Jump to content




Photo

A new development tank?


  • Please log in to reply
17 replies to this topic

#1 Friedemann Wachsmuth

Friedemann Wachsmuth
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 120 posts
  • Other
  • Hamburg, Germany

Posted 30 August 2016 - 05:57 AM

For those of you who are on facebook, please join this poll.

For those of oyu who are not, feel free to comment away here -- unfortunately, cinematography.com does not seem to have a poll option :(
 

-------------------------

 

Just imagine, hypothetically, that there would be a new development tank on the market, designed for 8mm and 16mm films of 50 or 100ft length. 

It wouldn't be a radically new design, mostly following the design of the common Lomo tank, but it would be

  • manufactured with much higher precision
  • based on modern, durable and stable plastics
  • slightly bigger to also take films that are a tad longer than 50/100ft
  • easy to load without hassle 
  • easier and faster to be filled/drained
  • more efficient during washing
  • compatible with all known and unknown processes
  • manufactured in the EU, with spare parts easily available
  • (maybe) extensible, so allowing larger stacks than two spirals
  • (maybe) providing a tank option with built-in temperature control
  • (maybe) providing a built-in timer that helps with process timing

Would you ne interested in buying such a thing? And what would be the most important options for you?

[  ] I'd pay $300 since that sounds a lot better than the Lomo option

[  ] I'd pay $500 since I know this is hard to manufacture
[  ] I'd really want the option of larger spiral stacks
[  ] I'd pay even more for the full setup, especially if it really becomes a modular system
[  ] I'd really want the built-in temperature control
[  ] I'd really want the the built-in process timer
[  ] I absolutely want the ability to develop 100' in one strand without cutting it in half

[  ] other: _____________


  • 1




#2 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 18789 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 30 August 2016 - 08:15 AM

Are you talking about an ECN-2 processor with a remjet removal step?


  • 0

#3 Heikki Repo

Heikki Repo
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 350 posts
  • Director
  • Finland

Posted 30 August 2016 - 09:42 AM

Are you talking about an ECN-2 processor with a remjet removal step?

 

I'm quite certain this is for processing films without remjet, E-6 and BW processes.


  • 0

#4 aapo lettinen

aapo lettinen
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 704 posts
  • Other
  • Finland

Posted 30 August 2016 - 09:44 AM

I think the biggest disadvantage of the Lomo tanks is the low capacity per spiral. with 16mm the splitting can be tolerated but with 35mm it makes the tank unusable for anything other than camera/film tests or shooting single separate shots for art projects. so the single spiral uninterrupted capacity is the key here I think, if you are making 8mm/16mm compatible gear it would need to be 100ft minimum, maybe 200ft option would also be good with ability to stack at least two of such spirals per tank without any modifications


  • 0

#5 Friedemann Wachsmuth

Friedemann Wachsmuth
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 120 posts
  • Other
  • Hamburg, Germany

Posted 30 August 2016 - 02:01 PM

Thats all good feedback. Keep the wishes and needs coming :)


  • 0

#6 Jesse Andrewartha

Jesse Andrewartha
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 27 posts
  • Other

Posted 30 August 2016 - 04:24 PM

A metal spool or a plastic design that can be wet-loaded would be great... that way if you have a way to remove remjet then you could do that then load the film onto the spiral wet.


  • 0

#7 Gregg MacPherson

Gregg MacPherson
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1524 posts
  • Other
  • New Zealand

Posted 30 August 2016 - 06:45 PM

In the 80s I had a stainless steel 200' open spiral.  The only problem I had apart from lots of fixer fumes was that it scratched the cell side sometimes.  Otherwise,  200' was really usefull.  A 100' Lomo style tank would be great.  I don't know if I would be interested in extras beyond what a Lomo is.  So,  a 100' lomo style tank with better materials...


  • 0

#8 Antonio Bunt

Antonio Bunt
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 130 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 31 August 2016 - 07:52 PM

How about something like this:
image.jpeg
image.jpeg
  • 0

#9 Gregg MacPherson

Gregg MacPherson
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1524 posts
  • Other
  • New Zealand

Posted 31 August 2016 - 08:35 PM

Intersting find Antonio. I wonder what the original application or use was.

The 200' spiral I used to have was used by a TV film cameraman working around the time that broadcast TV started in New Zealand. Live TV using, I think, tube cameras, was simultaneously recorded onto 16mm, processed on this stainless open spiral, then the film was quickly flown to the next city so that the delayed live show could be broadcast.

The telercording film, I processed quite a lot as camera stock, was very fine grained, not very dense blacks, orthochromatic (blue sensitive).

The idea of a spiral tank suits the modern paradigm (over identified modality of thought) where everyone wants to own for themselves. But if a small co-operative group work together, a modest continuous B&W processor may be possible. They can be quite primitive physically, the replenishment drips being just small clamps on the plastic feeder tubes for example.
  • 0

#10 Antonio Bunt

Antonio Bunt
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 130 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 02 September 2016 - 09:56 PM

Indeed It was Gregg, but I don't remember where I found those images.
I guess it was used for the same application as your spiral. Do you still own that 200 ft spiral? Can you post some pictures?
For the Aaton Minima loads is great.
I am very interested in getting to process myself. I have access to Lomo tanks and Morse ones but for longer loads thats a problem.
I am part of a local co-operative. It will be great to have a process, primitive as may be. How do you imagine that feeder? Like the ones in pro labs?
  • 0

#11 Antonio Bunt

Antonio Bunt
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 130 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 02 September 2016 - 10:01 PM

A metal spool or a plastic design that can be wet-loaded would be great... that way if you have a way to remove remjet then you could do that then load the film onto the spiral wet.

l
I used baking soda for that with great results. I saw it on the web and tried it. I used borax before but it was too dangerous and not environmentally friendly. It is just and additonal step in the process.
  • 0

#12 Gregg MacPherson

Gregg MacPherson
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1524 posts
  • Other
  • New Zealand

Posted 02 September 2016 - 11:42 PM

Antonio,  I worked with friends in the 80s who had such a continuous B&W reversal processor. 

 

They began with an existing factory made one,  about 1200x500x1200 size. It wasn't very fast but that didn't really matter.  You can calculate the speed required by the immersion time and the developer etc.  They threw out the original tanks and made new ones from PVC pipe,  with some connecting tubes at the bottom for some.  They kept the origional drive system,  which used a rubber surfaced friction drive rollers on the drive shaft at the top.  The other rollers were factory made 16/35 ones I think,  with the bottom roller on a wire shaft so that one could controll the immersion time easily.  I think there was a heater in the bottom bath that housed the tanks,  so that controlling temperature was not hard.

 

There was a magazine from a (contact?)  printer on the feed end,  and a take up system like from a projector on the output end.

 

There were some plastic squeeges sourced from the industry.  The only problem I remember from the results was that we sometimes got feint grey spots from the ping pong bat rubber we had used on the drive rollers.  Personally,  I wonder if a single drive sprocket at the output end might be OK for such a small processor.  But I'm sure friction rollers are OK if done right.


Edited by Gregg MacPherson, 02 September 2016 - 11:44 PM.

  • 0

#13 Antonio Bunt

Antonio Bunt
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 130 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 04 September 2016 - 03:22 PM

It would be great to have the resources and skills to build such a thing!
I own a Morse tank and I have access to Lomo tanks but still, the loads are limited.
Hopefully a solution will be around the corner.
In the mean time, I keep on thinking about how to process bigger film loads.
  • 0

#14 Giorgio Taricco

Giorgio Taricco
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 116 posts
  • Other
  • Toino Italy

Posted 04 September 2016 - 05:07 PM

http://www.ebay.it/i...=STRK:MEBIDX:IT

 

I was thinking to buy it some time ago.

 

G.


  • 0

#15 Doug Palmer

Doug Palmer
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 198 posts
  • Camera Operator

Posted 05 September 2016 - 04:08 AM

That L & F processor looks really interesting, if in fact it was actually sold and used ?  In those days of course (early 60s ?) $675 was a lot of money.  It would be several thousand now maybe. 

I'm not sure we really need another Lomo type tank.  OK it would be made of better plastic material,  but I think it would be best to concentrate on manufacturing a simple kind of open drum like they used back in pre-war days, but rotating on bearings in a light-proof container.  Ideally you could also load it in daylight, but maybe feeding the film in the dark is easier, if a darkroom is available.  It could be hand-turned but for a few dollars more you could add a motor.    A trough in the light-proof housing contains the chemicals which can be quickly drained and added through hoses.  Maybe the whole thing could stand in a  tray of water sitting on a darkroom heater.  But the actual processor could be made for not too much money, if there was enough demand worldwide. The open drum could be adjustable for 8, 16 and 35mm.


  • 0

#16 Glenn Brady

Glenn Brady
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 308 posts
  • Other

Posted 05 September 2016 - 07:34 AM

A new-in-the-box L & F Cine Processor like the one shown above sold at eBay last year for $500.00.  It would've been a big improvement over my Morse G-3 tank (and its Arkay clone), but I didn't see it in time.  Micro-Record made a motorized film processor that, as I recall, looked like the Morse, but I've been unable to find one.  I'd be interested in an affordable and reliable motorized processor handling film in 8mm and 16mm widths.

 

Has anyone used the Jobo CPP3 processor with a Super 8 processing drum (code EXPERT)? 


  • 0

#17 Pavan Deep

Pavan Deep
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 267 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • UK

Posted 05 September 2016 - 07:55 AM

I use a Jobo CPE 2 processor with a custom built rack to process colour reversal Super 8, it's very easy to use and the results are very good.

Pav
  • 0

#18 Wilfried E. Keil

Wilfried E. Keil

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 7 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Germany

Posted 13 September 2016 - 03:35 PM

For Super 8mm we bought the JOBO 3018 Expert Super 8 Drum (costs 850 Euros) for our CPP 2 processor. But we still had no time to use it.

I think I will use it with E-6 and also with D-94 A. I also want to test Kodak Vision 3 with the Remjet removal chemistry and the C-41 process.

I am exiting how good the results will be.

Friedemann Wachsmuth has there some really interesting films and articles on his website!

 

It would be very nice to have a drum for 16mm 100 feet for a CPP 2 and the other JOBO processors. I would buy it!

 

Normally I give 16mm and 35mm to a lab. But to make some experiments in the development a tank for 16mm 100 feet would be very interesting. But without cutting in a half!!!

But if you only have a tank like the Lomo tank, then it must be cheap, because then you cannot get constant results in the color processes.

And if you will build an own new processor, which costs very much, then I think it is only interesting if you can feed it with 400 feet and also 35mm (motion picture film).

Then it would be a nice option to make some crazy experiments with "natural" developers.
I want to test some of this "natural" developers first with 35mm photo film.

But how nice it would be to make a redwine development with 16mm 100 feet!

So maybe I would buy a tank for 500$...

 

I am interested in this, because I am planing an experimental feature film and for some scences if would be maybe nice to use some not normal developers...

With this I mean redwine, caffeol and so on.


  • 0


rebotnix Technologies

Rig Wheels Passport

Willys Widgets

Glidecam

Paralinx LLC

Aerial Filmworks

Zylight

Broadcast Solutions Inc

CineLab

Ritter Battery

Abel Cine

Tai Audio

Visual Products

Pro 8mm

CineTape

The Slider

Technodolly

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Visual Products

Zylight

Ritter Battery

Technodolly

The Slider

Tai Audio

CineLab

Pro 8mm

Rig Wheels Passport

Willys Widgets

rebotnix Technologies

CineTape

Glidecam

Aerial Filmworks

Abel Cine

Paralinx LLC