Slosher (pic)

[Changeling1]

So the "slosher" sits in a developing tray and is agitated by rocking the tray as you would if developing a print? Do you then pick up the slosher and put it into the stop-bath and fixer again, like you would with photo paper? At first glance I thought it was a part of a hand crafted sheet-film washer. Can you wash the film while it's in the device? It looks like a pretty good alternative to some of the more traditional methods. Can you move it from tray to tray with some kind of tong?

 

[Monophoto]

After loading the slosher (sheets are face up), I first put it in a presoak bath for a couple of minutes, then move it to the developer. Agitate by alternately lifting opposite corners -I agitate 5 sec out of every 30, s0, for example, I do lower right/upper left corner for five sec, then 30 sec later I do upper right/lower left, etc.

Then, move to stop bath for 30 sec. Then to fixer. Agitate continuously for 30 sec, and then rinse off and dry hands, and then turn on lights. Complete the 3 minute fixing cycle with the lights on.

Rinse in plain water in the slosher, then hypo clear - agitate continuously for 1 minute. Then to wash. I wash by putting the slosher in a tray of water, and let it stand for 5 minutes. Move to another tray of water for another five minutes, etc, for a total of 6 cycles. Then to a tray of photoflow. Finally, take sheets out of slosher while resting in photoflo, attach clips, and hang to dry.

I do all of this by hand - the vertical edges of the slosher make good handles. Normally I wear rubber gloves mainly to minimize contaminating the chemicals with residual chemicals on my bare hands.

Sometimes I will have one or two sheets that want N-1 processing. I simply remember which compartments they are in, and after the appropriate time, I carefully remove those sheets and put them in small trays of plain water while the rest of the sheets finish developing. Then, after I move the slosher to the stop, I put the N- sheets back in their assignment compartments.

 

[Reinhold]

Monophoto:

I notice that your design has no means of preventing the film from "floating" as it's lowered into a liquid. If I were to drop a sheet of film flat onto a fluid it would tend to float, taking a few seconds to settle below the surface. Dry film might sit on top of the surface much longer. Do you push the film down below the surface when first placing the unit in a tray?

I'm aware that a pre-soak will avoid the "dry film" scenario mentioned above, but I subscribe to Ilford's advice not to pre-soak. A 30 second stop for film which is reluctant to settle quickly seems a bit "iffy" unless it's positively pushed below the surface.

Your workmanship looks nice, I think a lot of darkroom people are missing the boat when it comes to making their own equipment. Maybe APUG ought to have a "How To" forum, complete with photo's and plans, kind of like the old Popular Mechanics article I found on how to make a 4x5 enlarger....

 

[Monophoto]

Reinhold -

Your observation is correct.

I know that Ilford does not recommend a presoak, but they also don't say that a presoak is a bad thing. I think it's mainly a matter of calibration - the process steps that Ilford recommend are based on no presoak, and they noted that if you use a prosoak, you need to develop your own process times. For me, it's a habit that I picked up 25+ years ago that I'm comfortable with, and since it's calibrated into my process, I stick with it.

When you lift the slosher out of the tray of chemicals, the chemicals force the film to the bottom of the slosher. Then, when you drop the slosher back into the tray, the flow of chemicals through the holes in the bottom lifts the sheets. My experience is that in combination with the irregular flow of chemical between the segments of the side of the slosher, the film remains immersed.

That said, however, if you allow the film to simply sit in the slosher, it does have a tendency to float to the top of the bath. I just processed some film and, as the film was soaking the wash, I reloaded my holders. I noticed that in the five minutes that it took to load three holders, one sheet of film (out of five) floated to the surface. Obviously, that is not a good thing if you are into stand development or even semi-stand development.

I've only experimented with stand development once - and in that case I used a tank rather than the slosher so that I had the freedom to turn on the lights and leave the darkroom. In his presentation at the LF conference this spring, Steve Sherman said that his experience is that stand development works best with a tank of some sort and with the sheet in a vertical position - he didn't say why, but I suspect that it is this floatation issue.

 

[mikewhi]

What about the idea of making the slosher with a lower hieght so that they could be stacked on top of each other in the developing tray, maybe having at least 3 layers for a total of 18 4x5 sheets in a 16x20 tray? These individual shelves could be made to sit in a piece with a handle so that they could all be lifted at once and moved from tray to tray?

 

[mikewhi]

I've only experimented with stand development once - and in that case I used a tank rather than the slosher so that I had the freedom to turn on the lights and leave the darkroom. In his presentation at the LF conference this spring, Steve Sherman said that his experience is that stand development works best with a tank of some sort and with the sheet in a vertical position - he didn't say why, but I suspect that it is this floatation issue.

Did he use the old stainless tank with the stainless hangers??? It seems we've come full circle again. At one point everyone was doing everything they could to get away from tanks\hangers - going to trays, then LF daylight inversion tanks, then JOBO's. And now it's back to stainless tanks. I think I threw all of mine away.

Does anyone know where to get 7x17 stainless tanks with hangers???


-Mike

 

[Tom Hoskinson]

With Pyrocat-HD, stand development in a PF Slosher produced identical results to stand development in a tube. Film was Efke 100 8x10. No differences were noted between vertical and horizontal film position.

 

[Monophoto]

Steve had his tank with him - it was a black plastic tank about 8: in diameter. I don't believe that it had been created by it's maker with the intention that it be used in a photo darkroom - but I don't recall what he described to be it's original function.

Incidentaly - by way of update - I processed a number of rolls of 35mm TMY using the stand process in Rodinal 1+200 (one hour, five gentle inversions during every 30 seconds for the first two minutes followed by an additional five inverstions at 30 minutes) this weekend. I did four rolls in a traditional four-reel tank. Very pleased with the results.

 

[JeffD]

I wonder about these sloshers. Does the film actually rest against the bottom of the plexiglass device? Seems like it would, or, perhaps, the film would float on the survace of the chemicals, and get uneven development? I guess sloshing the device around would keep the negs in motion, counteracting this, but that would defeat the purpose of stand / semi-stand development. I am probably missing something here....

Here's a photo of my home-built 4x5 slosher. It was modeled after one that Chip Forelli let us use in a workshop last summer that in turn was modeled after one that he had used in a workshop with John Sexton.

The dimensions are not critical - the inside dimensions of each of the six "boxes" has to be slightly larger than a sheet of 4x5 film - I made mine about 4.25 by 5.25. The overall outside dimension has to fit into your 11x14 tray. The holes are 1" diameter. Each box has two 1" holes - the idea is that lowering the slosher into the tray forces chemicals through the holes - this lifts the negative sheets a bit, both for agitation and to assure that chemical flow all around the sheets. I cut an opening from the "outside" hole in each "box" to the edge of the bottom to provide a way to grasp each sheet of film.

Total construction time was about an hour - I bought one sheet of 1/4" plexiglass at Home Depot from which I was able to construct both the six sheet slosher and a smaller unit that does two sheets in an 8x10 tray.

 

[Tom Hoskinson]

I wonder about these sloshers. Does the film actually rest against the bottom of the plexiglass device? Seems like it would, or, perhaps, the film would float on the survace of the chemicals, and get uneven development? I guess sloshing the device around would keep the negs in motion, counteracting this, but that would defeat the purpose of stand / semi-stand development. I am probably missing something here....

I have used the 8x10 PF Slosher plus the very similar 4x5 and 5x7 Summitek Cradles for stand and semi-stand developing many sheets of film (film horizontal). The Slosher and the Cradle are of very similar designs and are both fabricated from an Acrylic plastic material.

I have also done comparison testing with duplicate negatives stand and semi-stand developed in ABS plastic tubes (film vertical).

My results with Pyrocat-HD have been identical with both systems.

I pre-soak the film for about 5 minutes in deionized water (20 megaohm - measured) with both systems.

In the Slosher (or Cradle) the film remains immersed in the developer (emulsion side up) with the back of the film in contact with or just above the bottom of the tray. The film does not float on the surface of the developer.

In the tubes, the film's emulsion is facing the liquid contents of the tube and the back side rests against the wall of the tube.

 

[Monophoto]

JeffD -

Iv'e watched pretty carefully what happens in a slosher with the lights on (while washing film). If the film is left to stand in a slosher without agitation, it will either drop to the bottom of the slosher or float on the surface.

Sloshers have holes in the bottom. Agitation is by lifting one corner, dropping it back into the tray, and then lifting the opposite corner. That forces the chemical to flow through up the holes in the bottom of the slosher, lifting the sheet off of the bottom surface. Then, as the opposite corner is lifted, chemicals flow back over the film, forcing it back to the bottom.

Of course, the film is processed emulsion-side up, so the only thing that actually touches the emulsion is chemicals.

My experience (with three sloshers, albeit all based on a common design) is that agitation development is amazingly even. I have not tried to do stand development in a slosher. In his presentation at the LF Conference in May, Steve Sherman said that in his experience, stand development must be done with the negative in a vertical position in a tank - he didn't say why, but it makes sense to me that this orientation would assure that the negative remain under the surface of the chemical and that the emulsion never come in contact with the tank.

 

[Tom Hoskinson]

As I've previously stated, my data taken with Pyrocat-HD, pre-soaking and stand development in both sloshers and BZT type tubes shows no difference between the vertical (tube) and horizontal (slosher/cradle).

Films I use and have compared are Efke 100, J&C Classic 400 and Kodak TMY.

Different films, developers and development techniques may produce different results.

 

[JHannon]

For anyone wanting to build one of these trays, one of the adhesives used to glue acrylic is called Dead Link Removed . They also have other thinner versions. The weld-on 16 is a bit thicker and fills gaps a bit better.

I have also found through searches that a saw blade with a high number of teeth with no offset is best. Blades designed for cutting aluminum or copper are the best. I have not tested this yet.

I am planning on building a smaller 4 (4X5) sheet version and if it goes well, the 6 sheet.

Thanks to Monophoto (I don't know your first name) for all the information.

 

[argus]

Wow,

finally I know the official name for the gizmo I made myself for stand developping 4x5 sheets!
Thanks, the models featured here are well built. I should tune my slosher too!

As opposed to what others say, I never had uneven development or other unwanted faults on my negatives, but as I only started with 4x5 (shot some 80 sheets), this statistic should not be taken for granted.

G

 

[Brian Miller]

And here I thought that a "slosher" was something to automatically slosh the trays back and forth! I made one of those from a piece of Plexiglas and some nylon screws and nuts. Constructing mine just required some drilling.

I went to Tap Plastics and had them cut a 4.5 x 5.5 piece of plastic. Then I bought six nylon screws and 12 nylon nuts. The plastic was drilled out so that there is one screw at each short side (4"), and two screws on each long side (5"). The plastic is drilled out so that solution can easily flow on the bottom. The screws are position to hold the film on the edges. The film is held off the bottom by the nuts.

Its best used with a side-to-side motion. An up-and-down motion may dislodge the film from being held by the screws. Initially I give it a real vigorous side-to-side motion to dislodge any air from under the film. Then I just give it normal agitation. It works just fine for one sheet, and no scratching!

 

[CuS]

I made a slosher out of an old Kodak 2x2 hanger

I've been doing alot of 4x5 work these past few weeks.

Although I have no problem tray developing, I'm getting tired of being knuckle deep in chemistry.

I'm been wanting to build a slosher for a good long while and I even had the plexiglass to do it.

I was just about to dive into a build when I notice the 14 or so 2x2 hangers I had on hand. I have neither the space not the tanks to use them as designed so I have sacrificed one (shutter) to slosherdom.

All i did was hack-saw off the hanger section; de-burr the edges; and then drill a while in the center for a handle (a metal post, in my case).

It fits perfectly in my Paterson 8x10 trays.

I'll do some souping with it this week to determine how evenly developing proceeds.

Here's some pics if you are interested:

Dead Link Removed

 

[Roger Thoms]

For anyone wanting to build one of these trays, one of the adhesives used to glue acrylic is called Dead Link Removed . They also have other thinner versions. The weld-on 16 is a bit thicker and fills gaps a bit better.

I have also found through searches that a saw blade with a high number of teeth with no offset is best. Blades designed for cutting aluminum or copper are the best. I have not tested this yet.

I am planning on building a smaller 4 (4X5) sheet version and if it goes well, the 6 sheet.

Thanks to Monophoto (I don't know your first name) for all the information.

Or even better a blade made for cutting plastic. http://www.amanatool.com/circular-saw-blades/non-melt-lb86401.html

 

[Monophoto]

- - - so I have sacrificed one (shutter) to slosherdom.

Dead Link Removed

Very clever!

 

[CuS]

Thanks Monophoto - I was this close to making a clone of yours - and then it hit me.

I just tested it and the negs look good and evenly developed - I will make a couple other sloshers so i can develop a second or third set while the previous sets are washing.

And I really like your idea on differential developing (N-1) by setting the negs aside while the remainders keep souping.

 

[Mahler_one]

I've been doing alot of 4x5 work these past few weeks.

Although I have no problem tray developing, I'm getting tired of being knuckle deep in chemistry.

I'm been wanting to build a slosher for a good long while and I even had the plexiglass to do it.

I was just about to dive into a build when I notice the 14 or so 2x2 hangers I had on hand. I have neither the space not the tanks to use them as designed so I have sacrificed one (shutter) to slosherdom.

All i did was hack-saw off the hanger section; de-burr the edges; and then drill a while in the center for a handle (a metal post, in my case).

It fits perfectly in my Paterson 8x10 trays.

I'll do some souping with it this week to determine how evenly developing proceeds.

Here's some pics if you are interested:

Dead Link Removed

Great idea, and very well done. Kudos galore!

 

[jeroldharter]

I've been doing alot of 4x5 work these past few weeks.

Although I have no problem tray developing, I'm getting tired of being knuckle deep in chemistry.

I'm been wanting to build a slosher for a good long while and I even had the plexiglass to do it.

I was just about to dive into a build when I notice the 14 or so 2x2 hangers I had on hand. I have neither the space not the tanks to use them as designed so I have sacrificed one (shutter) to slosherdom.

All i did was hack-saw off the hanger section; de-burr the edges; and then drill a while in the center for a handle (a metal post, in my case).

It fits perfectly in my Paterson 8x10 trays.

I'll do some souping with it this week to determine how evenly developing proceeds.

Here's some pics if you are interested:

Dead Link Removed

I suspect that you might have some problems with this, so report back either way. I have never used hangers before so maybe I am wrong. I assume that if the film is held in place somewhat loosely on the 4 sides then it could pop out when inserted, agitated, or removed from the tray. If the film is held tightly by the frame, then it will probably bow and maybe pop out if not careful.

The manufactured sloshers have holes under the film to allow free flow of solutions when raising or rocking the trays and that promotes even development.

Also, one benefit of a slosher is that you can process each sheet for a different time which would be impossible here.

 

[CuS]

So far so good . . .

I suspect that you might have some problems with this, so report back either way. I have never used hangers before so maybe I am wrong. I assume that if the film is held in place somewhat loosely on the 4 sides then it could pop out when inserted, agitated, or removed from the tray. If the film is held tightly by the frame, then it will probably bow and maybe pop out if not careful.

Turns out that the hangers hold the film securely but loosely without bowing.

The negs are also easily removed because of the clever spring-loaded gate that each compartment has.

I just tested it and the negs look good, no banding, no surge marks - good even developing.