Yup, you've got good points. If it works for Adams, cool. If it's repeatable for him, go. Yeah, I use tanks and pour the chems in thru the top and there is that time gap. Some folks fill the tank to the brim with chemstry and dunk the loaded reel into in the dark and then put the lid on. Makes sense that way. That's how Kodak suggested you dev Tech Pan.
Why do you consider this method imprecise and not repeatable? If you think about it, it is very similar to develop sheet film in trays. What is the difference?
I guess when you are a master like either of the adams might have been, then you can tray develop and have fair results. However, for the most of the rest of the world, tray developing and consistency, repeatability or reliability cannot fit in the same sentence...
As for the time it takes to pour in chemistry and the the fact the bottom of the tank gets more developing time - that has been overcome by rotation processing, where the chemistry is introduced while the tank is already rotating, like with a Jobo processor equipped with a lift.
I was reading an essay by Todd Papgeorge on Robert Adams, and came across this explanation of his film developing technique for "The New West":
http://www.americansuburbx.com/2011/07/robert-adams-missing-criticism-what-we.html
It involved the use of shallow custom-made trays and required that Adams make a loop of a single roll of film by taping its ends together and then manipulating it through several trays of photographic chemistry, all in pitch blackness.
This sounds like stand development, right? Anyone know for sure, and why he taped the roll in a loop rather than use tanks? I wonder if he was doing development by inspection.
Well - a machine could be doing that for youReally? You pull a length of film through a tray of developer. Back and forth. How much easier can it get?
Rotary processing is a fine tool, but usually very expensive. I know I couldn't afford a JoBo, but am perhaps also a bit reluctant to rely on one. But I am a highly skeptical individual, so I may fit poorly into a group discussing rotary processors. All I know is I've seen some fabulous negs come out of them, and they cost a lot of money.
Rotary processing is a fine tool, but usually very expensive. I know I couldn't afford a JoBo, but am perhaps also a bit reluctant to rely on one. But I am a highly skeptical individual, so I may fit poorly into a group discussing rotary processors. All I know is I've seen some fabulous negs come out of them, and they cost a lot of money.
Depends what you consider to be expensive:
I've thought about doing that. There are a couple of Those rotary developers on the shelf, but so far I've only done sheet film.
How much chemistry do you use?
Matt -- your picture is food for thought. Heck, you could even fill the plastic tank with water at a specific temperature if you wish. I'd been thinking of how to make a hand-cranked device that would both rotate a tank and invert it at the same time, using parts from an old hand egg beater and bicycle parts or something. Yours is a bit easier!
Matt -- your picture is food for thought. Heck, you could even fill the plastic tank with water at a specific temperature if you wish. I'd been thinking of how to make a hand-cranked device that would both rotate a tank and invert it at the same time, using parts from an old hand egg beater and bicycle parts or something. Yours is a bit easier!
Well, shoot! I was gonna make a million bucks from my contraption -- and here this fellow makes a better product than I could imagine! Guess I'll concentrate on my anti-gravity boots...
Matt, is that a Uniroller base? I find that on mine the distance between the support wheels and the drive wheels is too great for the tank to touch both, so it doesn't spin properly.
A friend of mine has done largely what you do, but has basically invented a larger cylinder into which the stainless tank fits, so to increase its diameter. Your invention does the same, but adds some random behavior to the agitation, which I believe could even be a good thing.
I've been playing with the idea of simply making something that fits snugly to the tank, so that it's easier to fill and drain, because I don't have to remove the tank from another container, but I can just remove the lid in normal order. An added benefit to me, because my darkroom is about 50 degrees F in the winter, is for the insulation and temperature stability it would provide.
I have used several bases over the years, including Beseler and Uniroller ones.
I like the ones that automatically reverse, but have used the unidirectional ones as well.
The outer container is big enough to span the distance between the support wheels and the drive wheels - I had to haunt the Dollar Stores until I found just the right size.
The lid clips on - it is quite quick to handle. I'd rather have that because it is easy to clean.
Ansel Adams died in 1984. Were these technologies available then?
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?