Appears to have gone now...
Three, Asha, do you need THREE????Not to me...... who’s guilty? Lol
Three, Asha, do you need THREE????
Time to confess that I bought it and it arrived today. It was a bargain, in good condition, original box with manual base, instructions and the magic red pegs (four out of six).Appears to have gone now...
Nice to know that it's gone to someone who will be using it for (increasingly?) large film! I'd stick with the red pegs in the first instance, and try using it without any base modifications to start with. You can take the lid off after fixing and make sure the sheets haven't stuck too firmly to the base, as it's better to have them loose for washing to get the chems off the rear of the sheet.Time to confess that I bought it and it arrived today. It was a bargain, in good condition, original box with manual base, instructions and the magic red pegs (four out of six).
I would love to try it this weekend but I'm going to modify it to raise the film off the base, as suggested by many websites. However, I don't want to Dremel it or put blobs of glue in it, seems a shame considering the condition. One site suggested using self adhesive things (http://www.film-and-darkroom-user.org.uk/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=296&d=1247936374 ). I'll try that as the tank is too nice to cannibalise. Only thing is the things won't arrive until next week. It's also suggested not to use the magic red pegs but longer M3 nylon screws, which |I think I have somewhere.
So now I have a MOD 54, which I have always struggled with loading (and it takes a bucket of developer), a Stearman, which I like, it's easy to load and doesn't take much in the way of solutions, and, finally a Paterson which opens up another avenue of research, 5x7, 10x8?
I think I'll sell the MOD 54's now, if the Paterson proves to be effective.
Time to confess that I bought it and it arrived today. It was a bargain, in good condition, original box with manual base, instructions and the magic red pegs (four out of six).
I would love to try it this weekend but I'm going to modify it to raise the film off the base, as suggested by many websites. However, I don't want to Dremel it or put blobs of glue in it, seems a shame considering the condition. One site suggested using self adhesive things (http://www.film-and-darkroom-user.org.uk/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=296&d=1247936374 ). I'll try that as the tank is too nice to cannibalise. Only thing is the things won't arrive until next week. It's also suggested not to use the magic red pegs but longer M3 nylon screws, which |I think I have somewhere.
So now I have a MOD 54, which I have always struggled with loading (and it takes a bucket of developer), a Stearman, which I like, it's easy to load and doesn't take much in the way of solutions, and, finally a Paterson which opens up another avenue of research, 5x7, 10x8?
I think I'll sell the MOD 54's now, if the Paterson proves to be effective.
Thanks everyone. I'm tempted to try it out this weekend then, without any mods.
I used the unmodified Paterson for the first time yesterday and I'm quite pleased with the results. Looks like the anti-halation layer is all gone and development looks even. I used very gentle continuous agitation for development. The tank is ridiculouly easy to load.
As a control sample, if you like, I processed another four sheets from the same session in the Stearman. Unfortunately two of the sheets were blank! These were taken with an old aplanat with a shutter mounted on the front so I suspect the shutter didn't open.
I'll post some pictures when I can fit in a scanning session this week.
I used the unmodified Paterson for the first time yesterday and I'm quite pleased with the results. Looks like the anti-halation layer is all gone and development looks even. I used very gentle continuous agitation for development. The tank is ridiculouly easy to load.
As a control sample, if you like, I processed another four sheets from the same session in the Stearman. Unfortunately two of the sheets were blank! These were taken with an old aplanat with a shutter mounted on the front so I suspect the shutter didn't open.
I'll post some pictures when I can fit in a scanning session this week.
It might be interesting to know why at least one tank manufacturer mandates it.
Which tank out of interest?
I'd have thought it would be more down to the film than the liquid delivery system [emoji848]
Those Artifex tanks are not cheap, nearly spat my cornflakes out when I saw the price.The Artifex, both 10x8 and 5x4 specify presoak is essential - for two minutes. My best guess is that it's in some way connected to the film holders into which the sheets are placed. They are basically metal sheets with lots of holes that hold the film on three sides like a film holder.
Those Artifex tanks are not cheap, nearly spat my cornflakes out when I saw the price.
Do you think they’re worth the extra over something like the SP445 or the Combiplan?
10x8 (correct me if I'm wrong) only has 6 methods available for daylight development:
a Taco method
b Paterson orbital
c Stearman Press tray
d Catlabs spiral
e Artifex
f Jobo drum and processor
After I've used it, I'll report back.
Open trays!......In complete darkness of course.
Not as hard as it sounds tbh.
Even easier with a "talking" countdown timer app on the phone.
Still much prefer my Paterson Orbital tanks though!
Thanks for that very detailed reply, you are very informative as always and I’m now much better educated in the different large format developing options, thanks Stephen.That's not an easy question to answer. Agreed, horrendously expensive. But Artifex make tanks for both 5x4 and 10x8. 10x8 (correct me if I'm wrong) only has 6 methods available for daylight development:
a Taco method
b Paterson orbital
c Stearman Press tray
d Catlabs spiral
e Artifex
f Jobo drum and processor - this IS expensive! I'm ignoring this one here
Never having tried taco, I don't know how many sheets could be fitted at a time or indeed much else about it, so I'll ignore it. It is certainly the cheapest in equipment terms.
Of the rest, Paterson and Stearman are one sheet at a time, Catlabs 3, Artifex 6.
Paterson and Stearman are continous agitation, which reduces acutance effects (I use Rodinal) and at least in theory increases grain; Catlabs and Artifex allow inversion agitation which I've always used.
Comparing Catlabs and Artifex, Catlabs potentially requires more chemicals, as the tank will need the same amount whether 1, 2 or 3 sheets are processed. Artifex allow the tank to be blocked off if less than two sheets are used, reducing the amount of chemicals required to 1 litre for two 10x8 sheets.
I'm a born worrier and pessimist. On that very subjective basis, the Catlabs spiral worries me that the film could be misloaded or come adrift in processing, 10x8 being rather more "floppy" due to the size than 5x4. The Artifex holders do secure the film on three sides, and the space inside the tank means sheets can't physically rise out of the holders.
Moving down to 5x4, the contenders are much the same, with Catlabs dropping out (I don't know if they make a 5x4 - they may do) but with CombiPlan, the various Yankee type tanks, Jobo spirals, Stearman's SP445, MOD54 and 20th Century Camera spirals coming in.
Yankee (I have a Doran variant) allows up to 12 sheets at a time, but always requires a full tank of chemicals. For me, use only if I have a lot of sheets to process.
CombiPlan can have problems with uneven processing if 6 sheets are loaded, so I always limit it to 4, the same as Paterson and the Stearman. Jobo spirals can be a little more fiddly to load (easier if you buy the loading accessory), 20th Century Camera spirals are easy (and they make 5x7 as well) and take 6 sheets.
Loading and filling times are longest with CombiPlan at around 30 seconds the way I pour. The methods that use a standard Paterson or Jobo developing tank (20th C, MOD54, Jobo reels) are faster. In fact, all other methods with the probable exception of the Yankee tank (down to the volume) are going to be faster.
My interest in the Artifex 10x8 came down ultimately to a matter of convenience and nervousness. Convenience, as up to 6 sheets of 10x8 could be processed in one go (I develop for around 16 minutes, so multiple times through takes up time) and I had no worries about sheets detaching (in theory). Other 10x8 methods were one or three sheets maximum. Having seen what the 10x8 version was like, I did get the 5x4, on the basis of a reliable 6 sheet at a time method. I've often had multiple times through sessions with the CombiPlan (I have about half a dozen of these tanks...).
Just for completeness. As I'm now using 5x7 more than 5x4, I've had to investigate methods of daylight developing for this size, and options seem more limited: Jobo drum, 20th Century Camera, Stearman tray and Paterson Orbital. Prefering inversion to contimuous agitation, that only seems to give one option. The 20th Century Camera spirals look flimsy, but hold the film and are easy to load even with the larger sheet size.
I know this doesn't answer the question as to whether the Artifex are worth the price. I do know that if you're going to be moulding something, the cost ot moulds is horrendous, and is the reason that CombiPlan, Walker Titan and Paterson Orbital processors are no longer made. New moulds required, costs too high when set off against potential sales. This could explain somewhat the price. On the other hand, even if the Artifex is a cornflake spitting price, it is still only 3-4 boxes of 10x8 film. Price v convenience is always tricky. After I've used it, I'll report back.
You could presumably go either the IR goggles or ortho film route if you prefer to know what you're doing.
Chroma Carbon Adventurer?Indeed. Although my camera is about 2.4 KG, I've found that the lighter field cameras are not folders? Would very much appreciate being proven wrong here! I appreciate that Ebony make frankly beautiful cameras, but at those prices?!
Chroma Carbon Adventurer?
Negative stains. I'm looking into this - not a problem I've had. Improper washing and fixing is possible, Ansel Adams adds storage conditions to the mix, as damp can cause "mould and stains" (my emphasis). Perhaps some info on how they are stored and what in might help. From the photo, something like Clearfile sleeves?