Hello from East Yorkshire

Damnfinecoffee

Registered User
Joined
Feb 14, 2018
Messages
8
Hi all,

Recently dove into LF photography with an MPP MK VII and I'm glad I stumbled upon this forum!
I've only made a few 4x5 negs so far as I need to invest in a proper tank/adapter (as opposed to just placing rolled up loose sheets in a Paterson tank ..the horror, I know!). Any MOD54 users here, worth the money or are the better alternatives?

I have been making use of the 6x9 roll back that came with my MPP, I'll post my first results in the other thread!

Cheers
 
Welcome, there's an unusually high membership from Yorkshire so you'll be in your element :D

Ian
 
Welcome,
Have you tried developing in trays? You do need darkness, but from the quality of your image above, you are not a novice. Otherwise, there's the Combiplan tank which is sadly out of production but still available second hand.
 
Welcome from another Yorkshireman.
Have you considered using a Paterson Orbital Colour Print Processor to develop 5x4 sheet film in? Very simple, no fuss method. Takes four sheets. Load up in the dark, then do everything with the lights on. You don't need the motor (which makes it "orbital") Simply agitate by gently rocking in a random fashion.

Alan
 
Thanks for the advice guys, definitely some food for thought.

No love for the MOD54 then? The only reason I considered it is because I already have the tank.
 
Hi From Barnsley, South Yorkshire,

On YouTube the Craig Sheaks video covers different methods. https://m.youtube.com/channel/UCuh15ZtmA4Rim6jjFKrXG4Q

I have the MOD54 and have to learn to load and use it! My research suggests agitation methods have to be gentle enough to avoid dislodging the sheets from the slots they are "sprung" onto.

I will try the MOD54 first, do let us know how you go on, lots of shared learning here (thank goodness!).

Robert
 
Hi From Barnsley, South Yorkshire,

On YouTube the Craig Sheaks video covers different methods. https://m.youtube.com/channel/UCuh15ZtmA4Rim6jjFKrXG4Q

I have the MOD54 and have to learn to load and use it! My research suggests agitation methods have to be gentle enough to avoid dislodging the sheets from the slots they are "sprung" onto.

I will try the MOD54 first, do let us know how you go on, lots of shared learning here (thank goodness!).

Robert

Thanks Robert, let me know how you find the MOD54.. I don't like the sound of dislodging :/

The next time I throw a loose sheet into my tank I need to remember to pour enough chemistry in, as it's quite obvious when you haven't haha. Although to be honest I had very little faith I would even have an image here because this box of Plus-X Pan expired in October ..1967!!

Screen Shot 2018-02-14 at 21.58.32.png
 
I bought the second outfit from Jim Edge: he sold his spare MPP on the forum (I think). Jim included a 180 Xenar and a 90 (f8) Super Angulon.

If you follow my posts you'll see I am trying to break a life-long photographic habit of spending all my cash and attention on gear so I hope to avoid searching for any more equipment!

Oh, apart from I realise I need a triple Patterson tank to fit the MOD54 (thought I had one), a dark tent to load film, some more spare dark slides...

Robert
 
I've been using the MOD54 and find it to be very good. It needs 900-1000ml solution, no matter how many sheets are loaded, so it is best used to its capacity of 6 sheets. Films of 'normal' thickness tend to stay put. Thin films, like some Rollei types, could possibly move during agitation. I use inversion agitation, and haven't had any sheets come loose so far. Loading is much easier in a dark space, rather than a changing bag, but a bag can be used with a bit of patience, and a planned approach. Having the sheets out of the box, ready to load, makes things a bit easier.
Alex


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
 
The first MOD45 holders were cut out of acrylic rather than moulded and I believe that it was these early models that acquired the reputation for erratic holding.
I suspect that many forum members have already settled on their system for developing and so are not able to give a personal recommendation for the MOD45, rather than there being any hostility to it.
 
I have both , the mod54 and the SP445, I prefer the later as half the amount of developer is needed, it also holds the negatives firmly in place with no chance of them coming of the holder. I would not use the mod54 with 6 sheets as they are much more likley to come loose.
 
Martin,
One thing I've noticed about the SP445 is that you have to stick to the 475ml (16 US ounces) fill quantity. If, like a sensible person and citizen of the wider world, you round up to 500ml, the tank seems a bit too full for proper agitation. I mix the 500ml and leave out the 25ml to avoid calculating in scruples and pennyweights.
Your findings may differ, of course.
Some people have worried that the back of the negative may be marked by contact with the holding frame but I've had no problem and I have the original "full-frame" holders.
 
I use 500mils with no problem, however it does seem to mark the edges, does not seem a problem with scanning but it is something they need to be aware of and some type of fix necessary
 
Martin,
Do you agitate as Mr Stearman demonstrates, around the long horizontal axis, or do you agitate sideways around the short axis? I hope this is clear; it's difficult to describe three dimensional events in text. There may be turbulence generated by the lugs that hold the film in place. You will certainly know that turbulence can cause over-development.
I found this for myself when I first used a Paterson Orbital for film on the motorised base. There's quite a lot to discuss about using the Orbital, but that might be another thread.
 
I believe the purpose of agitation is to remove the layer of exhausted chemicals from the surface of the film and to replace it with fresh. The developer has to move past this layer to sweep it away. If you imaging a tank completely full, agitation would merely invert the whole block with no movement. The liquid needs somewhere to go and a little headroom is needed for this. I like to hear the liquid fall through the labyrinth of film and holders.When I used 500ml, I heard bubbles moving up, and back again as I reversed the tank but not much movement of the whole body of liquid. I also visualised that agitating around the long axis meant that the same small body of liquid moved along the narrow slot between the film surfaces, rather than being replenished by developer from the whole tank. All the developer in the column on one side would remain effectively unused.
I thought it encouraged denser edges from bromide drag.
And it's easier to apply the Stearman Extra Squeze when agitating along the short axis. He suggests giving an extra squeeze before sealing the tank to prevent liquid leaking out around the seal when agitating. This can be caused by the warmth of the hand or outgassing of dissolved air.
I'm afraid I'm making this sound much too finicky and catastrophic. My apologies. I do hope that I'm not retelling you things you already know.
When you said "marks" I may have misunderstood. Do you mean development effects or mechanical marks from the grip of the lugs? Apparently the latest holders have improved lugs.
 
Not mechanical marks, all around the edges and middle strut on the film holder, best way to describe it as a shadow, or slightly darker area of the plastic holder that partially covers the negative, top , bottom, sides and middle , this shows on the negativ, at least in mine it does, I have asked ian barber as he as the same tank and agitates the same as me but says he cannot see the marks on his negs, so not sure why it happens to mine and not his, mystery for sure
 
Last edited:
Back
Top