PDA

View Full Version : MOD 54 film holder cost


Niall Bell
27th October 2011, 01:24 PM
I noticed that Silverprint is now marketing the MOD54 sheet film holer for Paterson tanks.

I bought one last Christmas directly from Mr MOD54: all in all it's a pretty good item although I found that with anything except very gentle agitation the sheets tend to slip off the holder.

Times are tough, money needs to be made and non-digital retailers deserve strong support, but I couldn't help but think the mark-up was a bit steep on the Silverprint item (£44.50 against £36.00 from MOD54).

Proabably not a particularly PC comment to post, but a 23.6% mark-up is a lot- and that's assuming S/Print has to buy them at retail price.

Niall.

Dave miller
27th October 2011, 02:40 PM
I thought the same when I saw it then realised that Silverprint would probably have to add 20% VAT as well as a margin to the base price, then again maybe you paid VAT on yours. Either way we have a choice. I feel that on balance this is offered as much as a service as a money maker.

Niall Bell
27th October 2011, 02:54 PM
True enough. And as you say, we have a choice.

Also, I don't really want to undermine the good work S/Print does.

N

Dave miller
27th October 2011, 03:05 PM
True enough. And as you say, we have a choice.

Also, I don't really want to undermine the good work S/Print does.

N

Very true, they do a good job of treading the fine line between keeping a very comprehensive stock and competing with others to stay in business. Yesterday I ordered a selection of chemicals from them, all of low cost, that are unavailable from anyone else without putting together a minimum value order; that's a service I prize. :)

Martin Reed
11th November 2011, 05:46 PM
As Dave says, as a regular dealer Silverprint has to charge VAT, which is where the difference comes in, we just rounded it up a fraction to a more regular retail price.

At present the main function of giving the MOD some presence is to help introduce it to the market - if anyone wants to get it ex-VAT that's their option, it suits other people to include it in a larger order of other items from us which helps to swallow the difference.

The ultimate aim is to get it into full production on a larger scale, in which case the VAT charge will probably become mandatory wherever it's bought, but there may be the benefit of a lower base price. Harman have a strong interest, it complements their new 5x4" pinhole camera very well in the push to extending 5x4" film usage.

Niall Bell
14th November 2011, 12:45 PM
Martin,
Fair comment- it was really just an observation. As I said, I don't want to criticise too much the excellent efforts Silverprint and other retailers are making to provide stock of traditional materials.

I also support the initiatives to promote 4x5 film.

Thanks,
Niall

Dave miller
26th November 2011, 02:53 PM
Just came across this site, which maybe of interest: http://www.mod54.com/index.php

slona
7th December 2011, 05:03 PM
I did get one of the MOD54 directly from Mr MOD as well, and I have to agree there have been quite a few occasions when sheets have come off in agitation, with resultant scratches.

Morgan needs to improve the design by adding grooves for the film on the bottom and top plates... Will need to email him.

Mark E Mark
1st January 2012, 03:27 PM
I'm waiting for the MOD57 adapter, which I believe Morgan is working on.
Doing 2 sheets at a time in my orbital is painfully slow (when there 4 more negs to do).

Dave miller
29th January 2012, 07:41 PM
I recently brought a MOD54 sheet film holder for film development despite having read complaints regarding the film coming adrift during processing, which is disconcerting.
My initial impression is that it is well made except that the bottom plate is slightly too large which causes it to bind in the Paterson drum. This is because the drum tapers from the top to the bottom. In addition the unit is a loose sliding fit on the central Paterson tube. None of this is a problem if you use the gentle invert and tap routine demonstrated by its maker on YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rwl84ZnKF6Q); however I prefer to use the twizzle stick provided with the tank to agitate my films by rotation. To overcome this binding/slipping problem (and because I’m unlikely to want this particular tank size for any other purpose) I lifted the unit up about 5mm on the central tube and glued it in place with silicone sealant so that it can be rotated gentle and freely back and forth using the twizzle stick.
Initial tests with some sheets of old film show that the film stays put as it should. When the weather improves a little, and I have exposed some more film I shall develop it in this unit and report back.



In the meantime has anyone else used one in addition to slona?

Collas
29th January 2012, 09:01 PM
I was wondering how I could get the MOD to work with the twizzle stick, so Im interested how you're getting on, Dave.

Will the silicone sealant be removable in case of problems, or will the MOD have to be scrapped? And how will it take to some of the chemicals thrown at it? I use a Citric acid stop bath, but I'm sure there are some fiercer liquids out there.

Nick

Dave miller
30th January 2012, 08:14 AM
I was wondering how I could get the MOD to work with the twizzle stick, so Im interested how you're getting on, Dave.

Will the silicone sealant be removable in case of problems, or will the MOD have to be scrapped? And how will it take to some of the chemicals thrown at it? I use a Citric acid stop bath, but I'm sure there are some fiercer liquids out there.

Nick

I'm sure that the sealant will pull off easily if required and withstand any of the chemicals I use, including acid fixers and stop baths.

Martin Aislabie
2nd February 2012, 04:10 PM
You can buy replacement central columns if required - http://www.patersonphotographic.com/product_info.php?ID=5944&licenseKey=38766b5aba7056dc12ebc00c6db476bc

Martin

Collas
2nd February 2012, 04:31 PM
What was difficult to get hold of was the C-clip, and I had to buy an extra tank and reels to get hold of one. Paterson ignored my email request.

Though, the C-clip doesn't really hold the MOD 54 in place, anyway.

Nick

Trevor Crone
2nd February 2012, 04:40 PM
I was thinking of buying a MOD54, but considering having to perform some DIY on a product costing £44 - I'm none too impressed.

Steve Smith
2nd February 2012, 07:22 PM
I was thinking about making something similar but I'm not too impressed by the 1 litre requirement. I think I will stay with the Paterson Orbital.


Steve.

Dave miller
2nd February 2012, 08:02 PM
I was thinking about making something similar but I'm not too impressed by the 1 litre requirement. I think I will stay with the Paterson Orbital.


Steve.

Valid point, I’ve only changed because I’m now mixing my own developers so the quantity used is now much less important.

Steve Smith
2nd February 2012, 09:06 PM
I might still make one anyway just to see if I like the idea. I have the machinery (CNC router) and a good selection of Perspex so I might as well try it.


Steve.

Dave miller
3rd February 2012, 07:58 AM
I might still make one anyway just to see if I like the idea. I have the machinery (CNC router) and a good selection of Perspex so I might as well try it.


Steve.

Then you have the opportunity of installing a central drum to exclude excess liquid and thereby overcome the drawback to which you eluded earlier.

Trevor Crone
3rd February 2012, 08:15 AM
Then you have the opportunity of installing a central drum to exclude excess liquid and thereby overcome the drawback to which you eluded earlier.

Are you refering to some form of solid core? If so, Steve may wish to consider an indent to take the 'twizzle stick'.

Dave miller
3rd February 2012, 08:43 AM
Are you refering to some form of solid core? If so, Steve may wish to consider an indent to take the 'twizzle stick'.

Not quite, the central tube will still be required to allow the fluids to be poured into the bottom of the tank to allow quick filling.

Steve Smith
3rd February 2012, 08:53 AM
Then you have the opportunity of installing a central drum to exclude excess liquid and thereby overcome the drawback to which you eluded earlier.

That's a good idea. As Roger Hicks used to point out, most of the developer in a tank is just filling up space with only the developer at the film's surface doing any work. Obviously, you need a certain amount and agitation makes sure that the developer is refreshed at the surface at regular intervals.

If the Orbital can develop four sheets of 5x4 with just 55ml of developer (although most, including me use a bit more) I'm sure a clever design could use 100 - 200ml for six (or possibly eight) sheets.

I don't appear to have a tank tall enough at the moment. I will have a look on Ebay and if I can buy one, I might give it a go.


Steve.

Trevor Crone
3rd February 2012, 09:07 AM
That's a good idea. As Roger Hicks used to point out, most of the developer in a tank is just filling up space with only the developer at the film's surface doing any work. Obviously, you need a certain amount and agitation makes sure that the developer is refreshed at the surface at regular intervals.

If the Orbital can develop four sheets of 5x4 with just 55ml of developer (although most, including me use a bit more) I'm sure a clever design could use 100 - 200ml for six (or possibly eight) sheets.

I don't appear to have a tank tall enough at the moment. I will have a look on Ebay and if I can buy one, I might give it a go.


Steve.

I think a 'clever design' would be more in line with the Combi-Plan system and not circular like the MOD54 if one is to reduce volume. If the rack system like the Combi was reduced from a 6 to 4 sheet holder this would be a lot slimmer and a slimmer tank could be fashioned to save on chemistry. The Combi-Plan like the MOD54 requires 1L of chemistry.

Dave miller
3rd February 2012, 09:11 AM
That's a good idea. As Roger Hicks used to point out, most of the developer in a tank is just filling up space with only the developer at the film's surface doing any work. Obviously, you need a certain amount and agitation makes sure that the developer is refreshed at the surface at regular intervals.

If the Orbital can develop four sheets of 5x4 with just 55ml of developer (although most, including me use a bit more) I'm sure a clever design could use 100 - 200ml for six (or possibly eight) sheets.

I don't appear to have a tank tall enough at the moment. I will have a look on Ebay and if I can buy one, I might give it a go.


Steve.

There lies the route to fame, but probably not riches. :)

Steve Smith
3rd February 2012, 09:27 AM
I think a 'clever design' would be more in line with the Combi-Plan system and not circular like the MOD54 if one is to reduce volume.

Possibly. This quick sketch shows that it's theoretically possible to hold eight sheets in the space taken up by three 35mm spirals of 95mm diameter.

This puts the outer sheet 3mm away from the edge of the tank (a bit further actually as it's 3mm in from the dge of the spiral) and the sheets are spaced at 3mm. The hatched central core will take up space not now taken up by developer.

Estimating a tank height of about 150mm, I think I can get the developer volume down to just over half a litre which isn't too bad.

Whilst the Combi-Plan might be more of a clever design, the beauty of this system is that the light proof and waterproof bit is already made and it is easy for anyone to experiment with some method of holding the negatives without the worry of making a tank which won't leak either light or chemistry.

Red semi-circles are the film, blue is the outline of the holder, green dashed lines are where a standard spiral would be and the purple hatching in the centre is the solid centre.


Steve.

Trevor Crone
3rd February 2012, 09:44 AM
Looks and sounds good:) If you do decide to go commercial with it you have my full attention;)

PS. would it be possible to fashion a holder to hold the film horizontally rather than vertical like the MOD54, this would help reduce volume.

Steve Smith
3rd February 2012, 10:04 AM
If you do decide to go commercial with it you have my full attention

I don't think I would do that. It's not really fair on Morgan O'Donovan who had the idea in the first place. It will be for personal use only... but I could ask a few people to do some field trials!

would it be possible to fashion a holder to hold the film horizontally rather than vertical like the MOD54, this would help reduce volume.

This was my initial idea, mainly because it would fit in the tanks I have already. I will look into it but I think the spacing at the sides might be a bit tight.


Steve.

Bill
3rd February 2012, 10:21 AM
That's a good idea. As Roger Hicks used to point out, most of the developer in a tank is just filling up space with only the developer at the film's surface doing any work. Obviously, you need a certain amount and agitation makes sure that the developer is refreshed at the surface at regular intervals.
Steve.

You sound like you are 'progressing' towards the 1950's when you could buy a Solution Economiser. It was basically a block of dense material (or a weighted hollow block) that fitted over the centre column of the reel and had an O/D that was just inside the loaded film. The height was to suit the format, 127 or 120/620. I have a 127 version somewhere that was my Grandfather's. Saved about 25% of the developer so a 'free' development every 4 films if my maths are correct. I'm sure if you have the facilities one would not be too hard to make. Put me down for a 120 version :D

Bill

Steve Smith
3rd February 2012, 11:02 AM
You sound like you are 'progressing' towards the 1950's

If only that were possible!


Steve.

Martin Aislabie
3rd February 2012, 02:07 PM
Possibly. This quick sketch shows that it's theoretically possible to hold eight sheets in the space taken up by three 35mm spirals of 95mm diameter.

This puts the outer sheet 3mm away from the edge of the tank (a bit further actually as it's 3mm in from the dge of the spiral) and the sheets are spaced at 3mm. The hatched central core will take up space not now taken up by developer.

Estimating a tank height of about 150mm, I think I can get the developer volume down to just over half a litre which isn't too bad.

Whilst the Combi-Plan might be more of a clever design, the beauty of this system is that the light proof and waterproof bit is already made and it is easy for anyone to experiment with some method of holding the negatives without the worry of making a tank which won't leak either light or chemistry.

Red semi-circles are the film, blue is the outline of the holder, green dashed lines are where a standard spiral would be and the purple hatching in the centre is the solid centre.


Steve.

Steve, a few of thoughts on you design

5x4 film has a fairly large "sail" area and I am pretty sure my film moves around quite a bit in a Combi-Plan cassette due to flexing during the chemical agitation process - you might possibly find a 3mm clearance is not enough to give an adequate clearance between sheets of film.
I know of a number of people who don't use the central film slot in either a Combi-Plan Cassette or a Jobo 2509N Reel, because of the touching/film flexing issue

I am considering using a Mod54 film cassette (its a lot cheaper route overall than the Jobo 2509N) However, I have wondered about how to effectively wash the film after processing. Initially, I thought I would just need to use the standard Paterson hose - but because the end of the MOD Cassette is solid, I am concerned about the evenness of the wash cycle. There will be a large area of film (particularly on the inner sheets) which would remain unwashed due to very low water flow in the core of the cassette when loaded with film.
If you are considering using the simple Paterson hose on a tap to wash your film, it might wish to consider making the end plates of the Cassette slotted laterally, to promote water flow through the central region.
I expect with the MOD54 design, the only way to achieve an adequate wash cycle will be to use the same manual agitation technique as used during development and lots of changes of water.

One last thought, have you considered using ABS rather than Perspex ?
Not as exciting to look at, or quite as easy to "glue" together but it does have the advantage that it is less resistant to shattering when dropped.

Just my $0.02 - feel free to ignore them at you leisure

Martin :)

ps - the nominal gap between each of the 3 sheets on each side of a Combi-Plan cassette is 7mm

DaveP
3rd February 2012, 02:28 PM
Martin, I think report of people leaving the middle slot on a 2509N reel empty are overstated. As far as I can tell its a hangover (or misunderstanding) from original 2509 reels which did have a problem, hence the redesign. I do 6 sheets in a 2509N all the time with no problems.

Steve Smith
3rd February 2012, 02:44 PM
5x4 film has a fairly large "sail" area and I am pretty sure my film moves around quite a bit in a Combi-Plan cassette due to flexing during the chemical agitation process - you might possibly find a 3mm clearance is not enough to give an adequate clearance between sheets of film.

the nominal gap between each of the 3 sheets on each side of a Combi-Plan cassette is 7mm

You could be right. The facts are that I don't know and will have to try it out. another possibility is that all of the sheets will move the same way so it won't be a problem. The nice thing about using a CNC router is that I can redraw something and have the machine do the hard work. That way I can try lots of ideas which I wouldn't be so keen to do if I was cutting it all by hand.

Something else I might try is a more traditional spiral with the film going in much the same as 120 film, i.e. short side first. The film will have to be put in one sheet at a time and pushed to the end of its travel. Also the curve of the film, whichever way round it is, will help to give it extra stiffness.

If you are considering using the simple Paterson hose on a tap to wash your film, it might wish to consider making the end plates of the Cassette slotted laterally, to promote water flow through the central region.
I expect with the MOD54 design, the only way to achieve an adequate wash cycle will be to use the same manual agitation technique as used during development and lots of changes of water.

My main worry is of free flow of chemistry and water during processing and washing. The top and bottom pieces will be as minimal as possible to help this.

One last thought, have you considered using ABS rather than Perspex ?
Not as exciting to look at, or quite as easy to "glue" together but it does have the advantage that it is less resistant to shattering when dropped.

No because I have lots of Perspex to play with. I'll just try not to drop it!

Just my $0.02 - feel free to ignore them at you leisure

No suggestions or comments will be ignored. That's the practice of people who do the same thing their way all of their life.



Steve.

Dave miller
3rd February 2012, 04:12 PM
I think that if the spinning rather than inverting method of agitation is used then many of Martins concerns are removed.

Martin Aislabie
6th February 2012, 09:49 PM
Back to the OP

I have just noticed that RK Photographic (a FADU Sponsor) are selling a MOD54 Film Holder together with the required Paterson Tank and with free postage thrown in for £56.50

A considerable saving over buying the items separately

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/290665742357?ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1438.l2649

Martin

Dave miller
7th February 2012, 07:59 AM
Back to the OP

I have just noticed that RK Photographic (a FADU Sponsor) are selling a MOD54 Film Holder together with the required Paterson Tank and with free postage thrown in for £56.50

A considerable saving over buying the items separately

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/290665742357?ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1438.l2649

Martin

It is indeed a very good saving, especially since it includes postage, well spotted. :)

Stocky
8th February 2012, 09:43 PM
.......

Something else I might try is a more traditional spiral with the film going in much the same as 120 film, i.e. short side first. The film will have to be put in one sheet at a time and pushed to the end of its travel. Also the curve of the film, whichever way round it is, will help to give it extra stiffness.

.......

Steve.

This sounds good. Jobo supply a red clip to stop two 120 rolls on one reel from sliding over each other. Maybe a little indent or raised bit would be enough.

I use the 2509n with six sheets and have no uniformity problems. I only use inversion agitation though.

Steve Smith
8th February 2012, 10:08 PM
I use the 2509n with six sheets.

I didn't know this existed! Does it fit in a 2 x 35mm tank?


Steve.

Bill
8th February 2012, 10:17 PM
I didn't know this existed! Does it fit in a 2 x 35mm tank?


Steve.

I'm using one in a 2521 tank that takes 2 x 35 mm reels.

Bill

Steve Smith
9th February 2012, 12:20 AM
O.K. I might have a go at making something similar tomorrow.

Today I made some parts for my version of the MOD54 holder. I will put it together tomorrow and post some pictures. The problem for me is that I don't have a tank high enough which gives me some incentive to try the spiral version out.


Steve.