Tom R
Established
I am new to using Paterson tanks--having previous experience with Hewes stainless. I am sure that the forum can provide a quick response to the following question regarding agitation:
When loading one roll into a two-roll tank should I modify my agitation procedure; I'm concerned because I recently processed a roll that shows signs of "battering"--which is a sign of over-agitation. Perhaps I should place an empty reel to ensure that the bottom reel doesn't travel. This said, I'm using the "new style" of tank that does not appear to require filling the tank with empty reels when processing fewer than the maximum for the particular tank.
I'm hopeful that someone can provide some useful suggestions.
When loading one roll into a two-roll tank should I modify my agitation procedure; I'm concerned because I recently processed a roll that shows signs of "battering"--which is a sign of over-agitation. Perhaps I should place an empty reel to ensure that the bottom reel doesn't travel. This said, I'm using the "new style" of tank that does not appear to require filling the tank with empty reels when processing fewer than the maximum for the particular tank.
I'm hopeful that someone can provide some useful suggestions.
KenR
Well-known
I always use an empty reel when I process one roll of film in the two reel tank, with the empty reel at the top. I use 20 oz. of solution for the tank and agitate for 30 seconds initially and then 5 inversions every minute. Works for me.
I'm uncertain as to exactly what you mean by "battering". But I think there are a couple of things to take into account. Firstly, one can process using a Paterson tank that does not contain its full capacity of reels. But this doesn't necessarily mean the tank won't be filled to its maximum capacity of developer. (Indeed, depending on the type of developer used and dilution it may potentially be advisable to fill it completely, to guard against exhaustion in some cases.). To put it another way—a tank might be half full of reels, and full of developer—or, it might be half full of both. What applied to your roll in question?
Secondly, I've been routinely buying and using used Paterson tanks and reels for years so must have 25–30 reels and a dozen or so tanks, (both System 4 & Super System 4) in sizes from a small single 135 to my largest which can accomodate up to 8 x 135 (or 5 x 120/220). There's considerable variation in the fit between reels and centre light trap column. Some are so loose reels literally slide with gravity. Others hold reels more tightly in situ. Not sure why there's some difference—I presume age and/or use. But, if a tank will not be filled to full capacity, it is, in my experience, not prudent to assume reels will remain locked at a low enough point on the column, by themselves, to preclude tide marks or other artefacts. They may well. But might not. It's a risk entirely avoidable and hence, not worth taking.
Indeed, Paterson originally supplied C clips made of the same material as their reels with their tanks, the purpose of which was to lock reels in place and prevent uneven development. Their instructions specifically advised not to store the clip on the light trap when not in use. If you do, eventually they stretch, and become ineffective. This is a problem for anyone who sources used Paterson tanks and reels: the clip will usually be absent in the first place. If it's not, you may be assured it'll be...sitting on the light trap, well stretched, and...no longer effective. I have three or four clips. None worked terribly well, when I acquired them.
One work around (if you won't be completely filling a tank) is to fit an empty reel(s) above the loaded one(s). This will keep loaded reels safely immersed (assuming, of course, you have added the correct quantity of fluid per reel). I have done this many times without issue. Another simple hack is to take a standard Kodak 35mm film cassette container and cut the bottom out of it with a sharp knife. You then have a basically free spacer which may be inserted into the light trap above your reel( s) to prevent same from sliding above the high fluid mark during inversions.
Being fortunate to have a variety of different size tanks I can usually match the numbers of reels and times/dev type/dev dilution to tank capacity well. Occasionally however I may use a tank only partially occupied with reels. Case in point, just a few weeks ago I had my 8 x 135 3/4 loaded with a combination of 135 & 120 rolls that take the same dev and time, but which would not all fit in my 5 x 135 tank. I had no problems with any of the rolls involved, although, in that instance, the tank was completely filled with developer. On the rare occasions I process with a tank only partially filled with developer, I will be a little slower and gentler with my inversions than when a tank is full, simply because developer can slosh around more "violently", inside a partially filled tank.
The 8 x 135 Super System 4 tank is an interesting case study. It was a freebie (needed a light trap of the correct length which I fabricated from parts) however I was wary of possible development problems because of its size. And due to its sheer length, it takes longer to invert than smaller tanks. When filled just above the top of the light trap (not the lid) you can feel the dev take a good second to surge from end to end and displace the residual air inside, when you invert it. @ 10 seconds inversions per minute I only invert and return the tank 3 times or so. Despite initial concerns, I've had good results out of it, but I do make a point of being consistent with inversion technique with any tank, but particularly that one (and this is perhaps the overriding consideration, regardless of tank size, for good, predictable and even development).
mpaniagua
Newby photographer
+1. I use an empty reel tío when developing a single roll. Best avoid all the racket. Also since having a single reel means the loaded one travels along the tank intead of the chemical I would say that increases the chemistry contact with film.
Tom R
Established
Thank you for the thorough explanation, which took into account questions that I'd wished I'd asked in the original post.
Everything said in your post (and another reply as well) makes perfect sense. Use adequate number of reels to eliminate the possibility of errant reel(s) traveling during inversion, and avoid using the minimum quantity of developer (really ... it's a matter of fractions of the cost compared to useless or difficult negatives) to ensure consistent coverage of the film surface during development.
Cheers, and best.
T
Tom R
Established
Thank you for your quick and helpful response. In addition to including empty reels to pad the void, I'll also use the full 600mL (or 20 oz) of chemistry (suggested by a previous responder) to create a stable environment.
Thank you, again.
T
mpaniagua
Newby photographer
Have to confess that I went the same route when I had the issue some years ago, but the solution was to get a single reel tank, like this:
View attachment WDSwI98rI1kLwMI4u0rlX_Al8Cr-lYivcuBGaOMXvuIC2VegteSegCnNkfpZdNFzCevQprCVaghVCTxLpAeNCDUM5wP5MROvgEpb
But I guess that is not an option when using a Paterson tank.
Marcelo
Tom R
Established
Wow, that image reminds me of a tank I actually owned for those occasions where I had only one roll to process. Actually, I think that single-reel Paterson tanks are available, and if necessary, I could easily purchase one.
Coldkennels
Barnack-toting Brit.
They are - I picked one up last year after a decade of washing two reels when I'd only actually used one.
I don't much like the design of the new Paterson tanks (I say new - god only knows when the design actually changed), but it is nice to have the smaller tank available when needed.
Alpsman
Well-known
I cut off the bottom of a film canister as a spacer tube and it fits almost exactly. This way I don't have to dry a second film reel. The second film spool can also produce foam when agitating.
titrisol
Bottom Feeder
I have old pattersons and they came with C-clips (spring collar in the instructions) to keep the spirals in place.
If you dont have it use another spiral to prevent foaming or surging, or use more chemicals (mine says to use 10 oz ~300ml per 35mm and I use 400ml)
If you are agitating with the rod (rotating) you need to change the patterns from the stainless and as long as you keep it consistent you shoudn't have problems
You can also 3D print clip (something like Film developing tank retaining clip (Jobo 2000, Plastimat,etc) by E-Mat)
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
Sorry, not too much of the hidden from RTFM wisdom on this topic. If it is quality made two 135 films tank, flip it over and it will tell you the amount of solution for each loading scenario. And if you do agitation good way, turn over and knock at the end, it is no brainer you need to keep reel at the bottom. Even if you do it crappy way with the stick, you are still idiot proffed by putting loaded 135 on the bottom and another empty on top of it.
OK, wisdom here. Use one developer, one film, one speed rate. With this you put two loaded reels into typical Paterson and save time
Consistency is the key. Film, iso rate, accurate exposure, same developing. It gives you evenly exposed frames on films. Your scanner will say thank you or you will say it to me if you do it for real, under enlarger. Same paper, same developer and so on.
OK, wisdom here. Use one developer, one film, one speed rate. With this you put two loaded reels into typical Paterson and save time
Consistency is the key. Film, iso rate, accurate exposure, same developing. It gives you evenly exposed frames on films. Your scanner will say thank you or you will say it to me if you do it for real, under enlarger. Same paper, same developer and so on.