B&W prints in Jobo drum: sanity check.
William Laut
: I already have a Jobo CPA-2 for color, and my office/make-believe
: dark room has no ventilation (just dry film/paper/enlarger), no plumbing.
: I'm getting ready to print my first B&W.... in the Jobo and have a
: few questions I haven't found answers for in my search.
:
I own a CPP-2 and use it for color film/print, and B&W film processing. I
would never consider going back to inversion tanks. I'll take a stab at
your questions.
:
: Sanity check: should I forget it and set up trays as Jobo does
: not recommend processing FB papers in their drums? I have heard that
: it works for double-weight FB papers and about using a screen inside
: the drum to avoid problems with the ridges. Any experience with this?
: I'm starting with RC paper anyway, but will want to use FB soon enough.
:
I've done FB in my CPP-2 with no problems, and while it certainly is
doable I've found that it is more convenient to use trays. I
unhesitatingly recommend using a Jobo for small-scale color printing,
because it makes temperature control so much easier. But for B&W it's so
much more convenient to simply plop the paper into a tray than to fit it
into a drum which then later has to be rinsed and dried out for the next
print.
On the plus side, one nice thing about doing FB in a rotary processor is
that the drudgery of rocking the fixer trays for ten minutes (assuming you
use Sodium-based fixer) is eliminated, plus absorption of fixer into the
paper base is minimized. I wouldn't use single-weight paper, as you risk
having the ribs emboss the paper as well as the paper collapsing within
the drum. Double-weight paper does not seem to have any problems in it.
:
: I'm using Ilford MG IV RC deluxe in Dektol.
:
I've used this in my CPP-2 without any problems.
:
: Kodak lists capacity for Dektol that works out to about 63ml per 11X14.
: Standard Dektol 1:2 dilution works out to 190ml working solution,
: more than enough for the drum.
:
: Sanity check: Is this the correct way to calculate minimum/adaquate
: developer for single shot B&W paper processing in the drum?
:
Yes, assuming that you are using *fresh* stock developer, not something
that's been slowly absorbing oxygen in a partially-filled container for
several months. BTW, the one-shot processing paradigm of rotary
processing does make for a convenient means of insuring you don't have to
compensate for progressive developer exhaustion by either increasing the
development time or by replenishing the developer.
If you really wanted to be technically proper about it and had access to a
reflection densitometer, you could measure your D-max on a trial-and-error
basis, exposing each sheet identically and fully (eg, making one big black
print in order to simulate a "worst-case" scenario for developer
exhaustion), then for each sheet reduce the amount of working-strength
developer, until you either hit the minimum amount the drum requires or
your D-max begins to diminish. This approach would allow you to determine
for yourself how accurately Kodak's estimate matches your own working
conditions, as well as telling you precisely how much developer *must* be
in that drum to correctly develop a worst-case print (ie, all black).
:
: Ilford list developing time of 1 minute, but they only list _Their_
: developer at 1:9 for 1 minute, and 1:14 for 1 minute 30 seconds.
: Jobo recomends a minumum developer time of 1 minute for even process
: with no streaks, etc. My experience with color in the Jobo agrees and
: I set a minimum standard of 1 minute 30 seconds to be on the safe side.
:
: I want to develop for 1 min 30 seconds to ensure even develop esp. for
: larger prints. Should I use the Dektol 1:3 or just extend the develop
: by 30 seconds and adjust exposure accordingly?
:
The safest approach (IMO) is to dilute it 1:2 and develop for two minutes,
regardless of what the paper manufacturer stipulates. Adjust your
exposure time and/or filtration (for varying the contrast) until you have
full tonal separation in both your shadows and highlights.
If you were using graded papers and/or specialty developers, it could be
possible to extend the development time to obtain a deeper D-max, but at
this point you are better off standardizing your development time and
adjusting the overall print density/contrast during exposure.
:
: (hmmm, problem, can't see the print come up inside the drum to stop it)
:
EXACTLY! All the more reason to develop in a rotary processor until the
discipline of timing the development rather than utilizing "development by
inspection" becomes firmly established. If you get into the habit of
prematurely pulling the print from the developer now, your mastery of
craft will likely suffer in the long term.
:
: What other effects are to be gained/lost by using Dektol 1:3?
:
There are no advantages that I ever found. The greater differences are
found between using stock developer and 1:2.
In general, the more you dilute the developer the longer you must develop
the print in order to compensate for the higher dilution. This can be
beneficial for certain subjects in that the longer development time allows
the higher values and highlights to become fully developed. However this
can just as easily be accomodated by slightly burning in the highlights
after the basic exposure has been made.
:
: Everything else looks straight-forward,,,, so far....
: I did my first B&W 4X5's in the expert drum last week, Delta 400 in
: D76 1:1. I'm very pleased how they came out, and no clip marks either!
:
The Expert drum is, IMO, the optimal way to process LF film.
:
: Any hints or help are welcome. If I must use trays for FB, I will start
: looking for the nessesary real-estate around the house.
:
The one place where you MUST use trays for FB is washing the prints (if
you don't have a print washer) and/or using a washing aid (to insure that
the paper base is fully treated with the wash aid).
: Thanks
: Gary Frost
You're welcome. Please feel free to post more questions as you proceed,
and please update us with your results.
Bill
Gary Frost
dark room has no ventilation (just dry film/paper/enlarger), no plumbing.
I'm getting ready to print my first B&W.... in the Jobo and have a
few questions I haven't found answers for in my search.
Sanity check: should I forget it and set up trays as Jobo does
not recommend processing FB papers in their drums? I have heard that
it works for double-weight FB papers and about using a screen inside
the drum to avoid problems with the ridges. Any experience with this?
I'm starting with RC paper anyway, but will want to use FB soon enough.
I'm using Ilford MG IV RC deluxe in Dektol.
Kodak lists capacity for Dektol that works out to about 63ml per 11X14.
Standard Dektol 1:2 dilution works out to 190ml working solution,
more than enough for the drum.
Sanity check: Is this the correct way to calculate minimum/adaquate
developer for single shot B&W paper processing in the drum?
Ilford list developing time of 1 minute, but they only list _Their_
developer at 1:9 for 1 minute, and 1:14 for 1 minute 30 seconds.
Jobo recomends a minumum developer time of 1 minute for even process
with no streaks, etc. My experience with color in the Jobo agrees and
I set a minimum standard of 1 minute 30 seconds to be on the safe side.
I want to develop for 1 min 30 seconds to ensure even develop esp. for
larger prints. Should I use the Dektol 1:3 or just extend the develop
by 30 seconds and adjust exposure accordingly?
(hmmm, problem, can't see the print come up inside the drum to stop it)
What other effects are to be gained/lost by using Dektol 1:3?
Everything else looks straight-forward,,,, so far....
I did my first B&W 4X5's in the expert drum last week, Delta 400 in
D76 1:1. I'm very pleased how they came out, and no clip marks either!
Any hints or help are welcome. If I must use trays for FB, I will start
looking for the nessesary real-estate around the house.
Thanks
Gary Frost
Steve1chsn
>looking for the nessesary real-estate around the house.
Three words: Nova slot processor.
Absolutly fabulous way to do B&W. No fumes, no waiting(it is always ready to
go since you don't have to empty it),saves lots of space (uses about the same
space as one tray), and probably cuts chemical usage in half or better.
**** steve ****
SPECTRUM
(Steve1chsn) wrote:
And can work with color whereas RA-4 in trays oxidizes pretty
fast.
Regards,
John S. Douglas
http://www.spectrumphoto.com
Lloyd Erlick
steve...@aol.com (Steve1chsn) wrote:
>>Any hints or help are welcome. If I must use trays for FB, I will start
>>looking for the nessesary real-estate around the house.
>Three words: Nova slot processor.
>Absolutly fabulous way to do B&W. No fumes, no waiting(it is always ready to
>go since you don't have to empty it),saves lots of space (uses about the same
>space as one tray), and probably cuts chemical usage in half or better.
> **** steve ****
I have had a 16x20 Nova slot processor for several years. I have used
it mainly for RC black and white materials, but on many occasions I
have processed fiber base black and white prints as well.
For all sheet sizes smaller than 16x20, there is absolutely no problem
with FB materials in this device. However, a 16x20 sheet of FB will
swell enough when wet to touch the bottom of the slot tank. It pushes
the Nova clip up, causing it to fall over to one side slightly.
Sometimes this causes the sheet to be kinked or bent, sometimes not.
The solution is to pay a great deal of attention to what is going on.
I have given up on the Nova for FB materials. I prefer a single-tray
system with a group of containers for the solutions. The Nova has only
three slots anyway, so tray work was always a necessity with FB
materials (second fix, selenium toner, and my quirky double-bath for
hypo clear.) Besides, the single-tray method allows me to keep a
container of 1+20 selenium toner as well as one of 1+5 selenium, each
in its own water bath to adjust to different temperatures if I want. I
can also keep two developers at hand with no problem (i.e., no tray
farm!)
regards,
--le
-------------------------------------
Lloyd Erlick,
357 Richmond Street West,
Toronto M5V 1X3 Canada.
---
voice416-596-8751
ll...@the-wire.com
http://www.heylloyd.com
-------------------------------------
Gary Frost
now I'm going ahead with the Jobo CPA-2 because it's there. The slot
would also need to be in my (dry) dark room.
Bill,
I have added comments to your message below. Thanks for taking the time
to reply.
Gary Frost
I was planning on Double-weight FB paper anyway, so I'll give it a try.
I am aware of the lengthy rinse cycles for FB, but that can be done in
my well-lighted garage.
>
> :
> : I'm using Ilford MG IV RC deluxe in Dektol.
> :
>
> I've used this in my CPP-2 without any problems.
>
> :
> : Kodak lists capacity for Dektol that works out to about 63ml per 11X14.
> : Standard Dektol 1:2 dilution works out to 190ml working solution,
> : more than enough for the drum.
> :
> : Sanity check: Is this the correct way to calculate minimum/adaquate
> : developer for single shot B&W paper processing in the drum?
> :
>
> Yes, assuming that you are using *fresh* stock developer, not something
> that's been slowly absorbing oxygen in a partially-filled container for
> several months. BTW, the one-shot processing paradigm of rotary
> processing does make for a convenient means of insuring you don't have to
> compensate for progressive developer exhaustion by either increasing the
> development time or by replenishing the developer.
>
> If you really wanted to be technically proper about it and had access to a
> reflection densitometer, you could measure your D-max on a trial-and-error
> basis, exposing each sheet identically and fully (eg, making one big black
> print in order to simulate a "worst-case" scenario for developer
> exhaustion), then for each sheet reduce the amount of working-strength
> developer, until you either hit the minimum amount the drum requires or
> your D-max begins to diminish. This approach would allow you to determine
> for yourself how accurately Kodak's estimate matches your own working
> conditions, as well as telling you precisely how much developer *must* be
> in that drum to correctly develop a worst-case print (ie, all black).
>
Dektol was mixed yesterday and I am usually very conservative about shelf
life. I may try different quanities after everything else is dialed in.
> :
> : Ilford list developing time of 1 minute, but they only list _Their_
> : developer at 1:9 for 1 minute, and 1:14 for 1 minute 30 seconds.
> : Jobo recomends a minumum developer time of 1 minute for even process
> : with no streaks, etc. My experience with color in the Jobo agrees and
> : I set a minimum standard of 1 minute 30 seconds to be on the safe side.
> :
> : I want to develop for 1 min 30 seconds to ensure even develop esp. for
> : larger prints. Should I use the Dektol 1:3 or just extend the develop
> : by 30 seconds and adjust exposure accordingly?
> :
>
> The safest approach (IMO) is to dilute it 1:2 and develop for two minutes,
> regardless of what the paper manufacturer stipulates. Adjust your
> exposure time and/or filtration (for varying the contrast) until you have
> full tonal separation in both your shadows and highlights.
>
> If you were using graded papers and/or specialty developers, it could be
> possible to extend the development time to obtain a deeper D-max, but at
> this point you are better off standardizing your development time and
> adjusting the overall print density/contrast during exposure.
Ok on Dektol 1:2, I see very little reference to using it 1:3.
The developer time is where I'm still a bit puzzled. Even Kodak lists
"standard" development for Dektol and polycontrast RC at 1 minute.
I guess I'll try between 1:30 and 2 minutes and see what the differences
are.
>
> :
> : (hmmm, problem, can't see the print come up inside the drum to stop it)
> :
>
> EXACTLY! All the more reason to develop in a rotary processor until the
> discipline of timing the development rather than utilizing "development by
> inspection" becomes firmly established. If you get into the habit of
> prematurely pulling the print from the developer now, your mastery of
> craft will likely suffer in the long term.
Interesting as I was under the impression that it was common practice to
decide when the print was through developing in the tray visually.
(within a fairly narrow margin of develop time)
If this is not the proper way, I'm already used to adjusting print density
by exposure alone from color papers. More than happy to continue doing so
for B&W. (One "advantage" to tray processing gone)
>
> :
> : What other effects are to be gained/lost by using Dektol 1:3?
> :
>
> There are no advantages that I ever found. The greater differences are
> found between using stock developer and 1:2.
>
> In general, the more you dilute the developer the longer you must develop
> the print in order to compensate for the higher dilution. This can be
> beneficial for certain subjects in that the longer development time allows
> the higher values and highlights to become fully developed. However this
> can just as easily be accomodated by slightly burning in the highlights
> after the basic exposure has been made.
>
> :
> : Everything else looks straight-forward,,,, so far....
> : I did my first B&W 4X5's in the expert drum last week, Delta 400 in
> : D76 1:1. I'm very pleased how they came out, and no clip marks either!
> :
>
> The Expert drum is, IMO, the optimal way to process LF film.
I have some flat blue sky negatives in there. The negative is perfectly
flat to the edges. I have not yet processed any E-6 in the expert drum,
but may consider it soon.
>
> :
> : Any hints or help are welcome. If I must use trays for FB, I will start
> : looking for the nessesary real-estate around the house.
> :
>
> The one place where you MUST use trays for FB is washing the prints (if
> you don't have a print washer) and/or using a washing aid (to insure that
> the paper base is fully treated with the wash aid).
>
> : Thanks
> : Gary Frost
>
> You're welcome. Please feel free to post more questions as you proceed,
> and please update us with your results.
>
> Bill
Thanks, I'll be working on it today.
Gary Frost
William Laut
: Thanks for all the feedback. I may consider a slot processor, but for
: now I'm going ahead with the Jobo CPA-2 because it's there. The slot
: would also need to be in my (dry) dark room.
:
: Bill,
: I have added comments to your message below. Thanks for taking the time
: to reply.
: Gary Frost
You're welcome. I've snipped the post for brevity' sake, in order to get
to your responses.
:
: William Laut wrote:
: >
: > If you were using graded papers and/or specialty developers, it could be
: > possible to extend the development time to obtain a deeper D-max, but at
: > this point you are better off standardizing your development time and
: > adjusting the overall print density/contrast during exposure.
:
: Ok on Dektol 1:2, I see very little reference to using it 1:3.
: The developer time is where I'm still a bit puzzled. Even Kodak lists
: "standard" development for Dektol and polycontrast RC at 1 minute.
: I guess I'll try between 1:30 and 2 minutes and see what the differences
: are.
:
OK, I understand now. For RC paper, the "standard" development time is
one minute, whereas for FB it is two minutes. The variance is mainly due
to the differences in emulsions between RC vs. FB.
: >
: > :
: > : (hmmm, problem, can't see the print come up inside the drum to stop it)
: > :
: >
: > EXACTLY! All the more reason to develop in a rotary processor until the
: > discipline of timing the development rather than utilizing "development by
: > inspection" becomes firmly established. If you get into the habit of
: > prematurely pulling the print from the developer now, your mastery of
: > craft will likely suffer in the long term.
:
: Interesting as I was under the impression that it was common practice to
: decide when the print was through developing in the tray visually.
: (within a fairly narrow margin of develop time)
:
For gross errors in exposure time, yes, you can evaluate a print while
still in the developer. However, "fine prints" on FB it is impossible to
really evaluate the print until it was been processed and dried, because
most of the steps will contribute to the final tone of the print. For
example, while extended developing may help to deepen the D-max, with some
papers (such as Elite) extended fixing will noticably brighten the
highlights, something the developer won't touch. Additionally, toning
can also deepen the D-max or change the color altogether. Finally, FB
paper is susceptible to a phenomenon called "dry down," where the higher
values will deepen in value while the print is drying.
With experience you can anticipate some of these effects, but not when you
are first learning to print on FB. For these reasons (and probably
others) it is best to standardize your timing during processing, and only
after the print is thoroughly dry do you evaluate it for changes in the
basic exposure, burning and/or dodging.
:
: If this is not the proper way, I'm already used to adjusting print density
: by exposure alone from color papers. More than happy to continue doing so
: for B&W. (One "advantage" to tray processing gone)
:
True, at least in the beginning.
: >
: > The Expert drum is, IMO, the optimal way to process LF film.
:
: I have some flat blue sky negatives in there. The negative is perfectly
: flat to the edges. I have not yet processed any E-6 in the expert drum,
: but may consider it soon.
:
Something to keep in mind about color _negative_ film processing in the
Expert drums: One contributor to this ng had mentioned problems with
streaking on his negatives. It turned out to be excessive developer
carryover into the Blix, and was solved by adding a stop bath and rinse
between the developer and Blix. Kodak does not recommend doing this on
the grounds it *might* cause color crossovers, but in tests I've run with
control strips it did not cause the process to go out of control.
Therefore if you ever do encounter streaking on color neg films in an
Expert drum, you may want to experimentally add a stop & rinse after the
developer and then verify that your negatives are still printable.
Bill
Oh elsie
had a problem with my CPE-2. However I think you will find for B&W it can
become tedious to continually make sure the drum is absolutely CLEAN and DRY
every time you process a print, especially if you are making several test or
work proofs before a final print. I do most of my prints in trays although I
will use the jobo ocasionally. Where it can't be beat is processing film,
especially 4x5. It allows consistency and control that you cannot match with
tanks or trays. You can get the same consistency with prints, it just takes
longer to work up to a "fine print"
Good luck and enjoy, Jim Chinn
Abner Gershon
developer or do you reuse the developer and other chemicals? It would seem
somewhat inconvienient for all but the largest prints when tray sprawl becomes
impossible. Do you use this method for 8x10s as well?
Lloyd Erlick wrote:
> oct1099 from lloyd Erlick,
Lloyd Erlick
I reuse all chemicals. Developer I tend to discard at the end of each
working session. Fixer I use to the end of its service life.
I agree the single tray method is less advantageous for small prints.
For 16x20s and 20x24s it's excellent. Even for 11x14s.
My website contains an article describing my use of this technique.
--le