Jolly Japes with 8x10

[timing]

Many many moons ago I tracked down a Deardorff V8 - a beaut of a camera - as my 4x5 special was in need of a larger sibling. The grand plan was to contact print the resulting glorious negatives and scan as a backup.

Now Istanbul isn't widely known for it's plethora of shops selling a vast array of 8x10 films and that's because there are none. Not a single one that I could find. So, I waited and waited for the time when I would make a trip back to the UK, pick some up there and bring it back here. Except that trip never happened. In desperation I ordered some (Cheap) fomapan 100 from a chap in Norway and in no time at all the package arrived in Istanbul. Sadly, whilst said package was in Istanbul it wasn't actually with me, at my home. The Turk Postal system was, for quite some time, sitting on my package and finally decided to let me have it about 3 weeks later (not actually send it to me of course, just let me have it, to pick it up - another story in itself!!).

Finally, after several months I was now ready to start taking some glorious pictures and admiring the humongous negatives.

First came the film loading. Now after shooting a fair few sheets of 5x4 over the past year I have gotten the film loading down pat. 8x10 film loading took me right back to the first time I loaded 5x4 and then some. After about 10 mins I had managed to load only 2 sheets. Well, that was good enough for now - I was desperate to get going.

Shoot, shoot.....er, the light is a little low and I'm not giving enough exposure.......

....and so to developing; I had acquired a Paterson Orbital Processor sans electric base, as I had learnt that this could mean uneven development with 8x10, and developed the film in ID-11. The resulting negs actually had something on them so I hadn't messed up badly so far but I could see obvious lines running down the negative - the very same that I had seen on shots processed using the orbital electric processor - this was not supposed to happen. Once they were dry I then contact printed on Ilford Multigrade paper and also scanned the negative.

The print is really quite contrasy, the background is all blown out but it's drying right now so can't scan and post yet.

Attached is the scan using the Epson V700. Straight scan results - no post processing. You can see the lines clearly.

So, not a glorious start but it is very definetly a start - after all this time I'm actually quite pleased to just get something. Oh, and I have a knack of choosing some dull subjects for all my 'first shots' and I haven't let myself down this time either.

I was surprised by the exceptionally narrow depth of field - I estimate about 1cm - less than expected.

So, I'll load up a few more sheets and try some more tomorrow. I'll try tray processing even though I find it a real bind but that should get away from those lines - at least I hope so.

Any other tips to help me on my way?

Cheers,

Tim

ps the negs are huge and it's oddly pleasing to be able to see the subject on the neg from across the room as it was drying.

[Peter B]

Hi Tim

I've never had a problem with the Orbital even though I left the lugs/wings on the top part in place, but I've seen quite a few people say that they've cut them off due to developing problems. The lines on yours appear to be heading towards where the wings would be, so that may well be the eventual solution, but I'd not get the saw out just yet!

You don't give any details about the dilution of the ID-11 or the temperature or time, so can't really comment on that side of things, but I'm assuming your agitation was continuous? The Massive Dev Chart isn't wonderfully helpful with this combo, but I'm assuming you'll want to keep the time down if you're moving the orbital throughout the processing time. http://www.digitaltruth.com/devchart.ph ... mdc=Search

I'd be tempted to think about semistand development if you have access to Rodinal, since this will quickly tell you whether it's the camera or the processing. You'd need to search on APUG for threads on semistand, but maybe someone else will come along and help on that one. As a matter of interest though, I'd seriously think about using Rodinal as it keeps forever and it's dirt cheap, plus grain shouldn't be an issue on sheet film that size. Ordinary Rodinal times are maybe even too short for the Orbital. http://www.digitaltruth.com/devchart.ph ... mdc=Search

Look forward to hearing how you get on, Peter

[Patrick Dixon]

I use 100-150ml of chemicals, rotate the orbital continuously (about 3s per rev) and have never had a problem with uneven processing (on 1-4 sheets of 4x5).

I've scored the bottom of the tray, but other than that it's standard.

[timing]

Thanks both. I am diluting the ID-11 1+3 and continuously agitating for 10 mins at 20 degrees using about 100mls. I am not agitating in the same direction all the time but generally 4 rotations one way and 4 rotations the other. One key factor maybe the speed which is way more then 2/3 rotations per minute that I've seen suggested elsewhere but actually closer to Patricks speed of about 3s per turn.

Unfortunately I don't have access to Rodinal which is a shame as it was my developer of choice before moving to Istanbul.

I really don't want to be cutting off any of the parts - I hate taking a hacksaw to anything.


The good news is that this morning I loaded up 3 film holders in the time it took to do just the one a few days ago so that's a result.

This means I take some more today and have another go at the Orbital processor with a slower speed and maybe using 150 mls of dev.

Cheers,

Tim

[Patrick Dixon]

I always rotate in the same direction. If you are doing it manually, then maybe change halfway through just to alleviate the boredom.

[Matt_Bigwood]

This looks very familiar to me - viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1802

I've since taken the advice offered by forum members and now use the manual base for agitation, but on the last batch of processing I did there were still lines from where the fins in the lid appeared to be in contact with the film, but the development was much more even. (I used Fomapan 200 and Rodinal)

I'm seriously considering cutting off those fins, but my concern is that the film will float too much, so my next step is to try tray development in the dark.

[Trevor Crone]

Tim, I use a Paterson Orbital for processing 8x10 film. I have in fact two processors, one with the fins still in place and one where I removed them and all I can say is film processed in either are identical, very evenly developed. My agitation method is identical with Rodinal and PMK pyro. I gently tilt the tank left then right then tilt the tank to each corner in turn. I continue with this agitation plan for the duration of the development time. I use 250ml of WS for each sheet of 8x10 to be certain the film is evenly covered because my agitation is fairly gentle. Too vigorous agitation can give an increase in edge density - developer bounching too much off the sides of the tank. The only time I've had problems is when I initially used the motorised base - this gave under development to the centre of the film.

[timing]

Thanks Trevor - it's encouraging to know that it is possible to use the processor without any issues.

Are you using the manual base at all?

I processed another film last weekend and used 200ml of developer and much slower rotation - around 4/5 seconds per turn.

The result was better but still getting an artifact as you can see below - I've adjusted the photo so that the line is clearly evident. Interestingly a second line which would correspond to the other fin is not visible - this I do not understand. I'll have another couple of goes this weekend and see if I can make any improvements.

[Patrick Dixon]

Given that the base is shaped down in the centre and up at the corners, and with 8x10 there are no pins to hold the neg down, I wonder if it would be better to use much less liquid volume? IIRC, the design intention was for 60ml of chemicals to process an 8x10 print, and I'd guess with that volume the fins wouldn't be in any danger of interfering with the neg/paper as it floats up on the chemicals.

That's what I'd try anyway ...

[Trevor Crone]

Tim, I no longer use the manual base either. I keep the processor flat and just tilt it gently L to R and corner to corner. I do this sequence about every 2-3 seconds throughout the development, that is tilt to the L, leave tank level for 2-3 seconds then tilt to the R and again leave tank still for another 2-3 seconds. I then tilt it to one of the corners then the opposite corner. When all four corners have had their tilt I revert back to L-R and so on. As I mentioned before gentle agitation is important other wise you will get an increase in edge density. I use 250ml of developer with this method and I always pre-soak the film in 600ml of filtered tap water for 2-3 minutes with occasional agitation.

I like the Paterson processor so much (less chemistry for one) that I now dev my 4x5 film this way when before I always used Combi-Plan tanks.

Your development mark is very odd - as I said I have and use a tank with the fins in place and never had this effect. All I can say is if the problem continues remove them and see if things improve. Good luck.

[timing]

Bingo!

That's done it. I followed your process this morning Trevor and not a single track line or strange mark to be seen - see below.

Not only that but I have another neg drying right now and again, nothing.

Thanks for the help.

pool018.jpg (124 KiB) Viewed 10117 times

Now, I just need to get out with this monster of a camera and get some more interesting shots!

Oh, an improve my foccusing.

And management of the depth of field

And.....etc etc etc

[timing]

Mmmmm, seems I was a little hasty. The second is still showing a mark but it's not as bad as previous ones.

Leaves020.jpg (82.83 KiB) Viewed 10116 times

[Trevor Crone]

Tim, make sure you also keep the tank scrupulously clean. I always wash and dry mine after use. If after all this you still get the odd mark which you suspect is because of the fins - I think then its time they are removed.

A test I did some time ago was to place a dead sheet of 8x10 film in the tank without the lid and covered it with 250ml of water to see how the film physically responded to various methods of agitation, and not once did it float to the surface of the water. Perhaps the specific gravity of various developers is such that it causes the film to float

I've only used Rodinal and PMK pyro with 8x10 and the Orbital and as I said earlier I've not had the marks your film has suffered. Most odd indeed.

[timing]

Well, I cut the fins off and that's done the job.





I shot these in Cappadocia last weekend when the weather was really really very dull....until the day we had to leave that is, when the sun burst forth, all the clouds dissapeared and the place really bloomed.

[Trevor Crone]

Great stuff - pleased to hear that you've solved the problem