Pre soak/pre wash why or why not?

Forum statistics

Threads
197,388
Messages
2,758,265
Members
99,483
Latest member
bobequus
Recent bookmarks
0

MattKing

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
51,868
Location
Delta, BC Canada
Format
Medium Format
Kodak's Z131 document (C-41) explicitly mentions, in bold, not to pre-soak with rotary-tube processing.

I've found out that pre-soak and using stop bath (which is also not a standard C-41 step) helps me with uneven development of large format C-41 film. I feel like there is little point in sticking religiously to the instructions when they clearly don't work (for me)...

Thanks for the Z-131 reference.
When replenishing developer on a small scale.To filter out processing bi products you could pour the used developer through a coffee filter before adding it back into your stock .

I filter my X-Tol working solution from time to time with a re-usable coffee filter.
Not to remove the development biproducts - they are necessary for a properly running replenishment regime - but instead to remove the small amount of sludge that can build up. That sludge is likely to be mostly gelatin.

For clarity: in a properly running replenishment regime, it is necessary that the biproducts be present in a concentration that is stable and consistent. Replenishment is designed to remove any excess of those biproducts, while also replacing any active components as they are used up.
 
  • NB23
  • NB23
  • Deleted

Paul Howell

Subscriber
Joined
Dec 23, 2004
Messages
9,475
Location
Scottsdale Az
Format
Multi Format
For clarity: in a properly running replenishment regime, it is necessary that the biproducts be present in a concentration that is stable and consistent. Replenishment is designed to remove any excess of those biproducts, while also replacing any active components as they are used up.For clarity: in a properly running replenishment regime, it is necessary that the biproducts be present in a concentration that is stable and consistent. Replenishment is designed to remove any excess of those biproducts, while also replacing any active components as they are used up.

So a coffee filter is fairly porous at 20 micrometers, while a standard lab filter is .7 to -100 UM. what does a coffee filter filter out? Seems to me that you need to use a lab grade filter. Even then it only removes solids.
 

MattKing

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
51,868
Location
Delta, BC Canada
Format
Medium Format
So a coffee filter is fairly porous at 20 micrometers, while a standard lab filter is .7 to -100 UM. what does a coffee filter filter out? Seems to me that you need to use a lab grade filter.

It would obviously be more completely filtered.
But it isn't certain that the sludge is itself deleterious, so I am content to merely remove the majority of it with the filter I have at hand.
 

mshchem

Subscriber
Joined
Nov 26, 2007
Messages
14,192
Location
Iowa City, Iowa USA
Format
Medium Format
Best practices are ignoring the film and equipment (developing) manufacturers instructions and just striking out on your own. Then whatever you do, try doing it different every time. Never develop in solutions above "medium rare" on your meat thermometer!

Oh, I jest (just jest?) 😊
 
Joined
Oct 30, 2023
Messages
440
Location
Cleveland
Format
35mm
I just do what Ilford tells me!

The trouble with not pre-wetting with spiral reels is that they too-easily trap bubbles. Letting the reels soak for a while (with agitation) ensures that the entire film surface gets wet. This allows the developer to "glide on" smoothly, due to capillary action. Why has no-one mentioned capillary action before? There is no disadvantage whatsoever to pre-wetting, so why not do it, just to be safe?
 
Last edited:

brbo

Member
Joined
Dec 28, 2011
Messages
2,020
Location
EU
Format
Multi Format
The trouble with not pre-wetting with spiral reels is that they too-easily trap bubbles. Letting the reels soak for a while (with agitation) ensures that the entire film surface gets wet. This allows the developer to "glide on" smoothly, due to capillary action. Why has no-one mentioned capillary action before? There is no disadvantage whatsoever to pre-wetting, so why not do it, just to be safe?

I pre-soak for C-41 and don't for BW (because there is no need (for me, others might feel differently)), so there is that. But as to the question why "not just pre-soak"... Well, some manufacturers advise against it. I'd imagine there is a reason for that (even though we don't know what that reason is).
 

MTGseattle

Subscriber
Joined
Dec 8, 2013
Messages
1,330
Location
Seattle
Format
Multi Format
I also added a pre-wash to my regimen quite early in my years processing my own films and have never seen an issue directly caused by the extra step. I will say that after finally trying 2 rolls of Fomapan in 120 that is definitely the most vivid color dye I have seen so far.
 

DREW WILEY

Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2011
Messages
13,654
Format
8x10 Format
Augustus pointed out a very important reason to pre-wet when using reels, especially for hand inversion drums.
 
Joined
Jul 31, 2012
Messages
3,277
Format
35mm RF
I don't have a scientific basis for what I do, just experience I guess. I pre-wet when I use my JOBO 3010 for 4x5 with rotary. I've had issues with staining developers if I didn't. Usually streaks. With 35 and 120 in SS tanks I don't pre-wet, usually.

I use metal reels these days but I still have my JOBO 1500 tanks. I stopped using them because of the trapped air bells with 120 and inversion agitation. I might go back and try pre-wetting with those and 120. So much easier to load. I used to use LFN in the developer to rid myself of the air bells until LFN changed and it wasn't usable in developers anymore.
 

John Wiegerink

Subscriber
Joined
May 29, 2009
Messages
3,467
Location
Lake Station, MI
Format
Multi Format
I don't have a scientific basis for what I do, just experience I guess. I pre-wet when I use my JOBO 3010 for 4x5 with rotary. I've had issues with staining developers if I didn't. Usually streaks. With 35 and 120 in SS tanks I don't pre-wet, usually.

I use metal reels these days but I still have my JOBO 1500 tanks. I stopped using them because of the trapped air bells with 120 and inversion agitation. I might go back and try pre-wetting with those and 120. So much easier to load. I used to use LFN in the developer to rid myself of the air bells until LFN changed and it wasn't usable in developers anymore.
What change in LFN made it unusable/non-compatible in film developers?
 

AnselMortensen

Subscriber
Joined
Jun 9, 2020
Messages
2,253
Location
SFBayArea
Format
Traditional
Ilford doesn't recommend a pre-wash.

A pre-wash is mandatory with a Stearman Press SP-810.

So, when I process Ilford films in my SP-810...
I use Schrödinal. 🤪
 

Rick A

Subscriber
Joined
Mar 31, 2009
Messages
9,851
Location
Laurel Highlands
Format
8x10 Format
I don't have a scientific basis for what I do, just experience I guess. I pre-wet when I use my JOBO 3010 for 4x5 with rotary. I've had issues with staining developers if I didn't. Usually streaks. With 35 and 120 in SS tanks I don't pre-wet, usually.

I use metal reels these days but I still have my JOBO 1500 tanks. I stopped using them because of the trapped air bells with 120 and inversion agitation. I might go back and try pre-wetting with those and 120. So much easier to load. I used to use LFN in the developer to rid myself of the air bells until LFN changed and it wasn't usable in developers anymore.

When did this change to LFN happen? I have an ancient bottle from the 70's, one from the 90's and a current one. They all work the same and keep my developer from foaming, it was never intended to disperse air bells.

I pre soak specifically to avoid air bells, plus with rotary processing it helps to temper the drum to help maintain temperature.
 

John Wiegerink

Subscriber
Joined
May 29, 2009
Messages
3,467
Location
Lake Station, MI
Format
Multi Format
and is there a "best" wetting agent for a pre-rinse?

LFN is/was my favorite wetting agent. I'm still scratching my head on this one, since I didn't know there was a change. Of course, my still half full bottle is more than several years old, which might be before any change. If there was one????
 

Rick A

Subscriber
Joined
Mar 31, 2009
Messages
9,851
Location
Laurel Highlands
Format
8x10 Format
and is there a "best" wetting agent for a pre-rinse?

You don't need a wetting agent for pre rinse, just water. I use tap water. I use LFN in distilled water with a capfull of 91% isopropyl alcohol as my final wash. It speeds up drying.
 

RalphLambrecht

Subscriber
Joined
Sep 19, 2003
Messages
14,550
Location
K,Germany
Format
Medium Format
The trouble with not pre-wetting with spiral reels is that they too-easily trap bubbles. Letting the reels soak for a while (with agitation) ensures that the entire film surface gets wet. This allows the developer to "glide on" smoothly, due to capillary action. Why has no-one mentioned capillary action before? There is no disadvantage whatsoever to pre-wetting, so why not do it, just to be safe?

but there are potential disadvantages to prewetting, plus the obvious waste of time if it proves unnecessary
 

brbo

Member
Joined
Dec 28, 2011
Messages
2,020
Location
EU
Format
Multi Format
but there are potential disadvantages to prewetting, plus the obvious waste of time if it proves unnecessary

Yes, but it seems to me that people more often solve a problem by pre-soaking than introduce a problem by doing it.
 

John Wiegerink

Subscriber
Joined
May 29, 2009
Messages
3,467
Location
Lake Station, MI
Format
Multi Format
Hmmmm!!! I just did a search trying to find documentation of the change in chemical makeup of LFN and I just can't find anything stating there was or when a change took place. Can some kind soul point me in the right direction.
 
Joined
Sep 24, 2020
Messages
840
Location
World
Format
35mm
Ilford recommend that no pre soak is necessary for their films. I have read on this forum, some people like to pre soak their film, why?

Because it's an hard-to-die practice of no usefulness. Please trust Ilford on that.
 

Sirius Glass

Subscriber
Joined
Jan 18, 2007
Messages
50,103
Location
Southern California
Format
Multi Format
I have not found that I need to filter replenish XTOL.
 

DREW WILEY

Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2011
Messages
13,654
Format
8x10 Format
Alessandro - why would I blindly trust Ilford on that point when, over and over again, I proven just the opposite to myself. I presoak - no problems; I don't, lots of problems. And I'm certain I'm not alone in that respect.
 

Sirius Glass

Subscriber
Joined
Jan 18, 2007
Messages
50,103
Location
Southern California
Format
Multi Format
Alessandro - why would I blindly trust Ilford on that point when, over and over again, I proven just the opposite to myself. I presoak - no problems; I don't, lots of problems. And I'm certain I'm not alone in that respect.

I too prewash Ilford films too and doing that has never caused any problems. Doing such keeps the anti-halation dyes out of my replenished XTOL.
 

John Wiegerink

Subscriber
Joined
May 29, 2009
Messages
3,467
Location
Lake Station, MI
Format
Multi Format
I have not found that I need to filter replenish XTOL.
I never did on my very first batch of Xtol-R and after slightly more than two years I started seeing floaters and other junk in the bottom of my class Boston brown jug. Now I filter everything that goes back into my new batch of Adox XT3-R.
 
Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links.
To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here.

PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Ilford ADOX Freestyle Photographic Stearman Press Weldon Color Lab Blue Moon Camera & Machine
Top Bottom