To presoak or not to presoak

I have found what others have stated, and that is the developer is more evenly absorbed. I semistand Ilford fp-4 and am happy with the results. As for reticulation, it is more apt to happen when you go from high to low in the temp.

It is so hard to reticulate current films, I used that for a project some years ago (pictures from musicians) and had to have ice in the stop bath to produce reticualtion in Ilford HP5.

pentaxuser said:

I have only come close to a reticulation situation once. It was while I was on a City and Guilds course at a college. It was after the development stage and at the stop bath stage which at the college was taken care of by a water rinse. With 20 students water was easier and cheaper than a stop bath.

Anyway I mistakenly turned on the "hot" tap and water at probably 40 degrees centrigrade at least ran into the film tank for at least a couple of minutes before I realised what was happening. I fully expected reticulation as did the tutor but the film was unaffected. It was HP5+.

My guess is that film even "old" film like HP5+ is more resilient than we imagine. If this resistance to reticulation is peculiar to HP5+ then my congratulations to Ilford for a very tough film.

I suspect that film is tougher than maybe we give it credit for.

Pentaxuser

Click to expand...

I believe there are cases where a presoak can be helpful. Phil Davis did some investigation on presoaking versus regular development. In some cases it increased contrast. In some cases it decreased contrast. In some cases film speed was changed. In none of the cases was the change drastic. It appeared as if the main determinant to what would happen was the film itself ...different films reacted in various ways.

I use a 70ºF developing temp. My darkroom in the winter is as low as 52ºF and it can get above 80ºF in the summer. I presoak at 70ºF. Frankly, I have never considered thermal shock as a concern. My presoaking has had as a goal to maintain process control with presernting the developer with a film and reels at its temperature. I use a thermostatic valve and water bath to maintain temperature.

If one wanted to avoid thermal shock I believe that putting your loaded tank into a water bath of the correct temperature water with the tank weighed down to prevent floating I believe that one could temper the dry reels and film from ambient to developer temperature. One could also if available allow the film and reels sit in a room of the desired temp. An oversize tank with marbles inside for instance could accomplish this. One could start with water at the room temp. and put the film and reels inside and put it into a water bath of the proper temp until the developing temp had been reached. I have seen nothing that has shown any indication of reticulation with the practices that I have used.

There is much to be gained by having consistent practices. If your pracrices are all over the map one will be challenged to achieve a predictable result.

dustym said:

I presoaked a 120 batch last night prior to using precysol ef I left standing in 24 degrees water for 10 min I did not use a presoak agent just water and when I tipped away I was amazed at the amount and density of the tinted water that was disgarded. I then carried out the process with precysol and
was extremly pleased with the results, I cant give you a technical breakdown
but the negs looked great. My only comment is that this initial quantity of disgarable chemical must in same way hinder the meat and potatos of the development acting on the gelatin or Im I wrong.

Click to expand...

That tint is nothing more than some anti-halation backing that washed off the film. In practice it does no harm to the development process if you don't pre-soak. The only good reason to pre-soak modern films is for temperature control. If your tank and darkroom are cold, as mine is in winter, a pre-soak with water a degree or two above your normal processing temperature will bring the tank and film up to operating temperature in short order. This way, your developer will stay at your desired operating temperature instead of dropping as the cold tank sucks heat out of the solution. You may have to compensate with slightly extended development times if there is any truth to the belief that already wetted film takes up developer more slowly than dry film.

Stoo Batchelor said:

If a film is standing at room temperature, say 19 to 20 degrees. And you pour a liquid on it that is 24 degrees, couldn't the shock to the emulsion cause it to reticulate.

Click to expand...

If I could just add to my above comment.

Reticulation was a re-occuring problem for me when using a particular film and developer marriage. Because of it, I went through a long process of elimination and never did find the cause. It was solved in the end by taking the film out of the equation. So now I always er on the side of caution. Never had a problem since.

Regards

Stoo

We have visited this topic before, but for what ever it may be worth:

Here is my 2 cents worth!
I have been developing sheet and roll film for nearly sixty years. I have never found a need to presoak in all these years. Presoaking is a fad that comes and goes with each new person when he/she discovers photography then ventures into the room of darkness. I have never had air bell's,streaks or uneven development by not presoaking. If there is any problem in film developing it will show up first in sky areas. Believe me if a presoak would help in any way I would have been using it. My comments can only be supported by the thousands of negatives in my files!

Charlie...........

Interestingly, Kodak recommends presoaking sheet film processed in trays, but not roll film processed in small tanks. This is from their publication J-109, the technical data guide for using XTOL.

Am I correct in assuming that a presoak in water would not be a good idea when using two solution developers?

Click to expand...

titrisol said:

You are correct!

Click to expand...

No offence intended here, but .... telling me that something is a "no-no" is kind of like waving the flag in front of the bull, and seeing as my sign is Taurus ... well anyway, I decided to give this a try.
I went out today on this bright sunny day to get a picture that I have been visualising for some time now. I had done it in 4x5 about a year ago and enlarged it, but wanted to get it in an 8x10 contact print. So, picture a grey stone wall from a burned out house with snow on the ground and on the window ledges. PlusX Aero rated at 25 and an old Ilex Paragon 12" in an old Agfa Commercial View. It metered and I shot at 1/25'th@f/22 and did my usual "normal" development in D23 (Adams) for five minutes extended with Borax for four minutes. The difference? I presoaked in water for 5 minutes first. The result is just fine. It's a nice clean, clear negative, free of streaks and with good contrast. Tomorrow I'll contact print it and post the results. So, maybe I misread these posts? What is the difference between "two solution" and "divided" or "extended" developers?

cheers eh?