What about presoaking film before developoing? I hear there are a lot of theories and ideas concerning this item. I shoot 35 mm TMY and use Xtol 1:1. For a time now I4ve been presoaking for 2 minutes - mainly because I used to do so earlier shen I used HC110. But is there any advantages? Please help me out!

BC

-- Bengt Carlsson (bengt.087701938@telia.com), December 28, 1998

Answers

I tried presoaking for a spell with my plastic Patterson tanks. After adjusting development time I found no difference. I stopped presoaking to save time and complication.

-- Tim Brown (brownt@ase.com), December 28, 1998.

Ilford recommends against presoaking their films, stating that a wetting agent is included in the emulsion. Jobo says do not presoak if you're using Xtol. So...I've used a five-minute presoak in a Jobo with Xtol 1:1 and the world didn't end etc; in fact it was the only way to avoid airbells with the Jobo. Otherwise I have and haven't used a presoak without any real difference in results. If you use a presoak of more than than about a minute your results will be slightly different for the same film/developer/time combination. Phil Davis found that some films gain a little speed and contrast while some films lose a little, but there weren't tremendous differences. Also I'd suggest that perhaps anyone who's getting airbells or unevenness with a manual inversion tank simply isn't giving sufficient complete agitation. Anyway...I'd recommend that you try it without the presoak and if all's fine, don't bother with the presoak.

-- John Hicks / John's Camera Shop (jbh@magicnet.net), December 29, 1998.

Developing times given in most of the literature always seem to give slight under development.Presoaking the film allows the gelatine to swell and become more readily absorbant therefore, the chemical is absorbed quicker and, starts to act quicker. Care needs to be taken that the presoak is at the same temperature as all the other liquids.

-- "Ted" johnson (adryanj@hotmail.com), January 06, 1999.

Developing times given in most of the literature always seem to give slight under development.Presoaking the film allows the gelatine to swell and become more readily absorbant therefore, the chemical is absorbed quicker and, starts to act quicker; the net result is that the film is developed more fully, giving better contrast. Care needs to be taken that the presoak is at the same temperature as all the other liquids.

-- "Ted" johnson (adryanj@hotmail.com), January 06, 1999.

I wonder. If presoaking swells the emulsion allowing for quicker absorpsion of developer, how fast does the developer act if a pre-soak isn't used. I'd guesstimate the difference would be about the time it takes to presoak the film. Interesting. Everyones got an opinion. Even me. James

-- james (james_mickelson@hotmail.com), January 08, 1999.

Hi gang - I always presoak for a minute (with never a problemo) because that's the way I was taught many moons ago.

I now have a reason of my own. Several of the films I use have dark dyes that I am glad to see washed down the drain after my presoak. It just goes against my grain to pour fresh chemicals in on top of those dyes that are lurking there begging to be washed off. My negs look great too by the way so I've never had a concern that the dye was connected to good processing results.

Water is a chemical too, right? But B&W has so much latitude that it's been no biggie - for myself, at any rate. Aloha, Paul ;<)

-- Paul Rossi (prossi@vt.edu), January 11, 1999.

pre-soaking also allows the developer to soak into the film more evenly.

-- mark lindsey (lindseygraves@msn.com), January 13, 1999.

I think that in general, presoaking makes little difference. I stopped doing it a looong time ago. However, in theory, by presoaking you have an emulsion filled with water molecules when you drain the water and add developer. Since the developer is a solution of active ingredients in a water base, it will take time for the developer to displace the soak water and bring the chemicals into contact with the emulsion. This implies that for some brief time, the actual developer contacting the silver compounds is more dilute than the nominal concentration. How long this lasts (depends on the exchange rate across the film surface) and what it implies for developing time and contrast is a question only a photochemist could love. I just think that it adds another variable I don't want.

-- Richard Newman (rnewman@snip.net), January 19, 1999.

I went thru a terrible spell of air bells on ny negs. I tried presoaking (up to 5 min!) and thought that it had solved my problem. Then I got the air bells back and stopped the nuisance of presoaking. I've since solved my problem. I was using a patterson 2 reel tank. I'd develop 2 rolls, then develop another 2 rolls immediatly after the first 2 were finished. I would re-use all the same chemicals, including the developer. The 1st 2 rolls would come out perfect but always the 2nd two rolls had air bells. I suppose I introduced air pockets into the dev while agitating the 1st 2 rolls. I now mix fresh dev for every 2 rolls and have not had a problem since. I also got a 5 reel tank and dev 5 rolls at once. Much faster! Regina

-- Regina Hugo (vhugo@earthlink.net), January 20, 1999.