What did I do wrong on these B&W negatives?

Discussion in 'B&W: Film, Paper, Chemistry' started by adelorenzo, Nov 15, 2012.

  1. adelorenzo

    adelorenzo Subscriber

    Messages:
    792
    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2012
    Location:
    Whitehorse, Yukon
    Shooter:
    4x5 Format
    I processed three rolls of 120 the other day. I always do a single roll at a time just in case I make a mess of something. Anyways, six frames at the end of the second roll had dark, foggy edges. Normally when I screw up it because I somehow loaded the film wrong, is that what happened here?

    Here is an example (unprocessed) scan:
     

    Attached Files:

  2. Bob-D659

    Bob-D659 Member

    Messages:
    1,300
    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2008
    Location:
    Winnipeg, Ca
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Air bubbles along the edges maybe, or the emulsion side of the film sticking to the plastic reel and not allowing the developer to do it's thing.
     
  3. johnielvis

    johnielvis Member

    Messages:
    940
    Joined:
    May 21, 2010
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    could be from the reel when you develop it--that's what it looks like to me -- not enough agitation to get chemicals near the steel coils...this is 645 sized, right? if not then look inside your camera if this is 6x9....

    but if 645 then maybe you do have loading issues or the reel is weird and gets closer to the image area...or somehow way too tight curl in the film that pushes the emulsion against the coils???? tough one...you'd be able to tell when you pull the reel out if it's been loaded wrong...
     
  4. polyglot

    polyglot Member

    Messages:
    3,472
    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2009
    Location:
    South Austra
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Interesting. Are those dark bits on the film-edges or are they the inter-frame edges? I originally assumed they were edges and that this is 645, but the exposure printing in there (and lack of film-ID printing) is confusing and makes me think this is maybe your 690, but this doesn't look wide enough to be 45mm on 6x9 and if that 003-14 means "frame 14" then has to be the 645...

    Anyway, the weird thing is that the exposure-printing seems to have been developed nicely despite the image near there being darkened. And it seems to go towards a middle-grey rather than black; see in the tree at upper-left it's no darker than at the right.

    Is there any chance you accidentally got some gloved fingers in front of the lens or something? What do the negs look like, do they have any slight milkiness or brown staining?
     
  5. adelorenzo

    adelorenzo Subscriber

    Messages:
    792
    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2012
    Location:
    Whitehorse, Yukon
    Shooter:
    4x5 Format
    Thanks for the replies. Here's some more information:

    This is a 645 frame and using a metal reel. Is it possible that the reel was wet when I loaded it and the emulsion stuck to it? I've loaded a lot of rolls of film wrong but this one felt and looked OK when it came out of the tank. And I suppose if that was the case then the film edges would look bad too and they don't. Film edges look good and the film ID printing is clear (Delta 400), it's just cut off in by the film holder in the scanner. As you can see the exposure data developed just fine.

    Definitely not anything in front of the lens as there are 5 others (all from one end of the roll) from a few different times and places.

    The negatives are a little bit 'milky' you could really see it when I made a contact print from this roll. I know that my fixer is on it's last legs could this be a fixer issue?
     
  6. polyglot

    polyglot Member

    Messages:
    3,472
    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2009
    Location:
    South Austra
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Definitely smells like a fixer issue. Fix 'em again in fresh.
     
  7. dehk

    dehk Member

    Messages:
    890
    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2010
    Location:
    W Michigan
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I say solution is not covering the top of the reel leads to uneven development at the edge.
     
  8. MattKing

    MattKing Subscriber

    Messages:
    16,816
    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2005
    Location:
    Delta, BC, Canada
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Bingo! - it is a fixer problem.
     
  9. summicron1

    summicron1 Subscriber

    Messages:
    1,946
    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2010
    Location:
    Ogden, Utah
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    dark foggy edges tell me the film is fogged -- you didn't keep that particular roll out of the bright light and/or you didn't have it wound on the spool tight enough.

    the milky issue is separate -- the black foggs along the edge are fog, keep the film in the shade/dark and keep it rolled tight, maybe even carry a black plastic bag to carry it in, or film tubes (make one by cutting the bottom off a plastic film can and taping it to the top of another.)
     
  10. Bob-D659

    Bob-D659 Member

    Messages:
    1,300
    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2008
    Location:
    Winnipeg, Ca
    Shooter:
    Multi Format

    Except you are looking at a positive image, so dark areas are clear film.
     
  11. adelorenzo

    adelorenzo Subscriber

    Messages:
    792
    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2012
    Location:
    Whitehorse, Yukon
    Shooter:
    4x5 Format
    Right, negatives are clear in those areas. So that rules out a light problem, it seems like just somehow there wasn't any development along the film edges of six frames, even though the film edge markings look fine. I'm trying to figure out if it could be something in camera but I've developed film from the same camera/lens that was taken after those pictures with no problems.

    I did re-fix the film tonight so if nothing else I've learned all about not fixing film correctly. The negatives look much better and hopefully that will explain some of the problems I've been having with scanning.
     
  12. Thomas Bertilsson

    Thomas Bertilsson Subscriber

    Messages:
    15,206
    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2003
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I hope this doesn't sound like preaching, but test your fixer every time before you use it. Take a small piece of undeveloped film, put it in the fix you intend to use, and time how quickly it clears the emulsion. Rapid fixers shouldn't take more than 30-40 seconds, and regular fix not more than a minute to a minute and a half. If it starts to take longer you might run the risk of using exhausted fixer and it's time to retire it and mix fresh.

    Also, measure the exact volume of fixer you need to basically fill the tank, minus a little at the top, so that you cover the reels entirely, but also to give a little bit of room for the medium to move around in the tank when you agitate. Don't fill the tank entirely.

    If you already know this, then great, if not you have something to look into.
     
  13. ann

    ann Subscriber

    Messages:
    2,920
    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2002
    Shooter:
    35mm
    Could be a "fat" roll. Very common with 120 film.

    Be sure you remove the film from the camera in dim light and it is rolled tightly , or a "fat" roll can be the results.
     
  14. Sponsored Ad
  15. Thomas Bertilsson

    Thomas Bertilsson Subscriber

    Messages:
    15,206
    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2003
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Wouldn't that cause the affected areas to be over-exposed, though? (white instead of black in the positive image).
     
  16. summicron1

    summicron1 Subscriber

    Messages:
    1,946
    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2010
    Location:
    Ogden, Utah
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    if they are clear in those areas, but the edges are normal, then what that tells me in inadequate exposure, for whatever reason, not a fixing problem..fixer removes un-exposed silver

    Have you had your camera check for ghosts lately?
     
  17. adelorenzo

    adelorenzo Subscriber

    Messages:
    792
    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2012
    Location:
    Whitehorse, Yukon
    Shooter:
    4x5 Format
    I do measure the amounts of chemicals I pour into the tank BUT I'm not super precise about it. I do remember with at least one of these rolls that the tank felt like it was overfull with developer, maybe that screwed up my agitation? Even if it wasn't the source of the problem it's one more thing not to do next time, thanks.
     
  18. adelorenzo

    adelorenzo Subscriber

    Messages:
    792
    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2012
    Location:
    Whitehorse, Yukon
    Shooter:
    4x5 Format
    No ghosts in there that I can see. :smile:

    The only other camera-related problem I can think of is cold temperatures. We were out on an hour+ walk and I was carrying my camera on a strap, it was somewhere around -10 to -15 C. So I suppose it is possible that the first frames of the film were OK but as the camera or film got colder this somehow happened at the end of the roll. I've never had any cold issues in the past with my 645N but this 645NII is new to me and is about to go through it's first winter.
     
  19. ann

    ann Subscriber

    Messages:
    2,920
    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2002
    Shooter:
    35mm
    oops, your right, my brain is looking at it backwards. Glad you caught that :wink:
     
  20. pentaxuser

    pentaxuser Subscriber

    Messages:
    8,200
    Joined:
    May 9, 2005
    Location:
    Daventry, No
    Shooter:
    35mm
    Yes never a good idea to overfill a tank but how much this affects movement depends on the design of the tank. The Jobo has a great deal of expansion available due to the shape of the top but Durst tanks much less so. I have never tried it but I suspect that it would be possible in the case of a Durst tank to fill it right up to the top of the light trapped filling hole and have almost the equivalent of a solid block of developer such that on inversion very little movement of the liquid would take place

    pentaxuser
     
  21. johnielvis

    johnielvis Member

    Messages:
    940
    Joined:
    May 21, 2010
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    the amount of chemicals is not the problem--the lack of development is on BOTH sides...so one side was totally submerged.
    it's not a fixer problem since it's TOO clear in those portions (more light gets through hence dark in the print)
    the only thing that makes sense is that the emulsion is touching the reel coil or is so close that the developer can't get in there and do it's job.

    he already raised the flag that the reel may have been wet...if so, then that would surely do it....when film is dry and subjected to wet it STICKS to anything it touches and takes a bit of extra diffusion to get it off---so I'm thinking that's exactly what happened.

    Just make sure the reels are dry next time and you should be fine....OR just shoot to crop around an extra border....OR leave it be!!! INTENTIONALLY wet the reels to get a neuveaux hipstar look with EXTRA black "unpredictable" border to go with the regular frame lines that get left in them hipstar pix these days....
     
  22. adelorenzo

    adelorenzo Subscriber

    Messages:
    792
    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2012
    Location:
    Whitehorse, Yukon
    Shooter:
    4x5 Format
    I just processed another roll from that camera and same problem. Instead of being 3-4 frames at the end of the roll this time it was 5-6 frames in the middle of the roll. It was a bone dry reel and everything seemed fine loading it and when it was coming out of the tank. I really don't think there is a problem with the processing, I've done enough rolls to know when I've screwed something up.

    Since the sides of the negatives are dark this is leading me to believe it is a camera issue and the film is not getting light somehow. Would it be possible that I have film problem? Maybe the film is curling and so the top and bottom edges are not getting exposed? I was shooting at -30 C and the camera was very cold so I am wondering if this is causing some kind of problem in the camera.

    I'm going to try shooting a test roll indoors to see if cold is a factor, and also will try a different film back to see if that is part of the problem. Maybe my pressure plate isn't working in the cold?

    Here are some more scans, as always any thoughts and feedback welcome.
     

    Attached Files:

  23. MattKing

    MattKing Subscriber

    Messages:
    16,816
    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2005
    Location:
    Delta, BC, Canada
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Was this shot using a Pentax 645NII? If not, what type of camera?
     
  24. MARKNABIA

    MARKNABIA Member

    Messages:
    55
    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2012
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    looks like the curling is pretty consistent on each frame.try to send your next film to the lab, then if it the same problem, you might wanna check your camera...
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 7, 2012
  25. adelorenzo

    adelorenzo Subscriber

    Messages:
    792
    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2012
    Location:
    Whitehorse, Yukon
    Shooter:
    4x5 Format
    Yes, it's with my 645NII.

    I have had recent rolls out of this camera processed by a lab and at home without this problem. So either it has happened very recently or it's somehow related to the cold weather. If I can shoot a test roll indoors without a problem then maybe I can narrow it down to temperature.
     
  26. Bob-D659

    Bob-D659 Member

    Messages:
    1,300
    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2008
    Location:
    Winnipeg, Ca
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Well looking at the first new frame you posted, it almost looks like light is coming around the bump on the lower right side. Check the camera, something could be buckling in front of the shutter curtains and causing a shadow on the film, maybe?