OptiKen
Allowing Ads
For decades monobaths have come and gone. They have all quickly failed for one or more reasons. Mainly they did not live up to their claims.
Paterson Plastic tank and reels - 2 roll capacity with only the one roll inside - solution quantity is supposed to be 375mm for a single 35mm roll.Curious, what kind of tank are you using and what's its capacity?
Optiken, would you mind posting a scan of the frames in your original post including the sprocket holes. Thanks
History repeats itself! New55 don't ship outside the US, so I made my own monobath according to Donald Qualls' formula - which should be exactly the same. I got the same surge marks from sprocket holes - on both sides of the film if I inverted, but just on the lower edge if I poured it in and did no agitation as New55 recommended. I adjusted the pH, ensured my ammonia was exactly 5% with a hydrometer, but couldn't avoid the surge marks on 400ISO films. 100ISO films were tolerable. The eventual solution for me was to use my old Rondinax tanks, where the film reel is on its edge, and so any drag marks will run lengthways along the film and stay within the unused border. It works so well that I have stayed with the technique for several weeks now. I have also used a Rondix tank with no film reel with perfect results. Today I discovered the limit of a litre of monobath - the ninth film was underdeveloped. I'll stop at #8 in future.
My monobath shots are here.
Chris
I wondered about temperature. I wonder if the OP recorded the temperature of the developer before and after development. It sounds like a tempering water bath may be in order.Today I finally got around to the experiment where I poured 80 degree monobath into a cold stainless container. The temperature dropped to 72 right away. The thermal mass of the tank, not to mention the reel and film, are enough to lower the temp here. The result was uneven development.
I have always used a plastic tank and warmed everything up.
I wondered about temperature. I wonder if the OP recorded the temperature of the developer before and after development. It sounds like a tempering water bath may be in order.
Heat may have been a factor assuming that the chemical reaction of development would raise the temp.
Interesting.
History repeats itself! New55 don't ship outside the US, so I made my own monobath according to Donald Qualls' formula - which should be exactly the same. I got the same surge marks from sprocket holes - on both sides of the film if I inverted, but just on the lower edge if I poured it in and did no agitation as New55 recommended. I adjusted the pH, ensured my ammonia was exactly 5% with a hydrometer, but couldn't avoid the surge marks on 400ISO films. 100ISO films were tolerable. The eventual solution for me was to use my old Rondinax tanks, where the film reel is on its edge, and so any drag marks will run lengthways along the film and stay within the unused border. It works so well that I have stayed with the technique for several weeks now. I have also used a Rondix tank with no film reel with perfect results. Today I discovered the limit of a litre of monobath - the ninth film was underdeveloped. I'll stop at #8 in future.
My monobath shots are here.
Chris
Chris,
I can still see some marks in some of your shots particularly in the sky on the lake photo.
But can you elaborate on your process with the rondinax? Timings? Agitation?
Cheers
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?