File :-(, x, )
Development ac
Hay /p/

I'm seriously considering getting together the supplies to develop my own film, primarily because I recently acquired a half-frame camera whose negatives confuse the bejeezus out of the people at the drug store where I normally get my negatives developed.

(Plus: They gave me my developed-but-unprinted negatives back for free. Minus: They got their grubby fingers all over them when they pulled them out to show me that they had developed it but couldn't figure out how to print)

So, here's what I've got sitting in my Adorama shopping cart now:
Plastic developing tank for 35mm and 120/220
1pt Plastic Graduate
Plastic film squeegee with rubber blades
Adorama B&W film developer
Chemical stirring paddle 2 pack
Kodak darkroom thermometer
Small changing bag
Stainless steel film clips, 2 pack
Adorama Indicator Stop Bath for B&W films
Adorama film cassette opener

What am I forgetting?

I'm planning to scan the negatives once I've developed them, then either send 'em out or throw 'em at my inkjet for printing, so I don't need any real dark darkroom supplies.
>> thefamilyman
>>38239
i also recommend some PHOTO-FLO Solution.
makes for spotless film and fast drying.
>> Anonymous
>>38239What am I forgetting?
FIXER.

A supply of distilled (or at least demineralised) water.

1 or 2 more plastic graduates. They might not seem immediately needed, but you'll soon be grateful for having them.

3 glass beakers for solutions (use the plastic graduate for pouring clean water only - chemicals can mess it up).

A bowl big enough to fit all 3 beakers with some extra space (for stabilising the solution temperature).

Bottle(s) for storing re-usable solution(s) (at least one for fixer, another for developer unless it's a liquid concentrate for preparing one-shot working solutions). Plastic coke or any carbonated drink bottles work fine here (they are enough gas-proof), but they must be perfectly clean first.

Glass balls (small enough and well washed) for pushing air out of your chemicals bottles as you use them up (neutral gas sprays are overpriced bollocks).

>> thefamilyman
>>38252
>Just give the film a 5 minute rinse in distilled water after the running water wash.
good thing with photo-flo is its only 30secs and no need to wipe the film and much much faster drying times without needing to force it (ie with heat). The bottle seems to last forever too lol
>> ac
>>38252
Ug. Light-proofing any of the rooms in my apartment would be a big hassle. The only one without a big window is the basement, which is really dusty. I think I'll wait and see how much I hate using a changing bag.

(Given that this is basically so I can develop my own negatives from my "toy" cameras, there's a certain hassle-level past which I'm unwilling to go)
>> Anonymous
>>38258
Wiping film? Heat-drying film? You made me die a little inside. :<

With my workflow, I really don't mind the extra 5 minutes. And if it also helps wash out some extra fixer remains, all the better.
>> ac
>>38260
Drying time's gonna be an issue for me. I don't really have a dust-free room in my apartment, so less time spent hanging somewhere that dust could gather is better.
>> Teus !QbSstcPD6U
>>Plastic film squeegee with rubber blades
don't get those, they can scratch your film horribly. get a good, real chamois cloth.
>>Plastic developing tank for 35mm and 120/220
better get one that can soup two films at a time, unless you really don't shoot a lot
>>Adorama B&W film developer
get a real brand of dev, like kodak or ilford.
>>Adorama film cassette opener
I just use pliers and brute force

you've got a toilet or bathroom that can easily by sealed?

>>Wiping film? Heat-drying film? You made me die a little inside. :<
wipe film with chamois cloth works well here. sometimes you get tiny scratches from dust in your cloth, but usually theyre not visible on the scans. drying film, sure, with a hair dryer. nothing wrong with that..
>> ac
>>38271
>better get one that can soup two films at a time, unless you really don't shoot a lot
I really don't shoot a lot. If I'm going to be taking a lot of pictures, I pull out my digital SLR. My film cameras are basically just for me to play around with and feel all retro, so it's rare for me to burn through one roll of film in a day, much less more than one. The only time I ever did that was because I specifically set out to do so--I shot one roll of film in my Minolta Hi-Matic 7s walking up the street, and when I finished that roll, I turned around and filled a roll in my girlfriend's old no-focus point&shoot Samsung Maxima 40r going the other way.

(The goal was to test the old "A great photographer can make great images with a crappy camera" adage. I got three really good shots with the Hi-Matic, which gives me manual focus control and has a good max aperture, but nothing too exciting with the Maxima. So apparently I'm only a moderately good photographer)
>> ac
>>38271
Does the brand of fixer make much of a difference?
>> Anonymous
Bathroom sealed or a closet would be good enough to get the film out, preferrably the bathroom as you would have a place to place your equipment.

Bottle opener (flat side not the pointy end) is all you need to open the film, open it from the end without the plastic center sticking out and it will pop right off.

And again to dry your film the bathroom is probably the best room you can do it in as less dust would travel there as moisture from your baths and the like should not allow that much dust to travel about constantly.

For developer I go with the other poster, unless you don't really care about the pics you will be getting then generic will do... but at that point why bother.
>> Anonymous
>>38271
>>wipe film with chamois cloth works well here. sometimes you get tiny scratches from dust in your cloth, but usually theyre not visible on the scans.
I admit never trying this, but the sole thought of pushing a felt fabric against wet emulsion is making me cringe.

>>drying film, sure, with a hair dryer. nothing wrong with that..
That it's like bombarding the wet emulsion with high-speed dust particles? Not to mention one time I tried this (on a sample), the film got all warped due to uneven drying. And, curiously enough, it also got drying marks, despite them never appearing with the same process and natural drying. So I'll pass on this.

>>38302
For your purposes, not really.
>> thefamilyman
>>drying film, sure, with a hair dryer. nothing wrong with that..
>>That it's like bombarding the wet emulsion with high-speed dust particles? Not to mention one time I tried this (on a sample), the film got all warped due to uneven drying. And, curiously enough, it also got drying marks, despite them never appearing with the same process and natural drying. So I'll pass on this.

Not to sound like a broken record again sorry, but just buy a small bottle of Photo-Flo, its only US$6.99 at Adorama, and its something like a 1:200 mixing ratio so that bottle will last for ficken ages.
this stuff does work as well as much as i harp on about it haha (sorry, i hate doing that). you will never need to worry about force drying, water marks or slow painful dry times.
Just try it and see if i'm wrong :)
>> ac
>>38330
Current shopping cart is at $140+. So the extra $7 won't kill me. Added.
>> des
>>38317
The only times I haven't been burned from trying to quickly dry was with a dedicated drying cabinet. The one I used cut the dry time but didn't bake the film. To prevent curling we had a small clip on weight.
Worked pretty well. I'm not sure how much it cost, but it's probably not worth buying and maintaining one as an individual.
>> ac
Extra Bonus Question: Is it color that's difficult to process at home, or is it C-41? I.e., would Kodak bw400cn be as easy to process as normal black and white film, or would it be tricky like normal color film?
>> des
>>38403
400cn is just regular c-41 process, same as other colour films
>> ac
>>38416
Yes, I know, which was *completely* not my question. :-P

It's Common Knowledge that color film is way harder to develop than black and white. I was wondering if it's the colorness that makes it hard to develop or if it's the C-41 process that makes it hard to develop.
>> Anonymous
>>38421
I think you're kinda missing the point here. B&W C-41 films are just like colour C-41 films, and the process remains the same. To put it simply, whereas colour films use colour dyes, B&W C-41 films use dyes that do not produce colour. But they're still the same kind of dyes, as opposed to silver halides in traditional B&W films.

So it's the process. Which actually isn't as hard as people make it to be. It's just kinda unprofitable on small scale.
>> ac
>>38437
Yeah, but I've heard the reason color developing at home is tricky is because small temperature shifts can screw up the color casts. I wasn't sure if this was an issue with a B&W film or not.
>> des
for about $2 a roll to get it developed at my local shop, I haven't bothered to look into it, sorry :)
>> smonson
>>38445
Same here only mine charges $1. Developing C-41 at home seems like too much hard work - I got the impression it's hard to push/pull anyway, so why need to?
>> ac
>>38812
1. I can only take pornographic pictures of my girlfriend on digital or film that I can develop myself.
2. Scanner dust/scratch removal works on chromogenic films, but not "real" B&W films.