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. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
"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
|
|||
|
|||
"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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
"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 | |
|
|
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 |