I’ve heard the legends — handed down orally, generation-by-generation — of a curious race of humans who profess to find joy, peace, and harmony through the simple act of manual film development. Alas, I am not so spiritually attuned. For me, developing film isn’t zen, it’s drudgery. But it’s a necessary means to an enjoyable end, which is a photograph that looks the way I want it to look. And since I’m a total control freak when it comes to making my photos look the way I want them to look, there’s no way I’m sending my film to a lab… not only does that result in relinquished control (and quality) but also relinquished cash — which is nearly as undesirable.
Admittedly, in the general scheme of horrors best avoided, standing over a kitchen sink and hand-inverting a tank every minute doesn’t really rate a mention. But having to do it was always obnoxious enough that it would sometimes make me grab a digital camera from the shelf when I knew I’d much prefer the photos from a film camera.
A couple years ago, after halving the drudgery by turning over a portion of my condo to a dedicated digital camera scanning station, I next tackled the developing hassle by purchasing a B’s processor. The B’s proved to be a lifesaver — quite literally in fact, given that I no longer had to stand around inverting the tank while the film developed and fixed. The machine did the agitation for me, while I turned my attention to other mundane tasks like cataloging the negatives. It also enabled me to partake more liberally in some extreme push developing, since I rarely have the patience to spend 30 minutes or more inverting a tank.
My film output increased dramatically since I purchased the B’s and, truth be told, I’d probably have been just fine using it ’til the day I join Plus-X and Neopan 1600 in the great beyond. But why settle for “fine” when “grand” is within reach? Hence my decision to purchase the Vintage Visual AGO Film Processor.
On paper, the two devices are rather similar. Both are simply motors designed to provided constant agitation by rotating the film in a tank of solution. The B’s does it by rotating the entire tank; the AGO does it by rotating the reels within the tank. It’s a subtle difference, but there are advantages and disadvantages to each.
Because the B’s rotates the entire tank, you can use most any type of processing tank you like. Unfortunately, my 2-reel stainless tanks were too small for the B’s, and I have a general dislike for Paterson tanks, so I opted for JOBO tanks, which were a nice compromise.
The AGO, on the other hand, forces you to use Paterson tanks, which is precisely why I ignored it upon introduction. Capping and uncapping the Paterson every time you swap chemicals, and the general leakiness of the lid during inversion is what drove me to stainless and JOBO tanks in the first place. Sure, I could have just used the designated swizzle stick, but I preferred my film shaken and not stirred. Upon further investigation, I realized the AGO actually eliminates use of the Paterson lid. The tank is placed horizontally in the motor and you pour and drain the chemicals with the processor attached (using a custom modified Paterson funnel, provided with the AGO). This has reduced my grumbling about Paterson tanks to the point I now only impugn them for their ridiculous size. A 2-reel tank barely fits in my vintage Noritsu film loading dark box. But barely isn’t doesn’t, so I live with it.
So what drew me to the AGO? A few things: 1) As touched on above, there is no capping/uncapping the tank to swap chemicals. It’s a little thing, but it makes the whole process so much cleaner and quicker. 2) It has a built-in timer. Again, this is more nicety than necessity, but instead of using a separate darkroom timer on my iPhone, the machine itself times the stages. 3) It’s programmable. This is the AGO’s big advantage. A built in thermometer constantly reads the temperature of your chemicals, and (if you desire) auto-compensates the time up or down based on that temperature.
Speaking of auto-adjusting the time, the AGO will also auto-reduce black & white processing times should one forgo pre-soaking the negatives. Since the AGO is designed primarily for horizontal tank orientation (without a lid), the tank cannot be filled completely when agitated, as I would normally do with any pre-soak. Sure, I could perform the pre-soak agitation with the tank vertically positioned, but I chose to go “all in” on simplicity and eliminate the pre-soak. Doing so requires a 15% reduction in development time but, again, no calculator is necessary. The AGO does the calculations for me, and adjusts the timer accordingly.
So the end result is, if it’s 22 degrees in my condo, and I want to develop HP5+ at ISO 400, I don’t have to whip out the calculator to subtract one chunk of time for the temperature increase and another 15% for the rotational agitation. Instead, I just pick my custom “HP5/400 in Rodinal” program from the AGO’s menu and let the machine perform the math and stop the process itself.
I use the Ilford method to wash my film, so there are still a couple tanks of water to cap and invert at the end of the developing process. But by then, it’s only water coating my hands and not chemistry, so I find the Paterson less annoying.
I’ll admit, there’s a sort of Kickstarter-ish lack of refinement to the AGO — mostly in the way you need to enable it as a local wifi server in order to update the firmware or enter your own developing recipes. Mechanically, I feel it could use a slightly bigger lip around the well into which you pour the chemicals, and the way the tank seals against the processor requires rapt attention to prevent leaks. Also, the machine comes with a poorly placed USB port (used for charging the internal battery and not, sadly, for communicating with the unit). So, in order to prevent liquid from inadvertently finding its way into the processor, the AGO ships with a teeny tiny little silicon plug, which you are guaranteed to lose. I’m pretty sure, in 6 months, every AGO in existence will have duct tape covering the USB port. Also, I should mention that the first unit I received failed a mere hour after I received it. But on the plus side, Vintage Visual seems to be aggressively updating the firmware (twice already since my purchase), so they’re standing behind the product.
If you’re only processing B&W film, like me, then the AGO is really more about quality of life. It just makes things a tad simpler, cleaner and faster than using the B’s. But simpler, cleaner and faster are all keys to me wanting to shoot even more film, so it has a definite positive impact on my photography. Were I a colour shooter, the AGO’s benefits would become far more obvious, as the built-in temperature and time-compensation eliminate the need to plunge a sous vide, all my chemicals, and the tank itself into a big temperature-maintained water bath. Instead, one could just heat the chemicals, then let the AGO auto-compensate the time as the chemicals cool. In fact, even though I have zero interest in colour photos, I keep toying with the idea of running at least a few rolls of colour through it — just because I can!
Truth is, no one really needs an AGO — particularly if they shoot exclusively in black & white. But now that I have one, there’s no way I’m willing to return to a life without it.
©2025 grEGORy simpson
ABOUT THE PHOTOS : I suppose convention dictates that any article involving a discussion of photo gear should include photos taken in conjunction with said gear. That said, photos processed with the AGO should be indistinguishable from any other photos I develop via any other means — but what the heck? Gotta give the people what they want! So this essay’s accompanying photos (except for the digital product shot) were all developed with the Vintage Visual AGO Film Processor. Other than that, gear-choices are as varied as usual:
Butterfly was shot with an Olympus OM3Ti using a 21mm f/3.5 lens on FP4+ at ISO 200, and developed in Rodinal (Blazinal) 1:50
Arrival is from a Fujica Drive half-frame, shot on Fomapan 400 at ISO 200 and developed in Rodinal (Blazinal) 1:50
Foreshadowing is from an Olympus M-1 (precursor to the OM-1) using a 40mm f/2 lens and Fomapan 400 shot at box speed, and developed in Rodinal (Blazinal) 1:50
Out For In is from a Nikon 28ti, shot on Fomapan 400 at ISO 400 and developed in Rodinal (Blazinal) 1:50
Parallendicular came out of a Nikon S3, fronted with a 50mm f/1.4 lens, and shot on Fomapan 400 at ISO 250, which was developed in Rodinal (Blazinal) 1:50
To Go is from a Fuji Natura Black 1.9, shot on HP5+ at ISO 3200 and developed in Microphen stock.
REMINDER : If you’ve managed to extract a modicum of enjoyment from the plethora of material contained on this site, please consider making a DONATION to its continuing evolution. As you’ve likely realized, ULTRAsomething is neither an aggregator site nor is it AI-generated. Serious time and effort go into developing the original content contained within these virtual walls — even the silly stuff.
Those who enjoy a tactile engagement with photographs are encouraged to visit the ULTRAsomething STORE, where actual objects, including ULTRAsomething Magazine, are available for purchase.
COMMENTS : Comments will be moderated before they’re posted to the website, and commenting will be disabled on any article more than 6 months old.
