Stearman Press 5x4 tank.

S

soupdragon

Popular Poster
Registered User
Joined
Oct 17, 2023
Messages
432
This topic may have been covered before but I could not find an active thread.

I tried my Stearman tank for the first time to process some E100.
Is it me or does it take an eternity to fill and drain? By the time the tank is full, squeezed and both caps fitted about 35 seconds has elapsed (probably answered my own question there).
My first sheets came out with slightly uneven development but lacked density.

The burning question is, should I begin timing development when I start filling the tank or after the tank is filled?
Or does anyone know of a rapid method?
 
I don't know the correct answer, but when I do E6 in my Stearman, I pour the chemistry in as fast as I can and hit the timer start before I put the caps on. Then begin agitation.

I can't comment on how this affects development as all my E6 up to this point has been with expired film so I expect colour shifts and changes in density. One day I will sell a kidney and buy some brand new film...
 
I'd sell my liver for some 8X10 Fuji Velvia 50 but it's already on crutches.
It's on ebay right now, 4782 watchers but no bids.
 
It’s possible to fill through both holes, one of which is much narrower and intended only to vent the air. This cap must be loosened to allow the venting, both when emptying and filling. Merely loosening the vent cap would save time.
The Combiplan tank takes much the same time (or even longer) to fill and empty and gives even development.
Are you using a pre-soak?
It doesn’t matter when you start the timer as long as you are consistent. Your own testing will give different times for each method, but they would be for the same amount of developer action.
To me, it seems sensible to start the timing when all the liquid is in the tank, but others may take a different view.
You say nothing of agitation or temperature.
 
I share the same thoughts on when the tank is full, that is the process start time

The Bellinifoto E6 instructions say not to pre soak.
Temperature is controlled with two Cinestill sousvides and two tanks of water at 38 deg C throughout the process with the exception of stabilser.
Agitation is as per the manufacturers instructions, or at least it would be if I could fill the tank fast enough.

I have a feeling the Stearman tank is geared toward B and W shooters (or C41).
 
It sounds as though you’re doing everything that you should be doing.
You may well be right about the B+W bias. Far more people seem to send their transparencies out for processing. On this forum there is a continuous but intermittent debate on the niceties of B+W development technique, but nothing on colour. Is it worth sending out a couple from your stash of film as a check?
As an experiment, you could try removing the lid and filling directly, then replacing the lid for agitation. Obviously this would need total darkness until the lid is in place. Sounds hazardous, I know.
The serious alternative would be something like the Jobo system but that would be a very significant investment.
Best to check that it’s not faulty film first. I’m suggesting this because recently, I exposed quite a lot of old (B+W) film, developed it normally and found it had lost almost all its speed and was peculiarly mottled.
 
Sadly, as of yet, I do not have a darkroom so there is no way I can be removing the tank lid although I'm sure that would make chemical transit faster.
The jobo large format tanks look brilliant but, as you say, expensive. Not to mention the huge volume of chemistry required.
I do have a paterson tank with a mod54 holder which works quite well but I fear I have contaminated it permanently with stabiliser.
I almost feel like gluing a funnel to the fill side of the stearman tank and sticking my finger in the hole during inversions.
 
I found a silicone funnel somewhere, that fitted nicely and used that. It was a domestic one from an website that I’ve forgotten.
 
David M said:
I found a silicone funnel somewhere, that fitted nicely and used that. It was a domestic one from an website that I’ve forgotten.
Click to expand...

I would add another , "yes" to the use of a funnel and after my first go with one, the removal completely of the vent cap also allows a quicker fill. My first sheets had a tide mark at the bottom as I tried to fill with the vent only loosened.
 
I wonder if a catheter syringe is the answer you can get a 500ml one for around £12. I've found my Stearman to be slow as well but I have only done B&W processing to date.
 
Many people have expressed concerns about slow filling, but very few have reported any actual ill-effects. The filling time is a very small part of the total time. The only real problem is that if you pause while pouring, you may possibly get a tide mark on the film where you stopped pouring. Emptying time is not really a problem as the film remains totally wetted with chemicals throughout the emptying process.
I did know of a photographer who was doing scientific work that required extremely accurate control of development and he constructed a vacuum system that spread a thin film of developer over the surface, more-or-less instantly. He didn't do this for his normal photographs. where he used entirely conventional methods, with great care.
 
Last edited:
I bought yet another Stearman tank to try and overcome my contamination/filmprocess problems.
Things are better but processing E6 is a nightmare. It's so slow.
 
Last time I actually timed the fill time and it was 10s. Could be faster with a funnel but this was just using a jug. Maybe it seems slower when you're doing it but was faster than I had thought previously.
 
On this topic, its easy to concentrate on creating problems between the moment you start pouring chemicals in, and the moment you snap the caps shut and start inversions..

But no one really thinks about, or wonders about, the fact that the time to POUR the chemicals out is also considered to be part of the development time.
 
I only have experience of an SP 445 and am very apply with the results I am getting using Rodinal or Ilfosol 3. Tending to head for the slower speed development 15/30 mins. don't believe it makes any difference. I carry out one other process that seems rather controversial (lets not get into that conversation) wash the film before developing. I was taught that as a beginner many years ago and still continue the practice.
 
The trouble with the Stearman tank and its slow fill time is most noticeable when processing slide film.
Unlike B&W, the timings are short and critical at the first dev stage.

And yes, I do try and compensate for pour time as has been rightly said, it's part of the process.

In my view, the best way of developing E6 would be a dip and dunk style system but I have neither the finances or the facilities to achieve this.
 
soupdragon said:
The trouble with the Stearman tank and its slow fill time is most noticeable when processing slide film.
Unlike B&W, the timings are short and critical at the first dev stage.

And yes, I do try and compensate for pour time as has been rightly said, it's part of the process.

In my view, the best way of developing E6 would be a dip and dunk style system but I have neither the finances or the facilities to achieve this.
Click to expand...
hmmm it would not be that hard to build a dip and dunk system for home use. The only caveats would be

1. the rafters have to be tall enough to allow use of a tube long enough to hold the entire reel of film in it and to have an entire reel of film suspended above it.

2. the ability to have the area completely closed off from light, pets, people.

3. Horizontal would be feasable, just more annoying...
 
Can’t see why a dip and dunk system should need a filmstrip unrolled. An ordinary Paterson tank, with the film on a spool would work perfectly well.
The Stearman tank’s film holders are not well adapted for dip-and-dunk, but if you can work in the dark, you could remove the lid and use fill-and-dump instead.
If you must use the film unrolled, a weight can be placed halfway along the strip and the effective film length will be halved. This needs a spool-shaped weight that only touches the edges. You might find an illustration in old instructions to amateurs.

A small thought on filling times: If you have done your own tests on development, it doesn’t matter what part of the pouring cycle you select to begin and end as long as you are consistent. The test will give you the right time for your own procedure. Choose whatever point you find most convenient.
 
David M said:
Can’t see why a dip and dunk system should need a filmstrip unrolled. An ordinary Paterson tank, with the film on a spool would work perfectly well.
The Stearman tank’s film holders are not well adapted for dip-and-dunk, but if you can work in the dark, you could remove the lid and use fill-and-dump instead.
If you must use the film unrolled, a weight can be placed halfway along the strip and the effective film length will be halved. This needs a spool-shaped weight that only touches the edges. You might find an illustration in old instructions to amateurs.

A small thought on filling times: If you have done your own tests on development, it doesn’t matter what part of the pouring cycle you select to begin and end as long as you are consistent. The test will give you the right time for your own procedure. Choose whatever point you find most convenient.
Click to expand...

EVERY dip and dunk process talk i can find all have the strip fully rolled out and hanging from a rack, with the other end flapping free in the wind with a few clamps on it.

The earliest kodak home development kits were about doing your strip of film in a small tray, and running the film through horizontally by hand, not fun i guess.

There are alot of people who have a fondness for metal tanks, metal reels, and having say 4 reels of film on a dunking rod, and having a seperate tank of developer, stop, and fix. And leaving the lids off and just doing it in completely dark in the dark room.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top