Wilkinson 50-60 processorgreenspun.com : LUSENET : Large format photography : One Thread
Dear friends and contributors, here I am again to put a question to the distinguished large format community concerning a developing problem (not my own but my films!). I've just bought a Wilkinson 50-60 processor from a shop wher I normally buy many second hand photographica, it appear to be a processor for colour prints but I intend to use it for my 8x10 negatives because the cost of developing those at a regular lab is sincerely disgusting . I know many would suggest tray developing but Thanks I pass on that! Too many problems, I believe! Does anybody know this machine? Would anybody have instructions? Anybody have any Idea of the maker? Itlooks a very well made (but on a small scale) piece of machinery, I am rather concerned on its rotating speed (possibly too fast) any advice on this (in general terms of course if you don't know the machine......). Pre-soaking would affect developing times? Thanks for everything and I hope you can help me otherwise: Who wants to buy a Wilkinson 50-60?.........just a joke! Regards Andrea
-- andrea milano (email@example.com), December 05, 1999
Andrea! Meanwhile you are waiting for an answer to your question, you could start trying tray development. You are not shooting two dozens of films daily, no, I guess? Well, then it's simple. Put three trays on the table in your darkroom, one with dev.. and so on. Now, in the dark, put just ONE sheet in the developer. Develope it by rocking the tray gently, and when you have it in the fix, you'll start developing the next sheet. Problematic, isn't it? And because you have already one film developed, you can examine if it is proper done, so you can push or pull the next. In half an hour you have three to four sheets developed, depending of course of the dev.time.
And when you find out that your tabletop roller machine takes one hour to get warm, will scratch and make streaks, needs to be washed before and after every use, you can start developing in trays again! Ex cathedra... Jan
-- Jan... (firstname.lastname@example.org), December 06, 1999.
I don't know the particular machine you're referring to. However, I find that a longish presoak is a good idea when using the constant agitation of a rotary system. I think Jobo recommends a 5 minute presoak. This is supposed to counter the excessive contrast that would otherwise result from the constant agitation. I haven't experimented with speed of rotation but I would think that with most rotary forms of processing, the developer is in constant motion whether it is 1 rotation per second or 5. To that extent, I believe the speed of rotation is perhaps a minor variable and should not affect the negative too much (assuming, of course, that the speed is not so incredibly slow that there is some time when the film has a layer of developer just sitting on the surface). I say this based on rotary processing I've done in BTZS type tubes and using a Jobo tank manually on a roller base. I'm pretty sure that my manual rotation could not have been incredibly precise from one run to the next in terms of rpm, nor could it have matched the wobbly rotation of the BTZS type tubes. I, however, cannot tell the difference between the negatives. I have come to prefer rotary processing over trays for the simple reason that it reduces the amount of handling of the wet film, which is good where a bull-in-a-dark-china-shop soul like me is concerned. Hope this helps. Good luck. DJ
-- N Dhananjay (email@example.com), December 07, 1999.
Thank you DJ, You confirmed my suppositions but again I am still looking for somebody with a specific knowledge of this machine and possibly an instruction booklet laying somewhere.
Concerning Jan's contribution or rather the lack of it, I do not understand why certain people have to give voice to their frustrations here on this forum! B... Hell! If you cannot give the required advice and have to resort to blunt sarcasm. If you do not agree, just make politely your point and stick to the rules of communication in use between civilazed people. This Forum has lots of Good readers or contributors but also some weardos who flatulenty speak(or rather write) just to amuse their microdeveloped ego. Get real Jan, what's bugging you?
Thanks to all those who honestly partecipate to the forum.
-- andrea milano (firstname.lastname@example.org), December 07, 1999.
My apologies, Andrea, if you really got hurted. But I was just giving an answer to the too often occure statement that tray processing should be problematic. If I just had mentioned, it's not, had this explained anything. I wanted also make a point of roller transports machines suitability for fine art film processing. We are writing here for other people too, do not take it too personally. With best wishes, Jan
-- Jan... (email@example.com), December 07, 1999.
Thanks for the honest apologies, sorry if I got angry and took your entry too seriously on the sarcastic notes but I am sick and tired of the bashing that one has to take on this forum every time one has an opinion which differs from somebody else. However, I am not sure what you mean about roller processor, I am not using one neither I am remotely planning to use one. I'll be using, hopefully, a drum processor, I am not sure we are talking of the same thing. I understand a roller processor to be a processor for paper with several baths in which a numer of rotating cylinders drad a sheet from one place to another of the processor. Am I right? Well, I intend to use a rotating drum with an insert for 8x10 (Paper an hopefully film), limited use of chemicals, no contact between machine and emulsion. I'll give it a try. From my reaction to your contiution you can see that me and DJ have in common the fat of being an elephant in a pitch dark china store! I like machines even when this make life complicated. Developing in tray is not for me, sorry but that's the way the cookie (for me ) crumbles, no harm done and incident forgotten. Take care and lots of fun.
-- andrea milano (firstname.lastname@example.org), December 08, 1999.
Sorry about typing mistakes, one of them being Drad instead of Drag
-- andrea milano (email@example.com), December 08, 1999.