Rodinal

[NB23]

I never said it couldn't be done but I said that I'd never do that.

For my work, consistency is king, and I see no better way then to mix and use as fast as possible, preferably in 2 batches of 10 films per development.

At 6$ per Gallon, i see no point to save money there. I save my money on other things... Like not buying tri-x anymore (the local store asks for 145$ canadian for 100' roll)...

 

[R.Gould]

I never said it couldn't be done but I said that I'd never do that.

For my work, consistency is king, and I see no better way then to mix and use as fast as possible, preferably in 2 batches of 10 films per development.

At 6$ per Gallon, i see no point to save money there. I save my money on other things... Like not buying tri-x anymore (the local store asks for 145$ canadian for 100' roll)...

I have used a litre up ove 3 or 4 months with no loss of consistency, in my game I could not afford to take the risk, and for 35mm it is very good indeed, but I use little 35mm,and I cannot afford to wait until I have 10 films to develop, I often need to print from a film within a few days to satisfy a client, and the last is, and has always been, as good as the first, try it, you won't be dissapointed.

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

How is that weird?

It's just a different method. If you don't like the method that other people work with, can you at least be a little bit humble about it? There are many ways to use the same product.

Reusing the developer does not equal inconsistent results.

You reuse d-76? That's weird. I'd never do that.

I really like hc110 and rodinal for their stock shelf life.

When I plan to use d-76, ilfosol, or open a bottle ot tmax dev, I first make sure to have 20 rolls ready to be developed and only then do I mix the chemicals or open a bottle (ilfosol, tmax). I make sure to develop all the rolls within a day or two. This ensures absolute consistency.

And for even better consistency, I develop
10 same rolls at once in a big tank. This ensures that all those films require the same printing times (plus desired dodging/burning). This is a real saver.

At last, letting D76 rest for a few days after mixing is the best thing to do for ultimate development quality.

 

[Richard S. (rich815)]

I never said it couldn't be done but I said that I'd never do that.

For my work, consistency is king, and I see no better way then to mix and use as fast as possible, preferably in 2 batches of 10 films per development.

At 6$ per Gallon, i see no point to save money there. I save my money on other things... Like not buying tri-x anymore (the local store asks for 145$ canadian for 100' roll)...

What equipment do you use to develop 10 rolls at once?

 

[NB23]

I can be humble about it, although I don't see why I'd try to save 2-3$ out of a 6$ gallon... But that's just me.

I use a 10 35mm reel tank, 2.5 liters capacity. Similar to this...

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

I can be humble about it, although I don't see why I'd try to save 2-3$ out of a 6$ gallon... But that's just me.

I use a 10 35mm reel tank, 2.5 liters capacity. Similar to this...

But it's not about saving money. It's what I like. Cost is similar irrespective of approach. When a film costs from USD 5 and up for a roll, a few cents here or there for the developer matters very little.

I like how my negs print that I process with full strength D76 better than diluted stock. That's one out of two reasons I do it this way. The other is that when I reuse the liquid I can pour it back into, and completely fill, a gallon size amber jar. I don't have to split the developer up into smaller containers, or use accordion bottles. It's the ultimate way of storing the chemistry, and the easiest. All I have to do is keep track of how many rolls I processed.

Your tanks are exactly the same as what I use, except I have 1, 2, 4, and 8 reel (35mm) tanks.

 

[Richard S. (rich815)]

I can be humble about it, although I don't see why I'd try to save 2-3$ out of a 6$ gallon... But that's just me.

I use a 10 35mm reel tank, 2.5 liters capacity. Similar to this...

And do you pour the chemistry in the tank through the lid or do a quick dunk in the dark of all 10 spools at once into the already filled tank then close the lid and then turn on the lights?

If the former your bottom reels are likely getting a decent % more developer contact than the upper ones. Not a big difference but at least as much inconsistency you'd get from using D-76 replenished following time changes as per the chart/list above.

If you're doing the latter than good on ya'!

 

[Roger Cole]

You were not aware that D76 stock solution can be used and re-used with replenishment? Kodak published plenty of data outlining how to use it this way and it was almost a default for people doing 4X5 processing in rubber tanks. I've used D76 this way myself for 4X5 tank-and-hanger processing - as recently as September. Its not unusual.

It isn't, but sometimes I may not do another batch of 4x5 for six months anyway. I can afford to spend a buck fifty when I do. If you are developing every week or even two, it can make a lot of sense for systems like that which use a lot of solution (same with replenished Xtol or other replenished developers.) I'm also used to the results from 1+1 as I've used it this way off and on since the very early 80s.

Nothing wrong with either method.

 

[NB23]

The bottom wont get more because when I dump the chemicals the bottom empties first (upside down), therefore the top and bottom are balanced out.

Unless I'm being irrational, I think all the rolls are getting even development, as long as the pouring is dome at thd same rate as the dumping. Think about it...

 

[Richard S. (rich815)]

The bottom wont get more because when I dump the chemicals the bottom empties first (upside down), therefore the top and bottom are balanced.

No they are not. Until stop bath or a water bath hits they are still soaking in developing solution in the emulsion so adding even more time in developer contact for bottom reels as the tank drains vs the top reels.

Like I said, its not a huge percentage difference and I use a large tank like that too sometimes but if you're doing that vs using D-76 replenished thinking you're getting more consistency across all those rolls, well I'm not so sure.

 

[NB23]

I remain on my firm position.

When you pour the stop, it stops the bottom first, yes?

So there, it stops the bottom first whike the top is still soaked. Therefore, it all equals out.

Again, I may be wrong but i really don't think so.

 

[NB23]

The bottom is "stopped" while the top is still "developping".

No? Not true?

 

[Roger Cole]

Probably true. And doesn't really matter anyway as the difference won't be that significant.

One point - this will be less significant with dilute than full strength developer, because times will be longer with dilution. Any difference in development time will be more or less constant. That is, if the bottom reel gets, say, 20 seconds more than the top then it will always be about that much assuming the same pouring speed. If you develop for five minutes that's 1/15th of the time, or an increase of 6.67% in development time for the bottom reel. If you develop for 10 minutes then that same 20 seconds is an increase of only 3.33% for the bottom reel, so any difference will be even less.

 

[JW PHOTO]

When it comes to developing film I prefer to take small baby steps. Or maybe I should say, I'd rather not put all my eggs in one basket. 120 film usually in a single reel tank. I don't shoot much 35mm anymore, but when I do it's usually in a single reel tank or maybe two reels in my 120 tank. I'm 65 years old and now have a tendency to forget things. If I make a mistake with a one reel tank, I lost one roll of film. With a big tank I'll cry harder! If I were perfect it wouldn't matter of course. John W

 

[NB23]

Probably true. And doesn't really matter anyway as the difference won't be that significant.

One point - this will be less significant with dilute than full strength developer, because times will be longer with dilution. Any difference in development time will be more or less constant. That is, if the bottom reel gets, say, 20 seconds more than the top then it will always be about that much assuming the same pouring speed. If you develop for five minutes that's 1/15th of the time, or an increase of 6.67% in development time for the bottom reel. If you develop for 10 minutes then that same 20 seconds is an increase of only 3.33% for the bottom reel, so any difference will be even less.

As per Kodak; always add a minute for large tanks

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

Probably true. And doesn't really matter anyway as the difference won't be that significant.

One point - this will be less significant with dilute than full strength developer, because times will be longer with dilution. Any difference in development time will be more or less constant. That is, if the bottom reel gets, say, 20 seconds more than the top then it will always be about that much assuming the same pouring speed. If you develop for five minutes that's 1/15th of the time, or an increase of 6.67% in development time for the bottom reel. If you develop for 10 minutes then that same 20 seconds is an increase of only 3.33% for the bottom reel, so any difference will be even less.

To be compared with 1+49 or 1+50, which is roughly a 2% difference... Just tying it all back together. To compare that to temperature: assuming we have a linear temperature/developer activity curve, a 2% difference from 20*C would make it 19.6*C or 20.4*C. It would be hard to control the developer temperature to a higher precision than that unless extremely high precision equipment is used. I use a calibrated thermometer and it's bloody hard to see whether I'm at 68*F or 69*F. Results don't seem to suffer.

The bottom line is that most proven methods of developing film are good. I think it's more a method of being consistent and working out something that works for us personally. I love the slow change of replenished developers, where I can clearly notice when something is starting to go wrong rather than having a shocking surprise when something goes really wrong. The small drift in activity lies within the margin of error, and tolerance of the darkroom system.

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

The bottom is "stopped" while the top is still "developping".

No? Not true?

Well, how do you know that the parts at the top of the tank that got developer on them at the beginning are the same pieces of film that now get stop bath on them?
If you are truly worried about consistency, nothing beats lowering your reels into a tank already filled with developer. That is why they have lift rods for stainless steel tanks. You'd have one tank with developer, another with stop bath, and a third with fix.

 

[Roger Cole]

I use a Jobo and lift which is pretty consistent as the developer flows in the bottom (side) of the rotating tank and all reels get dumped at virtually the same time. Even then though the film wound on the inside of the reel will get developer on it slightly after the outside. Never noticed the slightest difference though.

 

[NB23]

Well, how do you know that the parts at the top of the tank that got developer on them at the beginning are the same pieces of film that now get stop bath on them?

... Because they didn't move.

 

[Xmas]

Calm down quiet at the back.
There is never any detectable difference with multi tanks or multi holders in deep tanks.

 

[NB23]

Calm down quiet at the back.
There is never any detectable difference with multi tanks or multi holders in deep tanks.

There isn't. But some people really want to prove a point...

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

There isn't. But some people really want to prove a point...

Like yourself, you mean? If you chase after consistency as being your primary target, I argue that the effect of filling the tank with developer has as much effect on consistency as using re-used developer, or comparing to poorly controlled temperature. Be consistent in pursuing consistency.

You're right, I am trying to prove a point, and if you throw rocks you gotta be prepared for some coming back at you.

There are many good ways of developing film. D76 can be used in three major ways: Reused stock solution with time compensation, Single shot (diluted if desired), or replenished. All methods are viable and extremely easy to do.

In my opinion the chief difficulty does not lie in mixing the chemicals; the difficulty lies in learning how to analyze the results, to learn what consequences our actions have, and to make the most of our materials. That's the hard part.
Rodinal, D76, Xtol, Neofin Blau, ID-11, DD-X, TMax, etc - they are all very capable products, and it is way more important to learn how to use them in order to eke out the maximum, rather than which of the developers we use. Mixing them is easy.

 

[Richard S. (rich815)]

Like yourself, you mean? If you chase after consistency as being your primary target, I argue that the effect of filling the tank with developer has as much effect on consistency as using re-used developer, or comparing to poorly controlled temperature. Be consistent in pursuing consistency.

You're right, I am trying to prove a point, and if you throw rocks you gotta be prepared for some coming back at you.

There are many good ways of developing film. D76 can be used in three major ways: Reused stock solution with time compensation, Single shot (diluted if desired), or replenished. All methods are viable and extremely easy to do.

I could not have said it better.

 

[NB23]

Guys you are wrong. Think about it very, very well. The obvious will hit you, one moment or another.

There is also something to be said about 10 films being developed, fixed and washed in a SAME temperature. The prints, from the first roll to the last, print exactly the same.
That's just another reason why its best to develop 10 rolls at once (or 6 120 rolls at once).

The first and last roll in the tank develop exactly the same UNLIKE films developed in 3 months internval in USED D76, in different conditions, while using longer developing times to compensate for a weaker developing solution? Thanks but no thanks. I insist; no thank you.

Ok, this was a very funny thread. On to something next. I won't be arguing on this topic anymore while it's clear you haven't even tried ot yourselves. I mean, why am I even trying to explain?

 

[Richard S. (rich815)]

Guys you are wrong. (snip) I mean, why am I even trying to explain?

Because "... some people really want to prove a point."

Hey let's just agree to disagree then. I'm not actually disagreeing that much either. I develop in long tanks too sometimes.

No hard feelings. A spirited and yes, fun, discussion.