A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » General Photography » In The Darkroom
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Questions about AP develop tank



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old April 5th 05, 02:55 AM
narke
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Questions about AP develop tank

I got a AP develop tank, I feel that's very good. But I still have two
question about it.

1) There is a table as below marked on the bottom of the tank, and I do
not fully understand its meaning. Can anyone explain that for me?

1 x 135 / 126 = 375cc
2 x 135 / 126 = 650cc
1 x 127 / = 490cc
1 x 120 / 220 = 590cc

2) After a test, I found 375cc solution can submerge one reel, and
650cc can submerge two. My 2nd question is, can I use only 375cc
solution for the processing? I remembered people adviced that it is
best to let the solution fill the whole tank even when process one roll
in a two reel tank, that is 650cc in my case. But I think there must
be a reason that AP mark a 375cc in its tank. Actully, since the tank
provides a rod (on the center top of the cover) to stir the solution,
so I never need to shake the tank by invert it. Hence I belive there
is NO change the film will exposed to the air in the stage of
agitation. So I want to confirm that I can use only 375cc solution for
processing.

-
narke

  #2  
Old April 5th 05, 03:23 AM
Peter Irwin
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

narke wrote:
I got a AP develop tank, I feel that's very good. But I still have two
question about it.

1) There is a table as below marked on the bottom of the tank, and I do
not fully understand its meaning. Can anyone explain that for me?

1 x 135 / 126 = 375cc
2 x 135 / 126 = 650cc
1 x 127 / = 490cc
1 x 120 / 220 = 590cc


That is the volume of developer required to cover the reels.
You need that much developer as a minimum.

2) After a test, I found 375cc solution can submerge one reel, and
650cc can submerge two. My 2nd question is, can I use only 375cc
solution for the processing?


Yes you can. Many people are happier placing a second empty reel
above their loaded reel and filling the tank as if for both reels.
I tend to do this, but the manufacturers of plastic tanks have
been suggesting partially filled tanks (at least for developer)
in their instructions for years, and if there were serious problems
they would have stopped recommending it by now. If you do this,
make sure that the reel has no tendency to ride up on the centre
column, if the film rides above the developer there will be a
problem.

be a reason that AP mark a 375cc in its tank. Actually, since the tank
provides a rod (on the center top of the cover) to stir the solution,
so I never need to shake the tank by invert it. Hence I believe there
is NO change the film will exposed to the air in the stage of
agitation.


Inversion agitation tends to work better than swizzle stick agitation.
Don't worry about the air in the tank. The film is sitting in the
developer for all but a few seconds each minute. Agitation should
be a lot gentler than the name suggests, the purpose is to make
sure that the tired developer at the surface of the film is replaced
by fresh developer once a minute (or every 30 seconds with the
Kodak method).

Peter.
--


  #3  
Old April 5th 05, 03:23 AM
Peter Irwin
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

narke wrote:
I got a AP develop tank, I feel that's very good. But I still have two
question about it.

1) There is a table as below marked on the bottom of the tank, and I do
not fully understand its meaning. Can anyone explain that for me?

1 x 135 / 126 = 375cc
2 x 135 / 126 = 650cc
1 x 127 / = 490cc
1 x 120 / 220 = 590cc


That is the volume of developer required to cover the reels.
You need that much developer as a minimum.

2) After a test, I found 375cc solution can submerge one reel, and
650cc can submerge two. My 2nd question is, can I use only 375cc
solution for the processing?


Yes you can. Many people are happier placing a second empty reel
above their loaded reel and filling the tank as if for both reels.
I tend to do this, but the manufacturers of plastic tanks have
been suggesting partially filled tanks (at least for developer)
in their instructions for years, and if there were serious problems
they would have stopped recommending it by now. If you do this,
make sure that the reel has no tendency to ride up on the centre
column, if the film rides above the developer there will be a
problem.

be a reason that AP mark a 375cc in its tank. Actually, since the tank
provides a rod (on the center top of the cover) to stir the solution,
so I never need to shake the tank by invert it. Hence I believe there
is NO change the film will exposed to the air in the stage of
agitation.


Inversion agitation tends to work better than swizzle stick agitation.
Don't worry about the air in the tank. The film is sitting in the
developer for all but a few seconds each minute. Agitation should
be a lot gentler than the name suggests, the purpose is to make
sure that the tired developer at the surface of the film is replaced
by fresh developer once a minute (or every 30 seconds with the
Kodak method).

Peter.
--


  #4  
Old April 5th 05, 05:08 AM
narke
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Peter wrote:

That is the volume of developer required to cover the reels.

You need that much developer as a minimum.

I can understand that, things I do not understand are those divide
symbal and numbers after them. I also do not understand the "1x127",
is it a film format?

if you do this,

make sure that the reel has no tendency to ride up on the centre
column, if the film rides above the developer there will be a
problem.

Thanks. I found there is a plastic lock which can lock the reel firmly
down.

Inversion agitation tends to work better than swizzle stick

agitation.

If I rotate the rod fully a circle, is it still worse than the
inversion? In my test with the cover and eyes open, I can not find a
reason why the inversion is better in the case. Maybe I i'v ignored
something, would like to tell me the story inside? A lot thanks!

-
narke

  #5  
Old April 5th 05, 05:08 AM
narke
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Peter wrote:

That is the volume of developer required to cover the reels.

You need that much developer as a minimum.

I can understand that, things I do not understand are those divide
symbal and numbers after them. I also do not understand the "1x127",
is it a film format?

if you do this,

make sure that the reel has no tendency to ride up on the centre
column, if the film rides above the developer there will be a
problem.

Thanks. I found there is a plastic lock which can lock the reel firmly
down.

Inversion agitation tends to work better than swizzle stick

agitation.

If I rotate the rod fully a circle, is it still worse than the
inversion? In my test with the cover and eyes open, I can not find a
reason why the inversion is better in the case. Maybe I i'v ignored
something, would like to tell me the story inside? A lot thanks!

-
narke

  #6  
Old April 5th 05, 07:24 AM
Ken Hart
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"narke" wrote in message
oups.com...
Peter wrote:

That is the volume of developer required to cover the reels.

You need that much developer as a minimum.

I can understand that, things I do not understand are those divide
symbal and numbers after them. I also do not understand the "1x127",
is it a film format?


"1x135/126=375cc" read as "one roll of 35mm or 126 Instamatic film requires
375 cc"
"1x127..." read as one roll of 127 size film..."
127 size film is fairly uncommon, if not discontinued. Not having a roll at
hand, I can't give exact size; roughly 2" wide, it's a paper backed film
like 120 size.

if you do this,

make sure that the reel has no tendency to ride up on the centre
column, if the film rides above the developer there will be a
problem.

Thanks. I found there is a plastic lock which can lock the reel firmly
down.

Inversion agitation tends to work better than swizzle stick

agitation.

If I rotate the rod fully a circle, is it still worse than the
inversion? In my test with the cover and eyes open, I can not find a
reason why the inversion is better in the case. Maybe I i'v ignored
something, would like to tell me the story inside? A lot thanks!


I prefer inversion. I think (this could easily be completely bull!) that
rotating the reel can cause the end of the film to "un-spiral", depending on
which way you rotate. Also, the film in the center of the reel, by virtue of
being a smaller diameter than the outer part of the reel, gets much
agitation by rotating. Again, this could be utter crap, but I will still be
inverting my film tank!

Ken Hart


  #7  
Old April 5th 05, 07:24 AM
Ken Hart
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"narke" wrote in message
oups.com...
Peter wrote:

That is the volume of developer required to cover the reels.

You need that much developer as a minimum.

I can understand that, things I do not understand are those divide
symbal and numbers after them. I also do not understand the "1x127",
is it a film format?


"1x135/126=375cc" read as "one roll of 35mm or 126 Instamatic film requires
375 cc"
"1x127..." read as one roll of 127 size film..."
127 size film is fairly uncommon, if not discontinued. Not having a roll at
hand, I can't give exact size; roughly 2" wide, it's a paper backed film
like 120 size.

if you do this,

make sure that the reel has no tendency to ride up on the centre
column, if the film rides above the developer there will be a
problem.

Thanks. I found there is a plastic lock which can lock the reel firmly
down.

Inversion agitation tends to work better than swizzle stick

agitation.

If I rotate the rod fully a circle, is it still worse than the
inversion? In my test with the cover and eyes open, I can not find a
reason why the inversion is better in the case. Maybe I i'v ignored
something, would like to tell me the story inside? A lot thanks!


I prefer inversion. I think (this could easily be completely bull!) that
rotating the reel can cause the end of the film to "un-spiral", depending on
which way you rotate. Also, the film in the center of the reel, by virtue of
being a smaller diameter than the outer part of the reel, gets much
agitation by rotating. Again, this could be utter crap, but I will still be
inverting my film tank!

Ken Hart


  #8  
Old April 5th 05, 12:26 PM
Stefano Bramato
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


Hallo.
I have two Ap tanks and is always safer using more the amount of developer
suggested by the tank.
FOr Example: for 375mm i cook 400mm, for 590 I use 640, for 650 I use to do
700mm.
More, when you develop in a tank there is aways some liquid spillimg or
dropping, so this is safer.
Or sometimes you can make bubbles or some foaming and the extra liquid help you
in prevent incosistent result.
Just my 2 cents of Euro-


Ciao,
Stefano Bramato

--
ed io imparo...
  #9  
Old April 5th 05, 12:26 PM
Stefano Bramato
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


Hallo.
I have two Ap tanks and is always safer using more the amount of developer
suggested by the tank.
FOr Example: for 375mm i cook 400mm, for 590 I use 640, for 650 I use to do
700mm.
More, when you develop in a tank there is aways some liquid spillimg or
dropping, so this is safer.
Or sometimes you can make bubbles or some foaming and the extra liquid help you
in prevent incosistent result.
Just my 2 cents of Euro-


Ciao,
Stefano Bramato

--
ed io imparo...
  #10  
Old April 5th 05, 12:47 PM
Justin Thyme
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"narke" wrote in message
ps.com...
I got a AP develop tank, I feel that's very good. But I still have two
question about it.

1) There is a table as below marked on the bottom of the tank, and I do
not fully understand its meaning. Can anyone explain that for me?

1 x 135 / 126 = 375cc

1 Roll of 35mm requires 375cc to cover it
2 x 135 / 126 = 650cc

2 rolls=650cc
1 x 127 / = 490cc

1 roll of 127 etc...
1 x 120 / 220 = 590cc

1 roll of 120 or 220 film...

2) After a test, I found 375cc solution can submerge one reel, and
650cc can submerge two. My 2nd question is, can I use only 375cc
solution for the processing? I remembered people adviced that it is

I have a Paterson tank that requires 290ml for 1x35mm. I use 300ml since
it's a nice round figure (easy to calculate the chemicals). Never had a
problem. My tank can take 2x35mm but I very rarely develop 2 rolls at the
same time.
best to let the solution fill the whole tank even when process one roll
in a two reel tank, that is 650cc in my case. But I think there must
be a reason that AP mark a 375cc in its tank. Actully, since the tank
provides a rod (on the center top of the cover) to stir the solution,
so I never need to shake the tank by invert it. Hence I belive there
is NO change the film will exposed to the air in the stage of
agitation. So I want to confirm that I can use only 375cc solution for
processing.

I stir rather than invert - my tank leaks if I invert it so I don't have a
choice. I've never had a problem with stirring. I stir gently, changing
direction about every second.

-
narke



 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Questions on Canon 300D and etc. questions regarding digital photography Progressiveabsolution Digital Photography 4 March 24th 05 05:11 PM
Questions on Canon 300D and etc. questions regarding digitalphotography Matt Ion Digital Photography 3 March 24th 05 03:57 PM
Problems with my Combi-Plan tank Frank Pittel In The Darkroom 23 March 4th 05 12:37 AM
Developing 4x5 B&W Film: Tray or Tank Ron In The Darkroom 39 February 14th 05 05:42 PM
400TX Developing Questions Adam Attarian In The Darkroom 15 April 9th 04 09:54 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:14 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.