Nightvision tray development questions

I've been reading for the last 3 hours on the concept of NightVision DBI (develop by inspection). There are a number of posts on APUG and also on the AZO forums about it and I'm almost convinced. Here's a short summary of my findings:

It seems that most people agree to purchase a monocular style Night vision unit. One specifically mentioned often is the ATN Viper which goes for $240 on ebay.

Also in my findings, most people seem to turn off the IR projection LED to prevent fogging and reflection issues and purchase an external IR LED bank with 50 to 140 LEDs. I've also read that most of these LEDs are about 850nm. This leads me to my question:

I came across a few people that complained about fogging at 850nm. Specifically with fuji acros film. One guy did a 30 second exposure test on unexposed film (which seems mindblowing considering development times can reach 8+ minutes). Can anyone elaborate on experiences with fogging. Specifically those using the clear tray IR lightbox technique? I shoot Delta 100 and Tri-X 320. I was thinking of purchasing 950nm LEDs which apparently put out no visible red light.

If anyone is interested (there was a url link here which no longer exists) is a link to a thread where guy who made an IR lightbox to develop with a clear tray on top of it.

Sorry for the long post, in short I want to hear experiences, especially tips on preventing fogging.

optV said:

I've been reading for the last 3 hours on the concept of NightVision DBI (develop by inspection). There are a number of posts on APUG and also on the AZO forums about it and I'm almost convinced. Here's a short summary of my findings:

It seems that most people agree to purchase a monocular style Night vision unit. One specifically mentioned often is the ATN Viper which goes for $240 on ebay.

Also in my findings, most people seem to turn off the IR projection LED to prevent fogging and reflection issues and purchase an external IR LED bank with 50 to 140 LEDs. I've also read that most of these LEDs are about 850nm. This leads me to my question:

I came across a few people that complained about fogging at 850nm. Specifically with fuji acros film. One guy did a 30 second exposure test on unexposed film (which seems mindblowing considering development times can reach 8+ minutes). Can anyone elaborate on experiences with fogging. Specifically those using the clear tray IR lightbox technique? I shoot Delta 100 and Tri-X 320. I was thinking of purchasing 950nm LEDs which apparently put out no visible red light.

If anyone is interested (there was a url link here which no longer exists) is a link to a thread where guy who made an IR lightbox to develop with a clear tray on top of it.

Sorry for the long post, in short I want to hear experiences, especially tips on preventing fogging.

Click to expand...

The primary objective in using DBI in development of sheet film is to be able to see highlight formation representative of adequate desired density range for your materials so the sheet of film can be pull from the developer tray. For this purpose you do not IMO need this magnitude of illumination as it is wraught with such technical pitfals. First, recognize that the LED's that are being sold are for security applications (and being used for this application) and the true wavelength being represented is obviously not as critical as it is for this purpose. Plus, I have no way of testing what I have acquired. Second, single sheet development is terribly time consuming (I have done over 10 8x10 sheets in an 11x14 tray in a single run with perfect results - to do that many sheets individually would take a VERY long time). I do not relish being a lab technician by any means and want to get it over with. Secondly, I get more consistent results with multiple sheets in a tray being developed together. You just have to learn to pull the sheets from the bottom of the tray and push them down on the top of the stack. No big deal as modern sheet film is pretty scratch resistant. Efke film is very fragile but can still be tray developed without damage. Washing the film is where many scratches can also occur so one be careful in this procedure.

As a result, I feel that while this glass bottomed developing tray looks pretty cool and being able to have that much "illumination" is appealing for some folks it is a complete waste of time and resources and is unnecessary.

Bounce a small IR light source off of a wall and use your NVG without the IR source on them to see how that goes. Test some film with the light bank source closer to the film and pointed at it for a typical development cycle by putting a piece of black electrical tape down the center of a sheet of film in complete darkness and pull it off after an IR light bank exposure and develop it in complete darkness to see what I mean. The fact that folks report that they have not necessarily had a problem with "fogging" only tells you that they cannot descern this condition on their developed film not that it does not exists. Without proper testing you do not have your hands on this variable and excess FB+F is not worth it because you have to print through it and will eventually cause you more trouble than it is worth.

Folks continue to use a very dim green light for DBI as they have for 75 years with success. DBI is a skill that needs to be learned not a quick fix. We need to continue to think clearly about our objectives as photographers and the minimum we need to attain the stated results.

Good Luck

I use the atn viper with it turned on for the entire development cycle. I have reported no fogging before, but that may be incorrect, I really don't know for sure. My negs look clean to me, they print very well, and I am very happy with the simple process that I use. That's all that matters to me.

You make a valid point about single sheet processing. Mainly, I just like the concept of being able to see in the dark with tray processing. This will greatly minimize development errors and allow me to work more efficently without having to deal with the downfalls of other development methods: eg. tons of chemestry for daylight tanks and dip n dunk tanks. I also like the idea of being able to easily develop N+, N-, etc in the same batch.

Also, it is common sense that I should test for fogging myself. However, before investing in 250.00 goggles, I'd like to hear other's experiences.

optV said:

You make a valid point about single sheet processing. Mainly, I just like the concept of being able to see in the dark with tray processing. This will greatly minimize development errors and allow me to work more efficently without having to deal with the downfalls of other development methods: eg. tons of chemestry for daylight tanks and dip n dunk tanks. I also like the idea of being able to easily develop N+, N-, etc in the same batch.

Also, it is common sense that I should test for fogging myself. However, before investing in 250.00 goggles, I'd like to hear other's experiences.

Click to expand...

To be perfectly honest, seeing in the dark is a relative concept. You do not really NEED to completely illuminate your darkroom to accomplish the stated objective.

I purchased my NVG from a company in Salt Lake and I believe that they had a 10 day money back guarantee. Check to make sure that wherever you purchase yours do it with a credit card and make sure that you have a short time to check them out. If they do not get it done for you then send them back and you are only out shipping.

All I can say about testing is that I am always surprised at how many people consider testing a waste of time when queried about their efforts in this arena. But I have heard first hand that safe light testing is one of the first things that one does in a John Sexton workshop wheither you think you need it or not.

Back to the subject at hand, I have seen probably 15 various IR illumination LED banks and when I plugged all of them in a differing degree of red or dark orange glow was present. I have yet to find an inexpensive IR LED light bank that was 100% IR. The reason that I have not (I suspect) is that it would be very expensive to produce them in that condition. When I tested a 32 LED light bank about 18 inches away from 125 and 400 speed film I could see with my naked eye obvious density variations between the film that was covered under the black electricians tape during the sample exposure and the uncovered film.

When I bounce the independent IR LED off of a wall three feet plus away from unexposed film there are NO density increases on the test film.

An untrained eye would probably not be able to detect .2-.4 density units of fog on your film as it would have the same effect as one Zone of pre-exposure, letting your film go out of date or a couple of trips through the airport xray. No thanks. Film is to damn expensive to assume anything for me.

To each their own.

optV said:

Also, it is common sense that I should test for fogging myself. However, before investing in 250.00 goggles, I'd like to hear other's experiences.

Click to expand...

A total waste of money. Just learn how to use a green safelight.

donbga said:

A total waste of money. Just learn how to use a green safelight.

Click to expand...

I purchased the safe light and the green filter and found it nearly impossible to use conventional DBI with T Max 400 no matter how hard I tried. I could accomplish DBI with many other films but something in the coating or the emulsion with that particular T Grain film was a different animal.

If I could have used DBI with TMY I would have never searched for an alternative and promoted this technique because it would have been (as you said) completely unnecessary.

I had the same problem with TMY and a green safelight. TMY can be DBI'd with a red safelight though. Something to do with the magenta dye I think.

Night vision is useful for other things though too.

matt miller said:

I had the same problem with TMY and a green safelight. TMY can be DBI'd with a red safelight though. Something to do with the magenta dye I think.

Night vision is useful for other things though too.

Click to expand...

yes, being able to load 5 8x10 holders with film in a matter of seconds is nice. Some may say they can do this anyways but I bet they are not near as clumsy as me..

donbga said:

A total waste of money. Just learn how to use a green safelight.

Click to expand...

Don, What green safelight are you using? thanks

RobertP said:

Don, What green safelight are you using? thanks

Click to expand...

Kodak Wratten #3.

donbga said:

Kodak Wratten #3.

Click to expand...

Don, I take it this is the kodak bullet shaped light that takes the 5 1/2" filter? I think it is 15 watts. How far away from the film is safe with this light? In other words I guess I'm asking you your technique? thanks, Robert.....P.S... The reason I'm asking is that I'm considering doing DBI. I brush develope but when I'm using some of the other older lenses with a studio shutter or a packard the exposure times may not always be exact from one sheet to the other. It would be nice to have that extra control when developing by being able to see what the film is doing. Thanks, Robert

RobertP said:

Don, I take it this is the kodak bullet shaped light that takes the 5 1/2" filter? I think it is 15 watts. How far away from the film is safe with this light? In other words I guess I'm asking you your technique? thanks, Robert.....P.S... The reason I'm asking is that I'm considering doing DBI. I brush develope but when I'm using some of the other older lenses with a studio shutter or a packard the exposure times may not always be exact from one sheet to the other. It would be nice to have that extra control when developing by being able to see what the film is doing. Thanks, Robert

Click to expand...

In my case it is a large wall mounted Kodak safelight about 10x12. The housing has a 15 watt bulb partially tape to reduce intensity mounted about 4 feet away from my development sink. The lamphouse is completely sealed to prevent light leaks. I use a footswitch that requires me to keep it depressed to turn on the lamp.

It all takes practice and as others have said TMAX 400 is impossible to DBI.

FWIW, I did DBI for a while and went back to tube processing.

I used to use the IR night vision thingy in my photo finishing carrer many many moons ago and like most people I found it to be too cumbersome to use. I learned to see with my fingers. But what ever floats ones boat. I'm easy.

Development by inspection is made easier if the film is first treated in a desensitizing bath since a higher level of illumination can be used for a longer period.

Gerald Koch said:

Development by inspection is made easier if the film is first treated in a desensitizing bath since a higher level of illumination can be used for a longer period.

Click to expand...

Gerald. I presoak all my film. I don't use Tmax so the greenlight should be no problem. You did mean a water presoak, right? To remove the antihalation dye? thanks

I use a NVG. I placed an 87C gel filter in a Kodak model A safelight (the bullet shaped one) with a 7.5 watt bulb and bounce it against a white wall about 10 feet from the film. There is plenty of illumination for film holder loading and finding anything in the entire darkroom. There is absolutely no fogging of the film, tested with a densitometer. Granted, the illumination is dim, and probably would not work well for DBI, but for general assistance in the dark, it works great.

donbga said:

A total waste of money. Just learn how to use a green safelight.

Click to expand...

I've used both, and the green safe light is Fred Flinstone compared to the NVG's as an effective Darkroom tool.

Mike