Need help with c41 and Tetenal Kit

Rudeofus · Dec 13, 2014

Irji said:
If I try to use 300ml instead of 500ml how fast should I mount my tank on the machine to prevent uneven wetting of film if I use Jobo without lift? Is 4-5 seconds between tapping cap on and starting of rotation too much?

If you make sure that developer has covered all the film surface for a few seconds before you put the tank into the Jobo, then you should be fine. It takes me an average of 10 seconds to fill such a tank with 500ml liquid, so the situation should be very similar to what you plan on doing on your Jobo.

Irji said:
1) These magenta streaks are underdevelopment or overdevelopment? I cant get it is it low magenta or high cyan and yellow on negative?

You always have to ask the simple question: is your neg, or one of the layers, denser or less dense in that region?

Irji said:
2) Is it necessary to wash between stop and blix or bleach? And how long I should wash?

The correct pH of C-41 BLIX is 6.5, whereas your stop bath is acidic, therefore I would recommend a wash. You don't have to wash in the Jobo processor, just fill the tank with water one or two times before you proceed with BLIX.

Irji said:
3) Is there any chance that development continuous in blix if developer carryover takes place?

If you go directly from CD to BLIX, this is what most likely happened to my 120 format C-41 negs until I started using a stop bath. As mentioned before, the most obvious sign of extra unwanted development would be extra density.

Rudeofus · Dec 13, 2014

Sirius Glass said:
What is the maximum amount of chemicals stated on the tank itself?

AFAIK, for their 1520 tank Jobo states 500ml for inversion processing, and 250ml for rotary processing.

Photo Engineer · Dec 13, 2014

Rudeofus has answered most of the questions proposed by the OP.

However, to extend this, one must look at the negative or scan.

Negative: Dark cyan streak gives light red streak on scan. This is over development of the cyan layer. The top two did not continue to develop while the bottom layer did. This is insufficient stop bath activity.

Negative: Dark red streak gives light cyan streak on scan. Top two continued to develop, but bottom was not developed enough. Insufficient or wrong agitation or prewet among many problems that can cause this one.

If you need more, I have many more examples.

PE

CatLABS · Dec 13, 2014

Rudeofus said:
AFAIK, for their 1520 tank Jobo states 500ml for inversion processing, and 250ml for rotary processing.

As far as Jobo knows (and so do the tanks labels), you need 240ml for rotation and 485ml for inversion, as was previously posted. Reading the manual does help.

OP:

RE when you should mount the tank on the machine after filling it? ASAP. No need for more then 2-3 inversions. This is also in the Jobo manual which is available free online.

Ideally you would have a lift, thus you can fill the tank while its rotating, but alas, of you do not have a lift, you just need to read the manual.

RE "use stop bath, extended blix time and 2 minutes prewash (not preheat) in case of uneven development":
If you start by following the instructions, and still get uneven development, then you should try these two optional recommendations, but only after you have established a baseline. In your OP you jumped ahead fairly far with many steps which may or may not have been unnecessary.

Also - of you have a motor in your machine which runs at 80-83 that is about 10% or more faster then the machine was designed for (75rpm or so), which may or may not also be an issue, though this is a minor issue, and cannot be helped at this point.

RE max capacity of the tetenal kit - perhaps that would be best asked of tetenal folks, though they are hard to reach (they sometimes answer the phone). The kit assumes 90ml working solution per roll thus allowing for 55-60 rolls to be run inside of 5 liters, ONE SHOT.

In some larger Jobo tank combinations, the ratio per roll goes down to around 105-110ml per roll 35mm and about 80-90ml per roll of 120 (5 or more rolls in both cases). That is how it is calculated, and how you can get 55-60 rolls using one shot.

In the 1520 it is 240ml per tank - which can have up to 2 rolls, that is 120ml per roll, not 250ml as posted above.

pentaxuser · Dec 13, 2014

CatLABS said:
In some larger Jobo tank combinations, the ratio per roll goes down to around 105-110ml per roll 35mm and about 80-90ml per roll of 120 (5 or more rolls in both cases). That is how it is calculated, and how you can get 55-60 rolls using one shot.

In the 1520 it is 240ml per tank - which can have up to 2 rolls, that is 120ml per roll, not 250ml as posted above.

Thanks for that. Pity Tetenal didn't qualify its 55-60 rolls with this explanation.

pentaxuser

CatLABS · Dec 13, 2014

pentaxuser said:
Thanks for that. Pity Tetenal didn't qualify its 55-60 rolls with this explanation.

pentaxuser

Their manual is lacking in many ways, but the materials are excellent.
Because it is lacking, it is sometimes over analyzed, which sometimes leads to assumptions etc., and that can lead to complications in trouble shooting.

The manual does have some strange and hard to follow chart about how to use 1L for 12 rolls, making the 60 rolls possible, but that is only relevant if you are using inversion style processing. If you have to use inversion, and are using a warm water bath, nothing will be as exact as a machine agitator and temp control, so the exact amounts and instructions are less important as well...

Photo Engineer · Dec 13, 2014

Guys, I am trying to figure out how to phrase this without offending all and sundry. But, during my experiences designing color developers and bleaches, fixes and blixes for EK, I found that the design had to fit conditions all over the world. One thing I learned was that city water supplies varied from pH 4.5 to 9.0, hard to soft and we had no way to determine what the user would use, DW, DI, or city water and whether the room would be hot, cold, warm and whether the process would be hand / inversion, jobo + lift or jobo or plain rollers and etc. This covers a LOT of territory..

So, in the Research Labs we used DI-DW, nitrogen burst and single use.. It was not until approval for release that the process went to the plant and to Photo Tech for the design of the replenisher and tank processing. In any event, we used a neutral design process.

HOWEVER, what I learned was that to fit into all conditions as well as possible, we need a prewet and a stop to prevent common problems from messing with the process. And, in all tank processes, we need to limit filling the tank too much thus preventing proper agitation. For example, you can actually simulate this problem by using sheets of Endura or CA paper and watching the dye in the paper move in streaks across the surface as you dump in developer. BTDT with too much and too little and too slow. There is no too fast unless you could squirting out the edges of the seal!

Anyhow, for this condition, my diagnosis includes improper fill (too much solution) and improper overall agitation in both developer and stop.

And since I have had hundreds if not thousands of rolls (and sheets) run through baskets, drums, trays and dip and dunk, and have designed several developers and blixes that were and are commercially sold, I think I can assure you that I have checked out a Jobo (of which I have 2) quite well with the C41, C-22, EP3 and RA4 processes.

Among other things, Jobo has recommended, in their manuals, use of the higher end of the agitation spectrum.

PE

pentaxuser · Dec 13, 2014

The 1520 is designed to hold 485 mls for inversion agitation. 500mls will fill the tank to the top before placing the top on. If the tank is completely filled then placing it on its side means that the liquid has to spill out into the sloping top and fill that area so all I can say is that the red cap must be a very tight fit to prevent some of the developer from leaking into the water bath.

I am surprised that the OP hasn't spotted what I think must be a leak. He may be preventing correct agitation but even if he is not then he is certainly wasting developer.

If he cuts developer to 240mls but sticks to his present process I see no reason why his processing will not be perfect.

All that leaves is the possibility of the scan not accurately replicating what the negative looks like.

Once again the key quesion is: Would these streaks which I couldn't see when he scanned it as PE suggested, be apparent in the print?

pentaxuser

Photo Engineer · Dec 13, 2014

If you see it in a scan and then duplicate it exactly in a print, you should see the streaks. BUT, scanning software has so much corrective manipulation going on it it, I say that with skepticism.

Due to the design of the cup/light trap, you may not leak out before you put the cap on. Remember that with a Jobo there is a light trap on the non-lift tanks, and they are fitted with a cap before being placed on the Jobo. This effectively prevents any significant leak.

PE

Prof_Pixel · Dec 13, 2014

Photo Engineer said:
It was not until approval for release that the process went to the plant and to Photo Tech for the design of the replenisher and tank processing.

Been there, done that! I still remember calculating the number of tank turnovers required to reach equilibrium - I think it was the last time I used Calculus.

(The answer, BTW, is three turnovers gets you close enough, but five is better.)

Fred

CatLABS · Dec 13, 2014

pentaxuser said:
all I can say is that the red cap must be a very tight fit to prevent some of the developer from leaking into the water bath.

New rubber caps do not leak, at all. If yours leak, they need replacing.

sfaber17 · Dec 14, 2014

30 deg C

My old jobo manual recommends using 30 deg C for 120 film or larger for C41,
for reducing streaking problems, so I was going to do that when I try it.
I use 30 deg for RA4 with good results. The extended dev times reduce the
effect of the time it takes to pour in the developer I would think.

Photo Engineer · Dec 14, 2014

This film was designed for 100F or 38.7 C processing. Changes to the developer or film are needed to prevent crossover from taking place at lower temps. But with these changes for say 30C, the film and developer will no longer work properly at 38.7C. So no, even though this might reduce streaks, other problems will take place.

PE

sfaber17 · Dec 14, 2014

Thanks PE. I'll stick with the higher temp then. I do have real Kodak chemicals with the new
rapid bleach, so I'll try stick with the Kodak instructions.

Rudeofus · Dec 14, 2014

Photo Engineer said:
This film was designed for 100F or 38.7 C processing. Changes to the developer or film are needed to prevent crossover from taking place at lower temps. But with these changes for say 30C, the film and developer will no longer work properly at 38.7C. So no, even though this might reduce streaks, other problems will take place.

Crossover, wrong contrast and Dmin/Dmax are very bad for optical enlargment, but absolutely no problem in a hybrid work flow, and I think the latter one is predominantly used for color work even by us, the APUG crowd. Streaks, on the other side, are a complete deal breaker, and for this reason I can imagine that many people will prefer 30°C or even room temperature processing. I do agree that is it preferable to fix a broken work flow or process than employ some workaround that will effectively prevent future aspirations towards optical enlargment.

AllanD · Dec 14, 2014

FWIW before I knew any better (!) I processed all my C41 film, both 135 and 120, using the lowest speed setting of my old CPE2 all the way through all process steps. and never experienced noticable uneven development. These negatives would have been optically printed. My understanding is that the speed of rotation of the older CPE2 is lower than the CPE2+ on both settings, so I should, apparently, have been using the poor little thing flat out. I always use the amount of developer recommended for rotational development, suggesting, to me at least, that using too much developer is indeed a major factor re. the O/P's problem.

My last batch of C41 was developed using a Rollei kit with each 240ml batch reused (i.e not single shot) as per their instructions. The results were fine as far as I could see from the scanned negatives (no optical prints from this batch), so it is possible to get usable results from reused, and well churned up, chemistry. Of course, what is acceptable to me may not be good enough for someone requiring super critical process control!

Irji · Dec 17, 2014

CatLABS said:
As far as Jobo knows (and so do the tanks labels), you need 240ml for rotation and 485ml for inversion, as was previously posted. Reading the manual does help.
RE "use stop bath, extended blix time and 2 minutes prewash (not preheat) in case of uneven development":
If you start by following the instructions, and still get uneven development, then you should try these two optional recommendations, but only after you have established a baseline. In your OP you jumped ahead fairly far with many steps which may or may not have been unnecessary.

For sure, I have tried to follow the instructions and result was not so great. So, I added Stop Bath and Presoak.

Irji · Dec 17, 2014

Photo Engineer said:
Anyhow, for this condition, my diagnosis includes improper fill (too much solution) and improper overall agitation in both developer and stop.

PE

Thank you all, guys, for you response!

Special thanx to PE and Rudeofus for sharing your knowledge! =)

I did two tests:
1) I developed two 135 films in 300ml instead of 500ml , Stop Bath 300ml, wash, Blix 300ml.
After pouring developer in I put the tank on running Jobo. It took approximately 4 seconds.
There are no more purple streaks but several surge marks appeared on every frame with skies and snow.

2) I developed 120 Portra 400 in 300ml instead of 500ml , Stop Bath 300ml, wash, Blix 300ml.
After pouring developer in I inverted the tank 4 times by hand. One inversion in one second.
I can't see any stains and streaks this time, but I can see very slight difference between part of negative which was covered by developer right after I filled the tank and the part which got the developer after I turned the tank.

I think it was insufficient agitation in developer and stop bath due to excessive volume of solutions in the tank. So, next problem is how to get rid of uneven initial wetting with developer.

I also think that I should try to develop without machine, by hand, as I did before I had bought Jobo CPE. And here is another question: Can you recommend and explain in details effective agitation method for hand development with 1520 tank full of developer?
For years I tried different methods for BW films and every time my films (roll films) were more or less overdeveloped along edges and I routinely burn in under enlarger.

Photo Engineer · Dec 17, 2014

Kodak shows a tank procedure for agitation on its web site.

PE

pentaxuser · Dec 17, 2014

It should be 240mls not 300mls. Try 240mls first before making any other change. I have a feeling that you cannot quite believe that 240mls is the right amount but that worked for me and Jobo is not going to state 240mls if it requires 300mls.

I cannot guarantee that changing to 240mls will solve your problems but it might tell you if 300mls is the problem. Even if 240mls does not cure the problem it stops you wasting 60mls. It is the correct amount.

I would not go back to hand inversion as a cure. If rotary inversion is wrong then Jobo processors would not have lasted long

pentaxuser

CatLABS · Dec 17, 2014

Irji said:
Thank you all, guys, for you response!

Special thanx to PE and Rudeofus for sharing your knowledge! =)

I did two tests:
1) I developed two 135 films in 300ml instead of 500ml , Stop Bath 300ml, wash, Blix 300ml.
After pouring developer in I put the tank on running Jobo. It took approximately 4 seconds.
There are no more purple streaks but several surge marks appeared on every frame with skies and snow.
View attachment 99705

2) I developed 120 Portra 400 in 300ml instead of 500ml , Stop Bath 300ml, wash, Blix 300ml.
After pouring developer in I inverted the tank 4 times by hand. One inversion in one second.
I can't see any stains and streaks this time, but I can see very slight difference between part of negative which was covered by developer right after I filled the tank and the part which got the developer after I turned the tank.

I think it was insufficient agitation in developer and stop bath due to excessive volume of solutions in the tank. So, next problem is how to get rid of uneven initial wetting with developer.

I also think that I should try to develop without machine, by hand, as I did before I had bought Jobo CPE. And here is another question: Can you recommend and explain in details effective agitation method for hand development with 1520 tank full of developer?
For years I tried different methods for BW films and every time my films (roll films) were more or less overdeveloped along edges and I routinely burn in under enlarger.

This looks (and later in the text also sounds) more like a light leak due to:
Issue while loading (note the "huge marks" seem to correspond to perforation on the film)
Issue with camera shutter causing overexposed or burned film edges

240ml is all you need.

Photo Engineer · Dec 17, 2014

Those appear to be bromide drag marks caused by improper agitation again. They result from chemical flow through the sprocket holes being uneven.

PE

Rudeofus · Dec 18, 2014

Irji said:
I also think that I should try to develop without machine, by hand, as I did before I had bought Jobo CPE.

You could use the best of both worlds, and do only those steps by hand which are short and time critical: color development and stop bath. All the other steps (wash, blix, wash) all run to completion and therefore are much less susceptible to poor agitation as long as you allow them to run for long enough.

Irji said:
And here is another question: Can you recommend and explain in details effective agitation method for hand development with 1520 tank full of developer?

After filling the tank, I bump it straight onto a hard surface in order to remove possible air bubbles. My agitation regime after that includes swirling and tilting the tank for about five seconds, then letting it rest for about ten seconds, which results in about four agitation cycles per minute. Tetenal's hand book recommends six agitation cycles per minute, and I can give you no reason why I use only four beyond personal laziness and "if it ain't broken, don't fix it".

Note, that a "full 1520 tank" is not filled to the absolute upper limit, but only to the entrance point of the funnel. This gives developer plenty of space to go into when you tilt over the film tank. Think of agitation like this: "how much impulse relative to the container can you impart on the liquid?". With an empty and a completely filled container, the result is close to zero, whereas anything in between should work fine (240ml, 300ml, who cares?). A hand inversion procedure obviously provides more impulse than gently rolling the tank, therefore you can (you have to anyways, otherwise your film won't be immersed 70% of the time) use more developer with hand inversion.

Rudeofus · Dec 18, 2014

A light leak in the camera or film tank would make the negative darker, which means the final image should appear brighter in those regions. This is not what the posted image shows.

PE: Can you argue, why a sprocket hole, which releases no Bromide and should therefore boost development, can still lead to a lighter negative / darker positive?

Photo Engineer · Dec 18, 2014

I am really not sure what is going on, but this sure does look like some sort of agitation problem. It certainly involves the sprocket holes. It seems to be retarding the yellow (top) layer giving a yellow cast to the image. It might be lack of development.

PE

Need help with c41 and Tetenal Kit

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency