C41 rotary development

Discussion in 'Darkroom Developing and Printing' started by news.c2i.net, Jun 3, 2008.

  1. news.c2i.net

    Ken Hart Guest

    Obviously, I didn't intend to degrade your darkroom skills; some people here
    are beginners and some are advanced-- without badges, it's impossible to
    tell.

    If you are doing everything the same, the results should be the same.

    How is your enlarger power supply? Here, when the air conditioner comes on,
    the lights dim, so before making color prints, I turn off the air
    conditioning. Also, I was taught that enlarger exposures should be in the
    ten to twenty second range. Shorter than that is difficult to control,
    longer and there is a chance for vibrations.
    Are you using dial-in filtration or individual filters? I use individual
    filters, and I've found that just because two filters are labeled 20M,
    doesn't mean they are both 20M. I numbered my filters, and always use the
    lowest numbers and least number of filters, so I'm likely to get the same
    filters each time.
    What about the chemistry? Do you one-shot the chems or replenish? Is the
    temperature control accurate? I use a roller transport system that
    automaticaaly replenishs. It also holds 15 gallons of each chem and the
    temperature is thermostatically controlled, so the temp stays pretty stable.
     
    Ken Hart, Jun 6, 2008
    #21
    1. Advertisements

  2. You should try here, in the midwest, rural area even. I used to use a lab in Terra Haute,
    about a 2 hour drive, and 50% of the time there were always issues (not to mention around
    $12 a roll to process C41 film). After a bout of hand processing I ran across a Wing Lynch
    Pro6 processor for $50, which I just picked up yesterday. I will finally have consistency
    and ease of use for the cost of sending 4 rolls of film out. The rush to digital has been
    a godsend to people still using film, that's for sure.



    erie
     
    erie patsellis, Jun 8, 2008
    #22
    1. Advertisements

  3. erie patsellis wrote (in part):
    Not to me. I do not mind if _other people_ want digital, but those that
    shifted away from Kodak Elite Fine Art paper means Kodak did not make enough
    money to keep making it. So I have to do with something else, and am not
    thrilled. I can still get fibre-based paper, and may switch totally to
    Ilford's Multigrade IV on the theory that that way I will have only two
    boxes of paper instead of 6 to go bad when it gets too hot in my darkroom,
    and Ilford may still be big enough to stay in business.
     
    Jean-David Beyer, Jun 9, 2008
    #23
  4. It's changed chemical based photgraphy from a specialty item that every
    small town had at least one store and large cities had many, to something
    that can only be gotten from a few specialty retailers.

    There are still lots of camera stores around, and almost every large
    store has some sort of photographic equipment or supplies, but the
    comsumables have shifted to batteries, memory cards and inkjet paper.

    Sadly to say, IMHO 9/11 had a profound negative effect. While digital
    supplies can easily be shipped via air and are not damaged by X-ray or
    gamma ray scanners, light sensitive material are and chemicals can no
    longer be sent by air mail, checked in baggage etc.

    Geoff.
     
    Geoffrey S. Mendelson, Jun 9, 2008
    #24
  5. That's for sure. There were two real photo labs in the next town to me, and
    one 1-hour one there too. There is a one-hour lab still in my town. There is
    also a drug store in this town that will sell 36mm color negative film and
    have it processed. And one in the next town. One of the real photo labs also
    sold 35mm cameras and darkroom supplies. Both real photo labs are now out of
    business. One of the one-hour labs is out of business. And I do not go to
    one-hour labs anyway. About 15 miles from here there was a quite good (for
    around here) store that had an extensive photography department that had a
    good selection of cameras, enlargers, processors, sheet film as well as 120
    and 35mm. Fishkin Brothers of Perth Amboy. Fortunately, Calumet and B&H are
    still in the wet-process photography business, though their selections are
    reduced compared to when I started in the 1970s. I do not look forward to
    emulsion making and film and paper coating.
    I do not know if 9/11 had much of an effect. I doubt my stuff from Calumet
    came by air anyway, and there would be no point in sending stuff by air from
    B&H, since they are only about 60 miles from here. They would need to
    charter a small plane anyway and that does not make sense. The only
    chemistry that B&H won't ship is Kodak Rapid Fixer Part B, and I do not need
    that anyway. And Calumet will ship it, so I am not sure what is going on
    there. I guess the only "dangerous" stuff I use is glacial acetic acid, and
    a gallon goes a long way.
     
    Jean-David Beyer, Jun 9, 2008
    #25
  6. Here it went from 5 stores to 2, one of which is just selling off what
    it had 5 years ago. Tel Aviv, which is the BIG city here has none now.
    The one really big photo store is still doing a booming digital
    business, but I bought the last of a few of their items, which were old
    stock.

    The one store that has anything has lots of film, but their darkroom
    department is two shelves about a meter wide. There is a nice display
    case with old cameras, but they are for display, not sale.

    It will for imported items, as anything that goes on a commerical flight
    is x-rayed, and containers are often gamma-ray scanned. Some of the
    courier services don't x-ray all packages, but how long that lasts is
    another speculation.

    I assume one day, if you want to send film via an airplane you will have
    to pay extra for hand inspection and certification of contents.

    Film can be shipped by container, but again you will have to make sure
    that nowhere along the way it is scanned, and that it goes in the winter
    as a summer trip in the hold of a container ship can ruin it.

    I was a fan of Edwal FG-7, which last I checked was still made by a
    company which bought the name and formula from Falcon who bought it
    from Edwal. However the post 9/11 air safety regulations make it a
    hazzardous substance so the only way I can get any is to find someone
    willing to buy a case, ship it via boat (there is no more surface mail),
    and get an import permit for it. I can avoid the import permit by buying
    one or two bottles and no more, but it still would have to be "shipped" and
    not mailed. :-(

    I can only assume that as commercial production of photographic material
    and chemicals moves from the U.S. to "botique" producers overseas, it will
    get worse.

    For example how long will a company continue to import film from eastern
    Europe or China if someone does not read the contents declaration, or does
    not care, and runs it through a gama ray scanner?

    There is an old story here about someone ordering a box of sheet film from
    abroad and the customs agent opening the box and looking at each sheet
    to make sure it did not have a pornographic image.

    Geoff.
     
    Geoffrey S. Mendelson, Jun 9, 2008
    #26
  7. Geoffrey S. Mendelson wrote:

    While I was never a fan of VC paper, I think I will have to go with Ilford
    Multigrade IV as the least boutique of the manufacturers still in business.
    I think I will be able to print on that once I learn how. I do have a VC
    cold light head (Zone VI) that can print with pure green all the way to pure
    blue. But I will have to calibrate my negatives and the VC head's control
    box, and I do not look forward to that.
    That actually happened at a small defense contractor where I once worked. We
    needed to X-ray some parts (machined castings) for flaws, and the QC guy
    opened the X-ray film to count the sheets and measure their size.

    As Ansel Adams once asked, when discussing the latest "progress in
    photography, "Why is there so much progress and so little improvement?"
     
    Jean-David Beyer, Jun 9, 2008
    #27
  8. It is the same everywhere.

    Meaningless monkey-motion is often taken as progress.

    OTOH: real knowledge only comes from mistakes - to find the
    one true path you first have to explore every wrong one,
    and there seem to be an infinite number of wrong paths.

    Maybe Intelligent Design ["God's great idea": man's great mistake]
    and Evolution ["God's great mistakes": man's great idea] _are_ one
    and the same.
     
    Nicholas O. Lindan, Jun 9, 2008
    #28
  9. Harman (who own Ilford's wet photography product lines) bought Kentmere
    last year and claim they'll keep the Kentmere papers in production.

    The Kentmere multigrade paper is, in my opinion, a lot nicer than
    Ilford Multigrade.
     
    Thor Lancelot Simon, Jun 10, 2008
    #29
  10. I wonder about Kentmere. B&H stock it, but Calumet do not. That makes me
    worry about how available it will be, even if Harman continue to make it.

    I had to give up using Ilford Galerie because no-one around here stocked it.
    (Of course, no one around here stocks any wet process stuff except 35mm
    color negative film now.) Then I had to give up Oriental Seagull. Then Kodak
    quit making any B&W paper, especially Elite Fine Art.

    If I must recalibrate all over again, I just want to do it once. So the
    question is, can I rely on B&H to keep stocking it for, say, 10 years or more?

    I have never used either Ilford Multigrade or Kentmere, I do not have a
    prejudice one way or the other, but I worry about the long-term availability
    in USA.
     
    Jean-David Beyer, Jun 11, 2008
    #30
  11. Kentmere have this to say about development:

    "To maximise d. max, grade spacing and tonal rendition, a multicontrast
    chemical system such as Kentmere VC Select Plus Developer and Fixer,
    especially formulated to enhance variable contrast emulsions'
    characteristics, is recommended. Also recommended, in alphabetical order are
    Agfa Multicontrast, Champion B&W Multicontrast, Ilford Multigrade, Kodak
    Polymax, and Tetenal Variospeed developers, together with their appropriate
    fixers. Equivalent products from other manufacturers should give similar
    results.

    "We do not recommend conventional manual developers, which tend to inhibit
    both d. max and contrast."

    I would normally use something like Dektol or D-72 (both 1+1) to develop
    paper. I have used my version of D-72 which is the same as the original, but
    I omit the bromide and use benzotriazole instead. This prevented the "green"
    color of Polycontrast Rapid that I have not used in decades, and may no
    longer be necessary.

    Have you found it necessary to use their recommended developers?
     
    Jean-David Beyer, Jun 11, 2008
    #31
  12. This is bizarre. Among other minor issues, Polymax paper developer -- as
    far as anyone seems to be able to tell -- *is* Ektaflo Type 1, which was
    basically liquid Dektol concentrate.

    I have had no trouble with the Kentmere paper in Dektol. I have also
    used Edwal Ultra Black with good results.
     
    Thor Lancelot Simon, Jun 11, 2008
    #32
  13. Kentmere VC Select Plus Developer

    Based on nothing more than the name I would say the whole
    thing is crap designed to sell overpriced cheesy developer.

    The more "Ultra Plus Select Elite Extra Superlative
    Reserve" there is in the name the more utterly mundane
    the product.

    If a country's name includes "Democratic" it is
    invariably a dictatorship, includes "Peoples" it
    means the people are screwed, "Socialist" and the
    populace's basic social needs are not met, and
    "Workers Paradise" means dying of black lung
    by the age of 30.

    A "Superlative Chronometer" keeps worse time than
    the watch you got for free with a Time Magazine
    subscription.

    "Special" attached to the side of a car means
    "Stripped: Three in the tree and dog-dish hubcaps".

    The "Ultra Plus" model is invariably the bottom of the
    product line.

    A simple "Plus" means cost-reduced.
     
    Nicholas O. Lindan, Jun 11, 2008
    #33
  14. Wanna see more bizarre? My quote, above, was from Kentmere's uk site. I have
    found their USA site, and the corresponding quote is:

    "To maximize d-max, grade spacing and tonal rendition standard developers
    such as Kodak Dektol, Clayton P20, Nacco Printol, Agfa Neutol Plus, Arista
    Premium Paper Developer, Ilford Multigrade Developer, etc. can be used."
     
    Jean-David Beyer, Jun 11, 2008
    #34
  15. I was looking at comments about Kentmere on the Internet.
    There were quite a batch of complaints in 2006 about Kentmere papers.

    There were some complaints that do not concern me much, that seem to be
    complaints about curve shape, or difficulties with contrast control. These
    may be problems with lack of technique, or genuine artistic questions that
    can be resolved only by my testing under my conditions and with my objectives.

    On the other hand, there were two problems that concern me.

    1.) Apparently the dimensional stability of the paper is very low so if you
    tried to flatten it in a dry mount press, the stuff crinkled and was
    useless. I fully intend to dry-mount my good prints.

    2.) Some people got white film over the print.

    A.) Apparently someone actually got in touch with Kentmere and they said the
    dimensional stability problems could have been caused by overlong washing
    times. The O.P. had soaked them overnight. I used to to that with Ilfobrom
    and, while I never got wrinkling, I did get the emulsion falling off the
    paper. That was fixed by using wash times of 2 hours or less.

    Trouble is, the O.P. shortened his wash times and this did not fix the problem.

    B.) I never got white deposits (if that is what they were) on prints. I have
    a 5 micron filter at the output of my mixer that supplies water to my print
    washer.

    Now these all were posted in 2006, IIRC. So either there was no problem, but
    just bad processing, or else there was a problem and Kentmere fixed it. Some
    suggested that Kentmere had an old factory and could not manage proper
    quality control. But if I read their site correctly, they have installed
    more equipment for making paper, and pass ISO 9002 quality control standards
    and are tested annually. I am not sure how much that matters...
     
    Jean-David Beyer, Jun 12, 2008
    #35
  16. news.c2i.net

    Rebecca Ore Guest

    Most Philly aren't handling 120 used cameras this side of the Hassies
    and other pro cameras ones these days. Cardinal/C-bop sometimes has
    cheaper medium format, though sometimes in dubious shape. One option is
    to hit the East Falls Flea Market. There's a guy there every year who
    has used cameras, generally something in twin-lens reflex, more or less
    working (I got a Minolta Autocord from him for $40 and had it set up
    proper for about $90 by Paul Ebel who advertises on Photo.net.
     
    Rebecca Ore, Jun 12, 2008
    #36
  17. I flatten all my silver prints in a dry-mount press. I haven't had a problem
    with the Kentmere paper. This was the double-weight Fineprint VC? That's
    what I use.

    I use Perma Wash or Kodak HCA and wash for 30 minutes at 70F, plus another
    30 minute wash after toning if I selenium tone (I mix the toner with
    PW/HCA). I see no benefit to prolonged wash times and they can take optical
    brighteners out of the paper in an uneven way and cause very unpredictable
    results, which I do *not* like.
    Again I haven't seen this. A yellowish-white film can result from
    inappropriate use of Ilford's film-strength, short-bath fixing method
    before selenium toning -- I used to see it with Elite. I wonder if
    that is what they were talking about. People used to the few papers
    with which Ilford's fixing method really works well would probably not
    be familiar with the results when it does not...
     
    Thor Lancelot Simon, Jun 12, 2008
    #37
  18. Not much. ISO 9000 (there are several of them, genericly called ISO 9000)
    standards only as good as the company wants to be. They refer to a set of
    standards and practices that are written by the manufacturer to follow
    so that they can set and achieve a specific quality level.

    If they follow those standards or the level they set is worth anything
    is debatable.

    How well they are "tested" depends upon the company they hire to check
    that they have fullfiled their goals and followed their procedures. Some
    are extremely exacting and really do check, others just read reports and
    rubber stamp them.

    Certain countries are well known for avoiding certification issues, such
    as not reporting problems, "cooking the books" and changing a product the
    day after it is certified. This is very common with electronic items as
    CE cetification is carried out by the manufacturer and FCC certification
    is rarely, if ever, checked.

    IMHO it is likely that if Harman actually manufacturers its products in
    the UK they do follow their procedures and quality targets, and if the
    manufacturing is subcontracted out to China and India, those procedures
    and targets are ignored.

    Geoff.
     
    Geoffrey S. Mendelson, Jun 12, 2008
    #38
  19. My guess is that Kentmere do manufacture their stuff in the UK:

    http://www.kentmereusa.com/kt_main.php?p=ak

    This is not proof that they still manufacture their stuff in the UK, but it
    suggests it. I am surprised that they did not switch over from "festoon"
    production of their paper to continuous processing until 1970, but that is
    the English for you.
     
    Jean-David Beyer, Jun 12, 2008
    #39
  20. I wonder about my technique here.

    I use a Zone VI archival print washer that runs about 1/2 gallon a minute of
    water through it. I process prints one at a time (almost always), and after
    a 5-minute rinse in a washing sink after the (last) KHCA treatment, I drop
    the sheet into the print washer. I start timing that final rinse after the
    last print goes into the washer, so the first sheet in there may be there
    for several hours, but the last one is in there only one hour. The only time
    I had problems was when I left prints in there overnight, which was in the
    early 1970s with Ilfobrom. Never happened with any other paper, although I
    quit overnight soaks as soon as I saw Dr. Henry's tests of brightener
    washing out whenever his first (?) edition came out. But if Kentmere is
    especially sensitive to excess washing, I wonder if I should find some way
    to shorten the wet-time of the first prints. I do not print enough at a time
    to justify two print washers, but I do not trust the separators in the
    washer enough to just keep track of which print is which and remove each one
    an hour after I put it in.
     
    Jean-David Beyer, Jun 12, 2008
    #40
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.