Presoak: How long is long enough

[vet173]

I use a five minute presoak with my semistand developing. I was wondering in the green glow of my night vision goggles, "how long is long enough"? I see various times used. If the emulsion is fully swelled at 1 minute, why soak five. Just what is the tipping point of diminished return. Thanks

 

[Edwardv]

I find 2-3 minutes works fine with me. Not to picky.

 

[lee]

5 min was a time that Jobo recommended for being able to use the tray times with the Rotary processing equipment. I always used 2 min for tray anyway.

lee\c

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

I presoak for 3 minutes. It's neatly between 1 and 5...

Always gave me good results.

- Thom

 

[fhovie]

I always presoak while I am mixing my developer. It needs to be a minimum of 20sec and past 2 minutes does little. At 20 seconds the emulsion is saturated making the development more even as it replaces the water in the emulsion. The other benefit of a longer soak is the removal of the antihalation layer. I am not sure that removing this layer has much benefit but I like to at least get the bulk of it off. My average presoak is one minute.

 

[Gerald Koch]

Since the only purpose of the presoak is to bring the rotary tank to the proper temperature that is the only real concern.

 

[John Bartley]

I presoak for one minute. I started doing this only because I found that using ABS tubes I will get water run marks if I don't immerse the dry negative completely, smoothly and quickly and I can't do that in the the developer.

cheers

 

[JBrunner]

Two minutes, as that is the limit of my patience.

 

[mono]

2 minutes!

 

[jstraw]

Two minutes...or more if I get distracted...but generally, two.

 

[Tom Hoskinson]

I presoak for 5 minutes...if it aint broke...don't fix it.

 

[Konical]

Good Afternoon,

Two minutes with Kodak, Fomapan, and a little Ilford. Look at it this way: should the two minutes be slightly inadequate, you have many more minutes in developer, fixer, and hypo-clear. Then there's the washing time. Any anti-halation coating should have a hard time surviving all that.

Konical

 

[Photo Engineer]

The higher the temperature, the greater the number of changes of water needed in a presoak. The time is not too important as long as it wets the film at the desired temperature.

So, while one water presoak at 3' might be perfect at 68 deg, you might have to use 2 or more changes of water for 1' each at 100 degrees to achieve both a presoak and a tempering effect.

I use 2 30" to 1' 100 F presoaks for color or more depending on the number of rolls or sheets. I use 1 1' presoak at 68 F. I don't use temperatures in between. I use rotary or hand agitation. In either case, agitation is continuous during the presoak. If I am hand agitating, I bang the tank with my hand to dislodge air bubbles.

In any case, use what works for you.

PE

 

[Stephanie Brim]

I use a 2 minute presoak when using any developer but Diafine and no presoak at all when using Diafine. This seems to work for me. Since I've started doing this I've always had even development.

 

[lightranger]

5 minutes in a Jobo processor.

 

[Woolliscroft]

I can't say I bother any more and I don't notice any difference (and I am the sort who pre-flashes paper).

David.

 

[Roger Hicks]

I can't say I bother any more and I don't notice any difference (and I am the sort who pre-flashes paper).

David.

Dear David,

Hear! Hear! 0 minutes is quite long enough unless (as PE says) you're also after a tempering effect -- especially with the very long dev times associated with semi-stand development.

Ilford's view is that while pre-soaks are theoretically a bad idea, in practice they don't seem to do any harm, so if people want to do them, let 'em.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Drum processed papers with incorporated developing agents may suffer if the developing agent can be washed out in a pre-rinse. Usually though the developing agent is ballasted or protected somehow and can only be washed out in alkali.

I do use a pre-rinse for papers regardless of type and have seen no problem.

I suspect that this could lower dmax or contrast if anything happens at all.

PE

 

[lee]

I thought we were talking about pre washing FILM instead of PAPER.

lee\c

 

[Photo Engineer]

Lee, I threw that in gratis as a comment, however some films and even papers may contain water soluable antifoggants that may change the results as a function of the prewet.

PE

 

[lightranger]

If you don't do a proper presoak when processing film, you will get uneven development. Developer hitting dry film is a bad idea. It's important to let the presoak swell the emulsion of the film so it will evenly accept the developer. I use 5 minutes at the same temp. as the developer in my Jobo processor. With the t- grain films you will see the anti halation coating washing off when dumping the presoak, a dark green ugly color.

 

[Roger Hicks]

If you don't do a proper presoak when processing film, you will get uneven development.

Not so. For many years Ilford specifically counselled against presoaks as doing more harm than good. Then, when they realized that people were going to do them anyway, and they didn't do any real harm, they stopped worrying.

Most of the developer is only there to wet the film quickly and evenly -- you don't need much to do the actual work.

Very short development TIMES are another matter, which is why a 5-minute minimum is normally recommended.

The best way to put the film in the dev is to have the tank open and ready, and lower the loaded reels/hangers into it as smartly as possible without splashing.

Consider also Polaroid peel-apart. Where is the presoak?

Throughout history, the vast majority of photographers have not used presoaks, not least because they are almost invariably completely unnecessary. I myself have never used them in 40 years.

Sorry to be a trifle aggressive, but this has always struck me as one of those things people do because they've always believed they need to, but have never actually investigated it; or because they're worried by advice to use pre-soaks, which they needn't be; or to demonstrate their superior knowledge, when they don't have any. We all acquire ritualistic habits, but this one is a waste of time and water -- unless, as PE says, you're tempering at the same time.

Cheers,

R.

 

[big_ben_blue]

Not so. For many years Ilford specifically counselled against presoaks as doing more harm than good. Then, when they realized that people were going to do them anyway, and they didn't do any real harm, they stopped worrying.

Cheers,

R.

What would some of the negative impacts of a presoak be?
Personally, I used a 1min presoak (limited attention span ) in the past (don't currently have a running darkroom YET), but would be more than willing to change my habits if it could be beneficial.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Gentlemen;

IIRC, our studies indicated that a presoak of film introduced a bit more process variation at different locations due to the characteristics of the water used in the presoak, but improved uniformity. AFAIK, these results were not published, as it seemed at the time that everyone was doing it properly.

Most all processing was in drums or tanks and people used the presoak for tempering if nothing else.

If you want the best of all possible worlds, a presoak using tempered distilled water is the absolute best.

PE

 

[Gerald Koch]

What would some of the negative impacts of a presoak be?

Some films contain a wetting agent to insure that the developer wets the film without bubbles or airbells. So washing this off with a presoak actually helps to create problems. It can also cause uneven development around the film edge or spocket holes.

A presoak is used with rotary processing to get the drum to the proper temperature. Other than that it is not needed.

People tend to blindly do things in photography because someone has told them that they must.

In almost 55+ years of developing I have never used a presoak and never had any problems.