R3 Monobath

Axle said:

Well I call it a success with my own mix of the Quall/R3 formula. I'm calling it HC-M

I noticed the drag marks as well, so next roll I run through I think I'm going to drop the time in the soup to maybe 9 minutes, and add a single inversion at the halfway mark (4:30) to see if it helps.

Click to expand...

You should call it a success! The development looks great (except for the drag marks). I'd love to see how the next batch works with the single inversion at the half-way point.
I'd also love to see your formula. It looks like you've got down perfectly.

Optiken I happened on this the other day and figured you may find it of interest.

Matt Day had similar issues and somewhat resolved them by using agitation every minute.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KQDZdkqOW2g

Hope it helps.

MrBrowning said:

Optiken I happened on this the other day and figured you may find it of interest.

Matt Day had similar issues and somewhat resolved them by using agitation every minute.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KQDZdkqOW2g

Hope it helps.

Click to expand...

Yes, very interesting. Looking at the results he got with simple agitation inspires me to try the developer on another roll.

What would happened, I wonder, if the reel were placed submerged on its side -- i.e. perfectly perpendicular. Would it just change the pattern of the surge marks?

I did agitation for the first minute and let it sit for the remaining 5 mins and got some good results

Third time was a charm for me by filling the tank before putting the reel in so I could quickly dunk it and gave it just a couple of spins with the agitation rod(Arista Premium tank). The suggested agitation for the first minute did not work out well for me.

jeffreythree said:

Third time was a charm for me by filling the tank before putting the reel in so I could quickly dunk it and gave it just a couple of spins with the agitation rod(Arista Premium tank). The suggested agitation for the first minute did not work out well for me.

Click to expand...

What did you get when you tried the agitation for the first minute?

OptiKen said:

What did you get when you tried the agitation for the first minute?

Click to expand...

I had a big enough increase in contrast and some kind of uneven development in some frames but not all, center 1/3 denser than the rest. I did not get those issues with another roll developed in Diafine or with the first roll in R3 Monobath that gave decent results other than the bromide drag banding. Film was Lomography's Orca 110 shot at box speed with a Minolta 110 Zoom. I wonder if the full minute is needed, or if less could cure it as well. I only needed 5 seconds to cure a bromide drag issue with Diafine. The roll that came out good today was Fomapan 100 I had in a Ciroflex TLR. Examples show the worst of the agitation negatives(sunny water fall/water well outlet) and how most of the Fomapan quickly dunked turned out(sunbleached stump on a shaded porch this morning, quessed at the exposure). I am sure there is a bit of apples to oranges here using different films, but it was what was already in the cameras and on hand.

Take a look at this link and the last comment (from Tuesday Aug. 4). Someone called Ralph Hope says he was able to eliminate the streaks completely by modifying the Paterson tank. I've read it a few times, and I'm not real sure exactly what he's describing though...

https://new55film.zendesk.com/hc/en...ting-streaks-on-my-negatives-what-should-I-do-

I understand what he is saying. He cut away all the thin plastic guides on one side of the reel so it looks like spokes, hub, and rim. If you look it the reel's round side, it should be pretty self evident where the six spokes are that go from the center to the outside of the circle. I still get it some on 35mm between the sprocket holes, but dunking with the unmodified spool is working well enough with 120 that I will stick to that until it is used up.

bvy said:

Take a look at this link and the last comment (from Tuesday Aug. 4). Someone called Ralph Hope says he was able to eliminate the streaks completely by modifying the Paterson tank. I've read it a few times, and I'm not real sure exactly what he's describing though...

https://new55film.zendesk.com/hc/en...ting-streaks-on-my-negatives-what-should-I-do-

Click to expand...

This makes absolutely no sense. If the R3 monobath worked correctly you shouldn't have to make any modifications to the reel. Having used a couple of the formulas in Grant Haist's book they both produced good results. However I could not see any advantage in their use over conventional development.

Some films are more sensitive to streaking either from halide drag or other effects such as sensitivity to high solvent levels.

I say halide drag because besides bromide drag, there is iodide drag in newer high iodide films.

PE

A full blog about my monobath experience! http://filmphotographyproject.com/content/features/2015/08/doing-one-step-developing-monobath

I have persevered with Donald Qualls' formula and have found that using the Rondinax (the motorised tank is just great for this and for c-41 processing) or a Rondix tank I can reliably avoid any drag marks. I did try making up a litre, but the ninth film was noticeably degraded/underdeveloped. I've gone back to using it as a one shot. The other thing I've done is to manage to use it in BTZS tubes for 10x8 sheet film. I used 200ml and the first negative came out nicely, but the second with the same solution wasn't so good, so I assume 80 sq.in. of film is all that 200ml can cope with.

Motorised Rondinax

10x8 in monobath