
25" wide and 14 1/2" high
3 buttons on the sides and 4 buttons on the top and bottom.

2" cut out at each corner at 45 degrees

Buttons are placed slightly longer in the width direction to accomodate the rolling of the sheet film (emulsion side in) on the panel to put it in the drum. The buttons are raised to allow flow behind the sheet film (really not necessary) and to allow the back button attachments to not get in the way (again not really necessary). Anyone that works with sheets of clear materials would be able to find one of the correct chemical resistance and durability to work. Plastic rivet buttons can be acquired with some simple checking at Small Parts of elsewhere. I bet you could do this for under $10.

Good Luck!

Click to expand...

Michael,

Again, thank you. My goal is to have an insert that works for three 7x17s in a 3063. In conversations here, the LF Forum and with Aggie as a project for her magazine, using the efforts of yet another John she knows, I have yet to learn if anyone including Jobo has ever made a working three sheet 7x17 insert into a 3063. As mentioned, I have been doing two sheets without trouble and without an insert. I am just trying to see if I can do three in the same amount of time without introducing new problems.

John Powers

John Snyder said:

.

The idea of having six sheets of 12X20 film—that is, ten square feet—exposed and vulnerable in a tray makes me uncomfortable—especially with the long development times (in some cases up to twenty minutes) required to provide the proper densities for the printing processes I’m using. My hat is off to those who can complete such an operation to their satisfaction, but my results with 4X5 and 8X10 were never so impressive that I want to take the risk to a higher level. At $13.00 a sheet I don’t feel like I have the luxury of practicing. How consistent is tray development batch to batch? Warmth of fingertips, variations in ambient room temperature—surely, these must affect the evenness and consistency. The only way to test this would be to make identical negatives, develop them in different runs, and read them for consistency. What I want is a constant that I can rely on and adjust as needed. I prefer developing one or two negatives under controlled conditions, with the opportunity to adjust density as required. Though it may take more time, I’d rather fine-tune a negative in hopes of saving time and frustration in printing later.

Click to expand...

After learning to correctly tray develop in a Michael Smith and Paula Chamlee seminar I have not looked back because you can develop any sized sheet film in trays with absolute consistency on par with any rotary methods. I do multiple sheets of 12x20, 8x20, 11x14 and 8x10 in trays and it is a day at the beach for me. I have learn to accept that some folks just are not conditioned to work with trays and that is just fine. But there are no moving parts that need replacement or service with trays.

Sounds like a skill I need to learn for when I do have a darkroom again and/or when my CPP-2 bites the dust--thanks for relating that. It's all about having options.

John

Michael Kadillak said:

After learning to correctly tray develop in a Michael Smith and Paula Chamlee seminar I have not looked back because you can develop any sized sheet film in trays with absolute consistency on par with any rotary methods. I do multiple sheets of 12x20, 8x20, 11x14 and 8x10 in trays and it is a day at the beach for me. I have learn to accept that some folks just are not conditioned to work with trays and that is just fine. But there are no moving parts that need replacement or service with trays.

Click to expand...

inserts in Jobo3063 for 20x24" sheetfilm?

Has anybody hands-on experiece with 20x24" sheetfilm in Jobo paper drum?

Would this also require an insert to avoid the back (antihilation layer) sticking to the drum? I have never heard of the existence of an insert for this size.


...george

I don't claim to be an expert in Jobo drums, but the 3063 is made for 20x24 paper and would seem to be suitable. It has ridges (about 1/16") on the inside of the drum which would keep the film away from he drum itself. I think my concern would be whether the film would stay rolled against the drum and not collapse upon itself. Perhaps someone has tried this . . . Good luck.

I'm interested in 20x24 film processing as well, can you let me know if you find any possibilities george?


erie

Brush develop those massive sheets one negative at a time. Absolutely beautiful results and I have never scratched a negative with a brush.Being clumsy and gouging one with a nail coming out of the wash ...yes. But never during development. When understanding brush development and what agitation means with a pyro/metol developer like WD2D... you'll see results that will put a smile on your face. Robert

RobertP said:

Brush develop those massive sheets one negative at a time. Absolutely beautiful results and I have never scratched a negative with a brush.Being clumsy and gouging one with a nail coming out of the wash ...yes. But never during development. When understanding brush development and what agitation means with a pyro/metol developer like WD2D... you'll see results that will put a smile on your face. Robert

Click to expand...

Correct me if I am wrong here but WD2D when the two parts are mixed is an acidic one shot developer that can only last a very limited amount of time in the tray. How many sheets can you brush develop in one developer tray without adding more carbonate to the solution and changing the ionic chemical activity ratio? Two sheets maybe? If you have the time and willing to be that patient then good for you.

I can get two batches of six sheets of 8x20 done at one time out of a single developer mixing in a single 16x20 tray with zero scratches. I have a dedicated 8x20 sheet film washer that takes six sheets at a time so I do not have to concern myself about scratching sheet film in the wash tray.

Cheers!

I can shuffle 8 sheets of tmax all day long with good results. Efke pl 50 and 100 are a different story. The film is very easily scratched. Yes brush development takes longer but seldom do I come back from a days shoot with more than a dozen negs. No matter what film I've used I've gotten better results from brush development than I have shuffling. Yes I've learned a lot about patience since moving up to ULF. I mix my own developers so the amount used is not an issue especially at the cost of ULF sheet film. Also over the course of a days shoot I may shoot some scenes that will require different developing times than others so putting them all in one stack and shuffling them all at one developing time wouldn't give me the best results. I don't do DBI and I don't use night vision goggles. I just know my developer and film. If you think brush development is slow (8-11 min) you should talk to some of the ones using stand development...they take naps while developing film. Now I've taken patience to even another level...I started doing wet plate collodion. As they say....different strokes....

Apologies for having sunk out of sight for so long. After being interrupted by travel, the holidays, sickness, more travel, sickness (and so on...), I showed the insert prototype to a manufacturing engineer on a recent trip to Portland. He said that just to get dies made for injection molding--the means I was proposing--could run about $100,000, and, offhand, another workable manufacturing method didn't come to mind.

It's a fairly simply item--one that would be useful to me and, apparently, others--but the dies would need to be large, hefty items that are intricate to make. I haven't given up completely, but haven't seen the way clear yet. Either I find a way to produce the insert, or find a space for a traditional darkroom. If I do find a way to manufacture this, I'll check in.

John

It is just a thought John, but if it is possible to get a sufficently thick flexible plastic and then use nylon nuts, bolts, and washers strategically placed on the sheet, this could work. I recently was very fortunate to purchase an 11x14 and a 16x20 JOBO insert. If you are in Boise sometime, contact me and I will be happy to show them to you. Jon

I was able to fabricate an insert for the 3063 drum for 7x17. See this link:

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

It's a bit crude, and you have to watch (in the dark!) what you are doing when you load it, but it develops film fine.