Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/01/02
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]At 09:25 PM 1/1/98 -0800, you wrote: > >I know two pros who finally got a Jobo and do their own work, primarily >because they were unhappy with lab consistency. I have similar >complaints and use labs which are very good. But the consistency of a >dip tank (Refrema) is just not as consistent as one shot. I read an >article recently by Ric Ergenbright, the travel shooter out of Bend >Oregon who uses Jobo (started because nearest good lab is Portland), but >figures with all his processing for originals and dupe film, he saves >SAVES $20,000 a year. Yes, he is prolific and makes numerous dupes. >One member of the stock photo list also discussed the need for Jobo >processing in his duping system to maintain the day to day color >consistency by using one shot. > >donal > He may save $20,000 gross but to save this much would require a full time lab technician. That's a lot of film. So the salary should be subtracted out. Also the kits aren't always consistent. I know from years of use. What I settled-in with is: a water de-ionizer and a pH meter, NaOH and H2SO4. Mixed all chemistry with de-ionized water. Tested the first and color developers with the pH meter and adjusted the pH (via NaOH & H2SO4). And don't forget that a pH meter takes lots of maintenance. Calibration with buffers. Storage problems. The resultant chemistry was split into one-shot size portions, stored in glass brown bottles, using glass beads to take-up the extra air space. The rotary processor drum must be warmed to processing temperature BEFORE starting processing. The drum will suck the heat out of the one-shot of first developer and cause low D-max (muddy looking slides). You cannot run the stabilizer through the processor as it can cause contamination. So you stabilize separately. Then either squeegee or not, and hang in a DUST FREE drying space. To push or pull a single roll or sheet, requires a full shot of chemistry. Not very economical. If you walk into your lab and start from scratch (mix chemistry, adjust pH, load film, process, hang to dry, then CLEAN-UP... we're talking a minimum of four hours. Probably more. This is if you are going to do it correctly. You can skip steps, but your results will suffer and never be consistent. I have also found that fresh "just mixed" chemistry is "hot" and needs to age a few hours before use. There is "three step" E6 chemistry but it is classed as amateur and when it came out, was not recommended for rotary processor use. That may have changed by now. It is a LOT OF WORK to produce properly processed and consistent E6 transparencies. I know from years of experience. The control strips that pro/commercial labs run and their modem link to Kodak's Tech-Net will provide the necessary adjustments to keep the line in balance. I don't know about other labs, but Calypso (and I'm sure many other labs) work very hard at maintaining an in balance E6 process. I can personally vouch for Calypso as I've run separate 4x5 sheets, on different days, of the exact same subject/exposure and ended up with identical 4x5 transparencies. Why would I do this? When photographing with my Linhof, I shoot two sheets of film for every subject. When I get back, I process only one sheet of each pair. I then evaluate the transparency and figure out how to process the second sheet. Most of the time it gets processed normally (that's how I get two identical transparencies, processed on different days) but if my exposure was a little off, or if I want to change the mood, I'll have the second sheet pushed or pulled accordingly. With 1/8 stop steps, you can fine-tune your final transparency. I was wrong in a previous post. It's 1/8 stop increments, not 1/4 stop. This is how you bracket with a 4x5. You do it at the lab. Anyway, if I had a huge amount of E6 yearly, I probably would do what your acquaintances do. Set-up a lab, hire a lab tech, and do it in-house. Once you get a routine down, you can produce consistent results. But it sure is easier to let someone else do it... especially with two hour turn-around. Jim