ðòïåëôù 


  áòèé÷ 


Apache-Talk @lexa.ru 

Inet-Admins @info.east.ru 

Filmscanners @halftone.co.uk 

Security-alerts @yandex-team.ru 

nginx-ru @sysoev.ru 

  óôáôøé 


  ðåòóïîáìøîïå 


  ðòïçòáííù 



ðéûéôå
ðéóøíá












     áòèé÷ :: Filmscanners
Filmscanners mailing list archive (filmscanners@halftone.co.uk)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: filmscanners: Home C-41 processing



I have read, and even tried, the suggestion of pre-washes or pre-soaks. 
  The "logic" behind it was that by pre-wetting the film, it would 
reduce the risk of bubbles or trapped air which might keep the developer 
from the film surface.  It also brings the film and reels, etc, up to 
temperature.  I would agree that the arguments against doing this make 
good sense, because the film swells with water and the developer then 
doesn't fully migrate into the emulsion, especially at the rate the 
manufacturers pre-test the development times for.

Probably, bringing the temperature of the developer drum/reels/film up 
to temperature by using a external water bath (not in contact with the 
film) is probably a good idea, especially in color films which require 
closer temperature accuracy.

Art


Tim Victor wrote:

> On Monday, January 29, Michael Wilkinson wrote:
> 
>> If pre soaking in order to bring film up to temperature is not
>> recommended, why do it ?
> 
> 
> I might have not been clear enough about it, but I'd already agreed
> that there was no reason to prewet the film. I've never tried it and
> wasn't intending to argue for it, just wondering aloud about what
> Tony mentioned about crossed curves and how catastropic that
> would really be. Sorry if my message was unclear about that. 
> 






 




Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.