BTW, I've even shot stills against a flat background outside using diffuse midday
light Still did not get even density on the background. HAd nothing to do with the
film processing.

Tom Phillips wrote:

Brian Kosoff wrote:

Jean-David,

Here is a copy of an email that I sent to Jobo. But first a few facts
not listed in the email as I thought they were so obvious as to not need
listing. I am using the 2500 series FILM drums, with the proper inner cores
and with 2502 reels for 120 film. For my 4x5 and 8x10 films, I have the
3005 and 3010 expert drums. Maybe you have not seen uneveness in your film
because you do not shoot on totally even, studio lit, white backgrounds.
I do not need to measure the uneveness on my densitometer as it is so
blatantly evident to the eye.

I can't imagine shooting with strobe in a studio setting against any background
(wall, floor, or light table) and getting "even" illumination on the background.
The whole point is to light the subject, not the background, and if you try to
use flat lighting) no way is the light ever going to be 100% even on a
background. Not in my experience.

As for the "magnetic field" comments, they came from 2 different Jobo
techs and as far as I can tell were said in all seriousness. Here is my
email to Jobo:

Someone will have to explain the theoretical physics involved with magnetic
field-processor rotation solution. It should be good.

All I can say is I've been processing sheet film in a Jobo 3000 series drum for
20 odd years and never had any unevenness.


I have processed everything from 35mm to 8x102 film, using methods
ranging from small tank (inversion), tray, large tank dip and dunk, large
tank nitrogen burst and now rotary processing. I can say with absolute
confidence that I have not gotten decent, even sheet film processing since I
switched from nitrogen burst to a Jobo rotary. I can also state that I have
not gotten even roll film development since I switched from small tank
inversion to a jobo rotary. I shoot landscapes and still lifes that have
large, extremely even, white backgrounds. The uneveness of development is
quite obvious in that environment.
I have experimented countless times in order to correct these
inadequacies. I have had a back and forth dialog with various members of
your technical assistance dept for several years, and have made alterations
to my methodology, as well as many experiments based on their advice. In
spite of all of these efforts, I still have, what your people describe as
3road ruts, on my roll film, and a combination of 3road ruts2 and an effect
that can only be described as pouring a blob of developer onto the center of
un-agitated film and letting it sit there for a minute or two prior to
agitation. These results come from film exposed in my Rolleis, mamiyas and
Fujis. As well as readyloads, 4x5 and 8x10 sheet film in lisco holders, and
8x10 film exposed under the enlarger. I have been told by your tech people
that using kodak film with kodak developers is problematic. I have also
been told ( by 2 different techs) that I should turn the machine 90 degrees
to the earth1s magentic field!!!!
Upon the further advice of your technical assistance people I have
measured the rpm of the processor and have processed roll film at 75rpm, 65
rpm and 50 rpm. I have used distilled water in my developers, distilled
water or tap water for my presoak when d-76 was the dev, no pre soak when
x-tol was the dev. My drums are perfectly level when in operation. I have
used chemical quantities at the recommended amounts, and at more and less
than the recommended amounts. I never process more than 4 rolls of 120
film at a time in a 2563 tank, using 4 reels. I use as much as 1000ml of
developer to do this. I have used d-76 1:1 (1000ml for 4 ?1201s), Xtol
(straight 1000ml for 4 rolls 120), xtol 1:1 (1000ml for 4 rolls of 120). On
the advice of your tech people I do not use stop bath, but use 4 rinses
prior to a 5 minute fix in kodak rapid fix. I have done all of this with
Tmax100, Ilford fp-4plus and Delta 100. I have done all of this with sheet
film, in 300x series tanks. The only difference being that your tech people
recommended 50 rpm as the speed for the 300x expert drums. I use distilled
water for presoaks, for developer and for photo flo. The photo flo is done
after the film is removed from the reels or drum and placed in a glass
beaker filled with the photo flo working solution.
All of my tanks and reels are completely clean, no contaminants
anywhere, as all of my prints are for sale in galleries, I run an archivally
oriented darkroom. There are no, sources of light in my darkroom save the
red light emitted from the jobo itself and the green glow from some gralab
timers. The entrance to the darkroom consists of entering a light tight room
first, with a light trap door, and then passing through a second light trap
door into the darkroom.
As a means of protecting my negatives I have what is probably the most
experienced B&W digital lab in the country, Bow Haus, produce 8x10 tmax100
copy negatives for me. They too have a jobo, they too can not get evenly
processed 8x10 film with it. They have tried sending their film to outside
labs who also use jobo, and they too have had the same problems. They have
not been able to find a single lab that processes 8x10 properly in a jobo.
They now process my 8x10 copy negs by hand in a tray. That has given them
the best results so far.

On 1/24/04 10:24 PM, in article , "Jean-David Beyer"
wrote:


I am not saying that, because I know enough about making dogmatic
statements: the most important of which is that the more dogmatic I get,
the more likely I am to be in error. (Be careful: do not step in the dogma.)

What I am saying is the problems are _not inherent_ in the Jobo system,
since I, among others, get no road ruts (even if carefully measured),
and without heroic measures to ensure their absense.

So it must be something the others are doing. While it is possible that
all those people (however many that may be) are either very sloppy
processors using too little chemistry, people who are trying to develop
negatives in print drums, using old reels, _or something else_, but I
have no clue what the something else might be, and I doubt it can all be
attributed to sloppy processing.

I mistrust those who say to rotate the processor 90 degrees to change
the magnetic fields though. They are either joking, or egregeously
ignorant. It happens that my processor is usually lined up along an
East-West axis (roughly; i.e., parallel to White Street in Shrewsbury,
NJ, but I have used it at 90 degrees to that and it matters not).