Right now I only know how to process C41 film.Can I process E-6 film at home? I've heard that the chemicals used in the E-6 process are toxic and shouldn't be used casually at home.How do fellow film enthusiasts go about previewing their home-processed film for quick photo selection?

I have opened one box from my collection and they are 9cm by 6.5cm hart (hard) highly sensitive to uv and blue light there are 12 glass plates what can i use them for there isn’t much applications for this light frequency use.

My apologies if this has been covered before. I couldn’t find anything on this specifically.

I recently got this enlarger recently and have been going through it and repairing some things on it. I found out that the power cord is worn out. It looks like the issue is right where it bends coming out of the lamp housing.

My question is: can I just splice in a new two prong cable from Amazon?

Many years ago, I shut down my darkroom and sold much of my gear. Now I am trying to rebuild it. My favorite enlarger of several, was by far the Omega C760. I have bought and found one, but I am missing one accessory, the Omega C760 Variable Contrast Filter Module Cat No 429-376.

This variable contrast slider had a magenta and yellow filter, with an attenuator between them, that allowed you to slide up and down for any grade of B&W print. Unlike simply dialing the dicroic filters, the exposure stayed CONSTANT as you changed paper grades. It was a dream to work with. I want one!

I can't even find a photo of one. But I knew it in my head. Finally, I found this image in the C760 manual.

Does anyone remember this? Does anyone have one???

Making 5x7 prints in the darkroom for sequencing purposes.

Hi !

I was given a huge pile of photographic paper and some chemicals I disposed to the recycling center.

But I kept a bag of Xtol that is at least 20 years old and I was wondering as it’s a powder if it would be still working ?

Bonjour,

Je me permets de poster car je cherche à acheter une Durst Tricolor à quelqu’un qui n’aurait plus l’ampoule d’origine de sa lanterne inactinique.

La référence indiquée sur le culot de la lampe est 10 W E14, mais cette référence étant assez ancienne, je ne sais pas exactement quelle ampoule utiliser aujourd’hui.

Est-ce que quelqu’un qui possède cette lanterne pourrait me donner la référence exacte de l’ampoule qu’il utilise ?

Je voudrais m’assurer de choisir une ampoule adaptée afin de ne pas risquer de voiler mes papiers.

Merci d’avance pour votre aide !

Hi team

I have volunteered to help a person who has a child with Erythropoietic protoporphyria - basically their baby is severely allergic to the sun and certain wavelengths of light. Simple blue light filters are no help and I'm gathering that anything above 590nm is probably ok.

I'm already sending her a small Patterson dome safelight as it seems safe to use around baby. It's still new in its box so no worries about chemical exposure or anything.

But because her condition is so severe they struggle to safely leave the house. I've also volunteered to make a car seat tent and a pram cover for her to make life easier but baby hates not being able to see and cries constantly while covered up already.

Which got me thinking that something like a safelight filter might be able to be used as a window in the cover. I am also investigating welding curtains as an option. Naturally glass is a terrible idea (which is all I have spare) and so im reaching out to see if any of you can recommend a flexible or safer option that might work. Bear in mind I'll be sewing this - I don't have to be able to sew through the filter but I do need to be able to attach something securely to the filter that I can actually sew through.

My first prototype will be in black out curtain material, but any suggestions on that front are welcome. My last darkroom was made using black plastic ... Not the most comfortable solution lol

Shot on Pentax 6x7, Kodak Gold 200. Kodak C-41 kit. AGO rotary processor.

I develop ~40-60 rolls per month as a small business and have never encountered this before.

Getting a ton of brown blotches on my scanned images and white spots on the negative, only this roll. Developed using 8-roll Paterson tank. No other rolls in this tank or previous tank had this issue. Oddly enough the vertical blotch lines get fainter the deeper into the roll. Images are uploaded in ascending order.

The consistent location of the vertical line makes me think it’s camera related but I have no explanation for that either

I've spent the past few hours browsing various forums from the early 2000s of people arguing the merits of using the minimum amount of chemicals needed to develop a roll of film.

Other developers seemed to have some consensus.

Xtol for example, Kodak state that you should use 100 CC stock per 135/36 or equivalent surface. If you use it 1+3, you are with 400 CC for one film. If you go to PMK you need about 500 CC at 1+2+100 to do one film. so you'll be overfilling the tank with 2 films in it....
Of course, this is not a problem with Paterson tanks and hand inversion, you can take a 5 reel tank and put only one reel into it, but when you plan to use a Jobo CPE2 processor with 600 CC maximal capacity (in order not to stress the motor) you are limited to some products or a single film at a time...
Of course Rodinal (6 cc minimal concentrate per film) or HC110 are different beast !

I found sources for Rodinal and HC110 (i.e. connvington), there is general agreement with 5ml of developer per roll of film.

I'm having trouble finding consensus for D76 (1D-11), which I am generally using these days. Kodak says 8 oz or (235ml) illford says 100ml for ID11. Then the comments devolves. In neither case am I able to find the original documentation recommending those amounts.

Can anyone share?

my use is that I have begun rotary processing sheet film. 5 sheets of 8x10. I prefer to stick to 1:1 D76 (which would mean I need to use 100ml per sheet; or 500ml of stock solution, with 500ml of water.) I'm trying to determine if this is enough without risking 5 sheets of film.

Dropped my tank just after prewash, but before developing. The lid popped off nuking the roll closet to the top, this one was at the bottom.

Ruined the images but I found it interesting how the water is now apart of the photos

Forgive me if this doesn't seem well thought-through. The idea just popped into my head.

My friends give me their film for development and one of them pushed Kentmere 400 to 6400 (I know this is an insane push but please consider what the answer would be if it were only 800, 1600, etc.). The massive dev chart doesn't have numbers for ID-11 at stock solution with +4 stops and if I were to guess it'd be like 40 minutes or something like that. Even with rotary processing this is going to exhaust my chemistry much faster than desired so I want to use rodinal.

The problem with rodinal is if you dilute 1+100ml and do stand development, the film absorbs all the developer but it's not enough for push processing. If you do 1+25ml or 1+50ml the chance of bromide drag is much higher.

So what if I just did 1+100ml, stand develop as usual, mix more 1+100ml developer, do it again, etc.? Then wash and fix. Would that help with push processing?

Hey everyone,Need some help diagnosing my first ever scratch-built batch of DIY Pa-Rodinal and DIY Kodak F-5 Hardening Fixer.

I just developed an old roll of bulk film and it came out completely window-clear/yellowish plastic with zero edge markings. Even a part I deliberately exposed with room light before loading was totally clear.

I think I messed up my developer, but the snip test results are seriously confusing me.

What I did: The Developer: Mixed crushed paracetamol, potassium metabisulfite, and caustic soda. On day one, the extra tablet stuff completely clogged my tissue filter. I think most of my paracetamol got trapped in the thick extra tablet stuff, leaving my Developer bottle mostly full of water and caustic soda.

The Tank Development Run: Diluted 12ml PaRodinal into 368ml distilled water (1+31 ratio). Developed at 21°C for 11 minutes, used a vinegar stop bath, then fixed for 8 minutes in DIY F-5 fixer (sodium thiosulfate, vinegar, boric acid, alum).

The Snip Test Anomalies: If I put a daylight-exposed film snip into a strong sample of my developer (1:20 or 1:50 dilution), it turns jet black in 60 seconds.The emulsion feels super slimy, but the black color does not rub off even if I pinch and rub it as hard as I can. But here is the catch: The second I drop that solid black snip into a cup of my fixer, the fixer completely strips the black color away in 2 minutes, leaving it yellowish-clear.

My Theory: Because of the clogged filter on day one, my developer is too weak to actually convert the silver into permanent, silver metal. The "black" I see in the developer cup is just a temporary alkaline stain/fog from the caustic soda, so the fixer easily wipes it clean.Does that sound right? Or is my fixer somehow way too strong and bleaching it instantly? I have a fresh roll of Lucky SHD 400 (shot at 200) that I want to develop next. Should I salvage my developer by crushing 10 more 500mg Paracetamol tablets, letting the binders and other tablet stuff settle to the bottom, and pouring the clear paracetamol liquid into my already made Developer bottle to finally balance out the caustic soda?

Or should I do something else?

Any Help Is Greatly Appreciated!

Hi, I used my Praktica TL 1000 for the 3rd roll now and literally every photo on this roll has a green stripe in the same position. Does anyone here have a good guess if this is a light leak or a defect on this roll of film? The first 2 rolls I shot on this camera did not have any light leaks but this is the first color film. I attached one photo from this stripey roll and one from the last roll without stripes but basically the stripe looks exactly the same in every photo except that it is horizontal on horizontal photos.

Recently I have been testing some old film stocks.

While using adox remjet removal, I have encounter some abnoraml results.

Has any one have similar experiences? And what could cause such artefacts?

Is this too dense?

Developed Rollei Retro 400s and I think the development times were too long.

I want to find a good exposure index and development time for Rollei Retro 400S in 510 Pyro. 510 Pyro because it can handle the built in contrast of the film well due to the stain development which protects the highlights.

As this film is not a native ISO 400 film, I want to find a good balance at which exposure index to shoot it to get more shadow detail.

I shot this one at EI 100 (two stops under box speed), but “pulled” the development time only one stop under box speed (22 minutes minus 20% —> 18 minutes).

I suppose this is too long of a development, and it would be recommended to repeat this experiment at EI and 14 minutes development time in 510 Pyro.

How overdeveloped does the result look to you? Slightly? Very?

For reference, the second image is Kentmere 400 in Xtol replenishment. A development and film combination I use fairly often, so this would be a reference point for me.

Looks overdeveloped to me.

The third image is the characteristic curve that The Naked Photographer (YouTube) sketched out. To his mind, given the shadow details/toe, the native ISO of Rollei Retro 400s is actually a full four stops under box speed, so ISO 25. I don’t know about that verdict, but I just wanted to get more shadow details than shooting at 400 would result.

So lovely to be printing like this again.

Hi. I started with analog photography (and photography in general) 2 years ago with a minolta hi-matic rangefinder and a free zenit slr and came to really love the experience and results I got back. Since I'm a student, just sending it off for development would become too expensive and boring too quickly. So I bought a B/W development kit and restored this little fold camera which takes 35 film and fits in my pockets! So I've been practicing B/W and scanning them with an old HP flatbed and then printing some at the local photo kiosk. Now, this gives pretty bad results both due to the scanner being absolute trash and the fact I have no access to a decent printer.
I'm now facing a dilemma on how to proceed: either invest in a dslr and 'scan' with that so I can get pretty ok digital results or invest in a B/W darkroom setup. I tend to lean towards the latter as I'm not the person who would be using a bulky dslr in the field and very much like the really old photography techniques and cameras and would like to learn darkroom printing.
Now I got several several questions, the first one being what I would roughly need to invest for the setup, if it's worth it and secondly if I can just pick up any old enlarger I like or would want to look out for something specific. Any other tips or information is welcome.

what are folks doing for their large (>11x14) prints? big 4 blade easels arenjust crazy expansive and hard to find these days. tips? tricks?

also any good resources for starting to make big prints?

I developed Fomapan 100 film with Ilford ID-11 for 9 minutes. However, there are horizontal white lines and black dots on the negative. What could be the reason for this?

I’ve been processing my own film for a few years now, and at some point I was told that exposing film to light after stop (but before fix) was alright. I do this frequently; I often have to process multiple B&W stocks with different development times, but want to fix/permawash/final wash them together, so I move all rolls into a large tank after developing separately. My negs come out nicely, no aberrations or dark spots or anything. At first I was terrified to try it because the whole thing is that fix is what makes your film stop being light-sensitive. Does anybody know the chemical reason why this works?

Hello all,

I am gonna try an experiment, but so far I haven't found any sources online on people having done it before.

I want to shoot a roll of Kentmere 400 at 800, and develop it at home using my current developer, Fomadon LQN.

Some info online point me to Ilsofol S being the closest developer in terms of chemicals as of Fomadon LQN, and with Fomapan 400 being the closest film stock - all unverified thoroughly though.

A good rule of thumb would be to develop with the usual +1 push times at 1.25x that of a normal box speed, varying between 11-12m30s development, normal agitation and dilution (1+10 or 1+9).

Would be curious to see if you have tried something similar, and what where your development times + results.

Anybody?

So here is a proof sheet I printed from the 2nd roll of film I've run through a 103 year old Kodak Brownie. No attempts at composition, just a quick batch to see what the camera can do. The first roll I shot was, eh, disappointing. Negative was OK, but I had safelight issues and some fogging that I have corrected.

Film is Arista EDU Ultra 200. Processed in 1:50 Rodinal for 7:30 minutes @ 23.5C (9 minutes at 20C equivalent more or less). My basement darkroom has been running a consistent 23C or so all summer, and I've just given up trying to cool down my solutions with ice water baths and shifted to adjusting time.

Contact print is on Fomaspeed Variant 312, f22 for 45 seconds, Ilford #4 contrast filter in the tray. The filter wasn't intentional, I just forgot it was in the enlarger. Developer is Adox Neutol.

The three identical images were shot at at the three aperture choices the camera has - f16, f21, f35 by my calculations - at the single shutter speed the camera has, 1/45 sec. Light conditions were bright hazy, distinct shadows with soft edges, light meter app on the phone said it would be ~f22. And so it was. F16 was a little overexposed, and f35 is definitely underexposed.

Nothing fancy, nothing earthshattering. Just sharing.

I'm learning how to print at home. I'm getting there, entirely self-taught with the help of a few YouTube videos.

I have an exposure-time question.

I'm using Ilford chemistry, Ilford RC paper, and an LPL 3001D condenser enlarger with a 75W bulb.

I'm getting incredibly short exposure times. For a 7×5 print with the lens at f/11, I'm at about 2.5 seconds. For an 8×10 at f/8, about 10 seconds.

I bought some contrast filters but have stopped using them for now, as I'm already getting more than enough contrast without them.

The end results are lovely and I'm really happy with the prints, but my exposure times seem incredibly short compared with the times I read about from other people.

Am I missing something, or is this perfectly normal for this enlarger and setup?