Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/05/25
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]John Hicks wrote: > > At 08:10 AM 5/25/01 -0700, you wrote: > > >How do those of you who use the JOBO compensate for the different > >agitation of the processor vs using a small tank with manual > >agitation? > > I just went through a process to determine just that. > My goal was to find development times for the Jobo that would provide > curve matches for what I had with intermittent inversion agitation. The > developer used with D-76H 1:1 and 1:3. I used a one-minute prerinse to > avoid airbells. > The results show that there is _no_ standard compensation factor that can > be applied. > To be specific, HP5+ in both D-76H 1:1 and 1:3 required a 25% reduction > in development time, Delta 100 in both D-76H 1:1 and 1:3 required a 35% > reduction, and Delta 3200 in DD-X 1:4 required only a 15% reduction. > > John Hicks > > jbh@magicnet.net And shadow density matched?! I'd predict cutting back on development that much you'd be bound to also loose some shadow density. Mark Rabiner Portland, Oregon USA http://www.rabiner.cncoffice.com/