[Leica] Re: Jobo Processors OT

[Jim Brick <jim_brick@agilent.com>]

The ATL1500 is for film only and uses the same tanks as all other
processors. You might be better off looking at an ATL-2200 or 2300 and get
the same capability as the 1500 plus more. Six rolls of 35mm instead of
four. Four rolls of 200, 8 rolls of 120. Print processing up to 20x24.
http://www.jobo-usa.com/products/2500.htm

I have an ATL-2400 and it is a godsend!!! Consistency in spades! Makes
processing any film type and printing Cibachromes trivial tasks.

Last Sunday I printed, for a guy, an 11x14 of a Grizzly bear, full face,
looking at the camera. Leica R7, Ektachrome something-or-other. I gave him
the print on Monday and he loved it. I said that his transparency was still
in my enlarger and I could make another print if he wanted. He said no.

So last night (Tuesday) I had something else to print. A 4x5 transparency.
I had been thinking about the bear and decided that I could open up the
eyes more. So I went into my darkroom, turned everything on (enlarger,
processor, water valve, etc.), and decided to make another bear print
before re-setting up for 4x5 printing. I checked the focus and it was still
right on, stuck a 11x14 sheet of Ciba paper in the easel, hit print, worked
on the eyes, put the paper in the processor, and out came a perfect print.
Matched to the print on Sunday (I still had the test print) with the eyes
opened up. 17 min dry to dry.

Finally, after all these years, I'm not fighting enlarger color drift,
focus drift, processing drift, temperature drift, etc drift...

Consistency in spades! 

Jim


At 05:48 PM 3/14/01 -0500, Steve Beyer wrote:
>Hi Everyone,
>    I know this has been discussed before and I have tried to look at the
>archives but I don't really find the information I recall reading around
>December of last year.  I would like to do in house processing of B&W, and
>E6, and who knows maybe even some C41.  I have gone to the Jobo web site and
>I think that the ATL1500 seems to be the right machine for me.  Could you
>give me your input.  Thanks
>
>Steve