Questions about AP develop tank

127 is about 40mm wide.

--
darkroommike

----------
"Ken Hart" wrote in message
...

"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

127 is about 40mm wide.

--
darkroommike

----------
"Ken Hart" wrote in message
...

"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

In article .com,
"narke" writes:

Peter wrote:

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!

Ultimately it's a question of what works best in real life. The usual
explanation for preferring inversion rotation to using the rod to twirl
the reel around is that the latter technique can set up regular currents
that can cause consistent patterns of under- or over-development,
particularly around the film's edges and sprocket holes. For this reason,
if you can't do inversion rotation, you should move the tank around on the
table top (IIRC, a quick movement of a foot or two is usually recommended)
in addition to using the rod, and don't always twirl the rod in the same
direction.

I've only used inversion rotation, so I can't comment from personal
experience how other methods might work.

--
Rod Smith,
http://www.rodsbooks.com
Author of books on Linux, FreeBSD, and networking

In article .com,
"narke" writes:

Peter wrote:

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!

Ultimately it's a question of what works best in real life. The usual
explanation for preferring inversion rotation to using the rod to twirl
the reel around is that the latter technique can set up regular currents
that can cause consistent patterns of under- or over-development,
particularly around the film's edges and sprocket holes. For this reason,
if you can't do inversion rotation, you should move the tank around on the
table top (IIRC, a quick movement of a foot or two is usually recommended)
in addition to using the rod, and don't always twirl the rod in the same
direction.

I've only used inversion rotation, so I can't comment from personal
experience how other methods might work.

--
Rod Smith,
http://www.rodsbooks.com
Author of books on Linux, FreeBSD, and networking

Stefano Bramato,

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.

Thanks. I decide to use 400cc for the suggestion of 375cc.

-
narke

Stefano Bramato,

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.

Thanks. I decide to use 400cc for the suggestion of 375cc.

-
narke

Justin Thyme worte,

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.

My tank has a little leak when inversion. You said you swir in on
direction in one second and opposite direction for another second, so
in a 5-6 seconds, you only get about 3 times of full cycle swiring? Is
it enough (Kodak suggested 5-7 cycle in 5 seconds)?

-
narke

Justin Thyme worte,

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.

My tank has a little leak when inversion. You said you swir in on
direction in one second and opposite direction for another second, so
in a 5-6 seconds, you only get about 3 times of full cycle swiring? Is
it enough (Kodak suggested 5-7 cycle in 5 seconds)?

-
narke

Justin Thyme worte,

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.

My tank has a little leak when inversion. You said you swir in on
direction in one second and opposite direction for another second, so
in a 5-6 seconds, you only get about 3 times of full cycle swiring? Is
it enough (Kodak suggested 5-7 cycle in 5 seconds)?

-
narke

narke wrote:

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?

Yes. 127 is the old vest-pocket format. It is largely obsolete
and I think only EFKE still makes the film, but there are a large
number of nice old cameras which take the 46mm wide rollfilm.

If I rotate the rod fully a circle, is it still worse than the
inversion?

I'm sure it is possible to get good results that way. If you
prefer that method, then I wouldn't change it unless you see
signs of uneven development. But I also wouldn't worry about
a slight leak from a plastic tank. Plastic tanks tend to
leak a bit, it may help to put the cap on slowly.

Some people have a nasty skin reaction from contact with
metol and other developing agents. Other people use their
bare hands in print developers for years with no evident
problems. I used to do that when I was a kid, I didn't know
that it wasn't a good idea. If you get developer on your hands,
it is a good idea to wash it off right away. If you are
really worried, or are using one of the more toxic developers,
you can protect yourself with gloves.

Peter.
--