Looooong Pre-soak

[peter k.]

Well started to develop two rolls of 120 film this late morning, and had completed the two one minute pre-soak, @ 100f, and the cell phone rang. I had forgotten to turn it off, .. but it was my wife's ring.. so answered, .. which was good.. as I had an immediate task that had to be taken care of.
So I refilled the tank with tap water and left it sit, and it is still sitting,,, as now I have a meeting I have to attend.
So at last.. the question.. will it 'harm' the film overnight, just sitting there.. until I can develop it in the morning?
I really have no other option.. but curious if somehow it will damage the emulsion.
Thanks...

 

[Peter De Smidt]

It depends on the film, but, yes, it could damage the film. The emulsion could lift from the support.

 

[darkroommike]

Not sure there's one answer to this one, depends on the film. You'll find out soon enough.

 

[peter k.]

Well is Portra 400 and Lomo 800.. should I empty the dev tank and let it sit empty?

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

You did the right thing by leaving it in water, rather than leaving it in the tank wet. It will be fine the next morning.

 

[peter k.]

Well will find out... but you give me some ease that nothing is ruined.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Not sure there's one answer to this one, depends on the film. You'll find out soon enough.

and hopefully report

 

[LAG]

... and the cell phone rang. I had forgotten to turn it off, .. but it was my wife's ring.. so answered, .. which was good.. as I had an immediate task that had to be taken care of...

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

I shall be brief with the rest, not very helpful and certainty out of time: In my case I would have left those films in the tank without water (at least without "tap" water) ... once back again with them I would "re-soak" (I don't know if this word exist) with the water up to the temperature needed again, and follow as usualy.

Best

edit: spellcheck

 

[peter k.]

de Report:
Well Lag you might have been right...
It soaked for 24 hours.. before being developed. Had a chance today to take a look.. the emulsion seems thin.. and I had not cut the tape leaders off the two rolls of 120, so they disintegrated and on the Portra 400 roll there where many flecks of paper.
Sigh... so the emulsion did not flake off, but perhaps 'soaked' away .. on the Lomo 800 was better, but in the sky area you can see its not .. ah all there. Its 'thinner' near the edges.
Such is life.. but the autumn leaves and landscapes shots will have to wait for next year..

 

[AgX]

Conclusion:
Never answer the phone when processing.

 

[peter k.]

de Rest of the Story ...

The soaked away image made it interesting, especially as it was taken with a 1914 Brownie, converted to 120 film. Haha.. don't think I will try it again though.

 

[Leigh B]

Why, pray tell, are you pre-soaking at 100 degrees???

This isn't a souffle.

The pre-soak should be at the same temperature as the developer and all the other liquids, 68F.

- Leigh

 

[MrBrowning]

Why, pray tell, are you pre-soaking at 100 degrees???

This isn't a souffle.

The pre-soak should be at the same temperature as the developer and all the other liquids, 68F.

- Leigh

Leigh

It was C41 film. Isn't the standard dev temp for that 100F? I may be wrong as I don't process my own color film.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Well, in any event this proves that a presoak does no damage!

PE

 

[LAG]

de Rest of the Story ...

View attachment 167781

it was taken with a 1914 Brownie, converted to 120 film...

Excuse me peter k.,

just out of curiosity: Brownie model?, ratio used with the 120, or is it a crop? Thank you

 

[LAG]

Well, in any event this proves that a presoak does no damage!

PE

 

[peter k.]

Excuse me peter k.,

just out of curiosity: Brownie model?, ratio used with the 120, or is it a crop? Thank you

Its a Kodak 3a folding Brownie..
There is film in it, so I could not get the number for you, but when received from a friend, who's grandfather used it, researched it and found it had been manufactured in 1914.
The only crop on the photo is about a .25" on the left side, as the picture before it overlapped this one.
You can only get five shots to a roll.. I have no idea what the format is in the the terms of 6 x ??, but it originally used "PostCard" 3.25 x 5.25 film, which was no longer made in the '70's, and so converted it to 120.
The difficulty comes when you wind for the next shot.. there is a 'red' viewer on the back, but of course it has nothing on the backing paper to align up to. So I have worked out how many turns for each shot.. and masked part of the viewer so as to frame the shots.
Makes great panoramas.
http://licm.org.uk/livingImage/Kodak_No3A-Folding-Brownie.html

 

[LAG]

Its a Kodak 3a folding Brownie..
There is film in it, so I could not get the number for you, but when received from a friend, who's grandfather used it, researched it and found it had been manufactured in 1914.
The only crop on the photo is about a .25" on the left side, as the picture before it overlapped this one.
You can only get five shots to a roll.. I have no idea what the format is in the the terms of 6 x ??, but it originally used "PostCard" 3.25 x 5.25 film, which was no longer made in the '70's, and so converted it to 120.
The difficulty comes when you wind for the next shot.. there is a 'red' viewer on the back, but of course it has nothing on the backing paper to align up to. So I have worked out how many turns for each shot.. and masked part of the viewer so as to frame the shots.
Makes great panoramas.
http://licm.org.uk/livingImage/Kodak_No3A-Folding-Brownie.html

Thank you for the info. peter k. (don't worry about the number)

I think that model was introduced in 1909 (up to 15), if the shutter is F.P. Auto (1909-13) Brownie Ball (1914-15) Indeed it was postcard size (film 122) with 8.24 x 14 cm, so you can get five shots 6x14.

Nice one!