Fuji Hunt E6 - 3 bath - 3 batches?

[Bogdan_B]

Hi all,

I recently started developing my own film using a Jobo CPE-2 Plus with the lift and the 2523 drum loaded with 4 sheets of film. The instruction manual says the chemicals can be reused three times, with the extra added times. My problem is that after each batch i loose about 20ml of First Developer so after the second batch i only have 210ml left. Jobo recommends using 270ml of chemicals with the 2523(I have no problems using 250ml) and 210ml seems a little low. Is 210ml of First Dev enough for a third batch?

Thanks,
Bogdan

[Joanna Carter]

Then why don't you put 6 sheets of film in the spiral (something that works fine n my ATL1500) and do two batches? The ATL doesn't allow for easy recovery of chemistry, so I have to use it as one-shot but, at least, I can guarantee consistent results.

[Bogdan_B]

That's a good point Joanna. 6 sheets of film is something i never tried, although, with 6 sheets, i might have to use Jobo's recommended 270ml instead of the 250ml that I'm using at the moment and that brings, yet another, question mark. I have very consistent result, 100% trouble free with the 4 sheets & 250ml/230ml(approx on the second batch) but i would be nice to be able to do a 3-rd batch with the same results.

[Joanna Carter]

I take it you are trying to get four 250ml doses out of a 1ltr kit? I suppose the question you have to ask yourself is: is the saving in chemistry costs worth the risk of spoiling film which may have cost a lot more to travel and photograph?

At 12 sheets per 250ml dose, your costs for chemistry would be 52p per sheet. At A2 sheets per 330ml dose, your costs for chemistry would be 69p per sheet. Since the average cost at a lab would be aroound the £2 per sheet,

My costs, when buying the 5ltr pack, using one shot processing, allow for 96 sheets of film (8 drums of 12 sheets @ 600ml) and thus come down to 44p per sheet. The only problem with a 5ltr pack is usually using it up before it oxidises, although using an anti-oxidant gas to top up the bottles helps with that.

[Bogdan_B]

I only use 250ml because is a lot easier to calculate and measure the chems and this system seems to be working for other people too. I also use the 5ltr kit, I thought they only sell this kit in 5ltr packs in UK.

Definitely i would not risk a single sheet of film, that's why I'm only doing 2 batches at the moment. At the end of day, I'm saving a lot of money anyway, against the cost of using a lab. But there is always a reverse on every coin and if i can safely reduce the cost even further I'm willing to learn how to do it.

At the moment using the system i described earlier, if my maths are correct, my processing cost/sheet is 32p but if i could do a third batch the cost would go down to 21p/sheet.

Can you please tell me where to buy the anti-oxidant gas from?

[timparkin]

I only use 250ml because is a lot easier to calculate and measure the chems and this system seems to be working for other people too. I also use the 5ltr kit, I thought they only sell this kit in 5ltr packs in UK.

Definitely i would not risk a single sheet of film, that's why I'm only doing 2 batches at the moment. At the end of day, I'm saving a lot of money anyway, against the cost of using a lab. But there is always a reverse on every coin and if i can safely reduce the cost even further I'm willing to learn how to do it.

At the moment using the system i described earlier, if my maths are correct, my processing cost/sheet is 32p but if i could do a third batch the cost would go down to 21p/sheet.

Can you please tell me where to buy the anti-oxidant gas from?

Hi,

I'm doing a third run with my chemicals and haven't had a problem with the third run (although I observe the same depletion per run). I have also tried two batches of 6 with the same 250ml of chemicals and this worked fine too.. I have a feeling that the amount of chemicals to cover the film is a lot less than 250ml and so going down to 210 shouldnt make a huge difference. Using two batches of six sheets does increase the risk of transparencies accidentally touching each other but I only know of a single occasion that this has happened to one person. It does reduce the amount of time spent next to the processor too...

Out of interest, what times are you using?

Tim

[Joanna Carter]

Using two batches of six sheets does increase the risk of transparencies accidentally touching each other but I only know of a single occasion that this has happened to one person.

I'm wondering if this fear of touching sheets may be down to the model of reel used. I use the 2509n with its "wings" to retain the film in its guides. But, when I was in France, my friend asked me to load some sheets in a 2509 reel; now that was scary. The process of loading film was much more difficult and keeping the previously inserted sheets in place whlst inserting further sheets was much more difficult than with the more modern reel and I made several mistakes of loading film in the wrong slot. I would not have the same confidence of the sheets staying in place with the old reels.

I get the feeling that you may not need the wings in the new reel but I feel happier using them for that little extra peace of mind.

[Bogdan_B]

Hi Tim,

Thanks for your reply. The times I'm using are the ones from the instruction manual(6.30/6/6) with a 30 sec increase for the second batch for the chems and changed the washing to your method although i tend to fill the water bottles up to the top (could not see in your videos if you do the same). I have a lift with my CPE-2 plus, and always start the timer after i pour the chems( i don't think it make a difference but that's the way i do it and its good to be consistent).
Do you add/subtract anything for the third batch or just use the times from the manual (7.30/7/7)?. Also have you tried a third batch with 6 sheets?

Joanne,

I'm using the same type of reel and find it very easy to load without using the massively expensive sheet film loader. I use just 4 sheets of film because my little brain tells me the chems will flow better, than with 6 sheets.
According to the math i did earlier using 6 sheets/batch x 3 batches will take the cost/sheet down to 12p, only if the chem are used before oxidizing.

[timparkin]

Hi Tim,

Thanks for your reply. The times I'm using are the ones from the instruction manual(6.30/6/6) with a 30 sec increase for the second batch for the chems and changed the washing to your method although i tend to fill the water bottles up to the top (could not see in your videos if you do the same). I have a lift with my CPE-2 plus, and always start the timer after i pour the chems( i don't think it make a difference but that's the way i do it and its good to be consistent).
Do you add/subtract anything for the third batch or just use the times from the manual (7.30/7/7)?. Also have you tried a third batch with 6 sheets?

I use extended times after comparing a and b sheets where a sheets were sent to peak imaging and b sheets done myself.

I use 7.00, 6.30 6.30 for my first run and then increase by 30 secs for second and final (so final is 8.00 7.30, 7.30)

Now these could be different because of temperature or my particular timing but they give me good results.

I start timer once pouring is finished..

I'm using the same type of reel and find it very easy to load without using the massively expensive sheet film loader. I use just 4 sheets of film because my little brain tells me the chems will flow better, than with 6 sheets.
According to the math i did earlier using 6 sheets/batch x 3 batches will take the cost/sheet down to 12p, only if the chem are used before oxidizing.

I would be converned about any more than 14 sheets - I'm pretty sure you will exhaust the chemicals beyond this point. (the max I've done is 14 and I think that there was some coolness in the results of the final batch).

Tim

[Joanna Carter]

I'm using the same type of reel and find it very easy to load without using the massively expensive sheet film loader. I use just 4 sheets of film because my little brain tells me the chems will flow better, than with 6 sheets.
According to the math i did earlier using 6 sheets/batch x 3 batches will take the cost/sheet down to 12p, only if the chem are used before oxidizing.

Yes, I have an old film loader that someone gave me and, although I had a go with it in the light, I have decided it is a lot easier, with the new reels, not to bother with it.

I would agree with Tim that three batches of six sheets would exhaust the developer before the third batch. Fuji Hunt's data sheet specifies that 5ltrs can process 200 sheets of 4x5; thus 10 sheets per 250ml. anything you get beyond that is unofficial and the quality would not be guaranteed.

You could, theoretically, use 300ml to develop two batches of 6 sheets.

[timparkin]

I'm using the same type of reel and find it very easy to load without using the massively expensive sheet film loader. I use just 4 sheets of film because my little brain tells me the chems will flow better, than with 6 sheets.
According to the math i did earlier using 6 sheets/batch x 3 batches will take the cost/sheet down to 12p, only if the chem are used before oxidizing.

Yes, I have an old film loader that someone gave me and, although I had a go with it in the light, I have decided it is a lot easier, with the new reels, not to bother with it.

I would agree with Tim that three batches of six sheets would exhaust the developer before the third batch. Fuji Hunt's data sheet specifies that 5ltrs can process 200 sheets of 4x5; thus 10 sheets per 250ml. anything you get beyond that is unofficial and the quality would not be guaranteed.

You could, theoretically, use 300ml to develop two batches of 6 sheets.

I have once non-theoretically used 250ml to develop 14 sheets in three batches and it wasn't a disaster... I think I'd limit it to 12 sheets with 250ml though (I know Richard Childs has been doing this for all of his transparencies and I haven't seen a problem with his end results.. although photo quality may not be just a result of the developer in Richard's case

Tim

p.s. Has anybody any idea where all the first dev goes? Could it just be 'surface tension' holding on to some in the drum or is the film actually absorbing liquid? (I imagine probably a combination of the two)

[Joanna Carter]

I have once non-theoretically used 250ml to develop 14 sheets in three batches and it wasn't a disaster... I think I'd limit it to 12 sheets with 250ml though

OK, this is obviously a Yorkshire thing isn't it here in Lancashire we'd rather waste developer than film

Has anybody any idea where all the first dev goes? Could it just be 'surface tension' holding on to some in the drum or is the film actually absorbing liquid? (I imagine probably a combination of the two)

Well, the film definitely curls with the emulsion on the outside before it's dry and then reverses that curl afterwards; which would indicate that the emulsion is significantly "bigger" when wet. But, then again, it has to go through a few more baths; do the subsequent chemicals show the same loss, or do they gain what the prior bath lost?

[Bogdan_B]

Yes, I have an old film loader that someone gave me and, although I had a go with it in the light, I have decided it is a lot easier, with the new reels, not to bother with it.

I would agree with Tim that three batches of six sheets would exhaust the developer before the third batch. Fuji Hunt's data sheet specifies that 5ltrs can process 200 sheets of 4x5; thus 10 sheets per 250ml. anything you get beyond that is unofficial and the quality would not be guaranteed.

You could, theoretically, use 300ml to develop two batches of 6 sheets.

Hmmm.....i just checked the manual and you are right they say, as a general guideline, 200 sheets of 4x5. But my little brain tells me 1000ml/50ml= 20 times(or mixtures,or whatever....you get my point) and then (20 times x 4 sheets) x 3 batches = 240 sheets . Am i missing something?

Well, the film definitely curls with the emulsion on the outside before it's dry and then reverses that curl afterwards; which would indicate that the emulsion is significantly "bigger" when wet. But, then again, it has to go through a few more baths; do the subsequent chemicals show the same loss, or do they gain what the prior bath lost?

That's the thing, it only happens with the First Dev, the rest of the chemicals don't gain or loose, or if they do is unnoticeable.

[timparkin]

Hmmm.....i just checked the manual and you are right they say, as a general guideline, 200 sheets of 4x5. But my little brain tells me 1000ml/50ml= 20 times(or mixtures,or whatever....you get my point) and then (20 times x 4 sheets) x 3 batches = 240 sheets . Am i missing something?

That sounds like they are saying 10 sheets is 'optimum for perfect results'. My presumption is that a couple of sheets extra fits within 'acceptable limits' for a not so fussy photographer who will always be scanning anyway.

Tim

[Bogdan_B]

That sounds like they are saying 10 sheets is 'optimum for perfect results'. My presumption is that a couple of sheets extra fits within 'acceptable limits' for a not so fussy photographer who will always be scanning anyway.

Tim

I think all manufacturers like to cover their backside and Fuji or Jobo (with the 270ml written on the 2523 that I'm using) are no exeptions. And especially when they use words like ''General guideline" makes me think that i can process 240 sheets with a 5ltr Kit.
The manual also says: "The capacity is a only indicative and can very greatly, depending on working conditions,storage,type and brand of film,etc...." witch sound to me like ''We are short staffed, its recession, this is what we think and if you want to do more tests, do it in your own time with your own money'' - only joking of course.