Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,880   Posts: 1,520,466   Online: 962
      
Page 1 of 9 1234567 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 87
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Linköping, Sweden
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    74
    Images
    6

    What has happened to my negatives?

    See the attached images. The film is Foma 100, developed in R09 in Paterson tanks (plastic reels), according to my standard procedure (2 minute pre-soak, 30 s initial agitation, then 2 flips, rotation, and 2 more flips each minute).

    Any ideas? I used a bit more chemistry than actually necessary (300 ml instead of 290 ml, iirc) but I think it was in the larger tank (that takes two 120 spools) so maybe the film wasn't all the way down on the bottom all the time? Or what is it that has happened here? :/

    I developed a roll of TMAX400 using the same chemistry a few minutes prior to this Foma 100 roll, I haven't had any issues with doing so earlier.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Ska?rmavbild 2012-02-02 kl. 22.48.25.png   Ska?rmavbild 2012-02-02 kl. 22.48.43.png  

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    122
    Quote Originally Posted by Oscar Carlsson View Post
    See the attached images. The film is Foma 100, developed in R09 in Paterson tanks (plastic reels), according to my standard procedure (2 minute pre-soak, 30 s initial agitation, then 2 flips, rotation, and 2 more flips each minute).

    Any ideas? I used a bit more chemistry than actually necessary (300 ml instead of 290 ml, iirc) but I think it was in the larger tank (that takes two 120 spools) so maybe the film wasn't all the way down on the bottom all the time? Or what is it that has happened here? :/

    I developed a roll of TMAX400 using the same chemistry a few minutes prior to this Foma 100 roll, I haven't had any issues with doing so earlier.
    Forget the pre-soak.

  3. #3
    MattKing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Delta, British Columbia, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    12,050
    Images
    60
    Is there any chance that your fix was exhausted?

    Are there any signs that the film hasn't totally cleared?
    Matt

    “Photography is a complex and fluid medium, and its many factors are not applied in simple sequence. Rather, the process may be likened to the art of the juggler in keeping many balls in the air at one time!”

    Ansel Adams, from the introduction to The Negative - The New Ansel Adams Photography Series / Book 2

  4. #4
    Terry Christian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Memphis, TN
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    530
    Images
    15
    Did you put an empty reel on top of the one with the film to keep it at the bottom of the tank? Using a larger volume of chemistry wouldn't hurt things at all.

  5. #5
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    22,912
    Images
    65
    Keep the prewet!

    Looks like uneven development due to low agitation. There is a hint of bromide drag in the left photo. Films react differently to the initial wetting and the continued re-wetting with each solution. The initial agitation must be strong enough to fully wet the film and the pouring process where the prewet or developer enters the tank must be rapid and even.

    PE

  6. #6
    Thomas Bertilsson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Minnesota
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    14,163
    Images
    289
    Looks like uneven development to me. Initial agitation is crucial, so make sure to agitate well for at least the first thirty seconds (after pouring the chemistry into the tank).
    "Often moments come looking for us". - Robert Frank

    "Make good art!" - Neil Gaiman

    "...the heart and mind are the true lens of the camera". - Yousuf Karsh

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    15,935
    unless you are doing some sort of nutty development method like semi stand, or stand &c
    or continuous agitation in tubes or rolling around your darkroom sink ...

    manufacturers usually recommend agitation for the first full minute, and either 5 sec's / 30 or 10 sec /60
    agitation should be solid and consistent ... i was always taught like a figure - 8 and at the same time turn
    the hand tank over ... again and again for the 5 or 10 seconds ...
    agitation for fix is the same routine as it is for developer ... and stop bath + fix remove are continuous agitation ...

    nice views ( less the streaks ) good luck getting the kinks out! ( and belated welcome to apug ! )

    john
    if my apug gallery looks empty you might check these places

    website
    blog
    sell-site

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    122
    Regardless of what other says, most of the world stopped using pre-wetting in the 1930-ies because of problems with uneven development.
    Besides that, modern film doesn't need pre-wetting in anyway.
    In addition to this you may have to little agitation. Rodinal and R09 contans a development agent that is very sensible to bromide, so insuficcient agitation will give you bromide drag.
    As mentioned earlier, agitation with inversion of the tank works best.

  9. #9
    ic-racer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Midwest USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,126
    Quote Originally Posted by Oscar Carlsson View Post
    so maybe the film wasn't all the way down on the bottom all the time?
    Maybe! You can see that it moved up. Probably a centimeter each time you agitated. Try putting an empty reel in there to hold the lower one down.

    Also, those that use Mac OSX, the "Universal Access" has a button "White on Black" to view posts like the above easier. I guess his scanner automatically inverts it.

  10. #10
    Thomas Bertilsson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Minnesota
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    14,163
    Images
    289
    Quote Originally Posted by Tronds
    Regardless of what other says, most of the world stopped using pre-wetting in the 1930-ies because of problems with uneven development.
    Besides that, modern film doesn't need pre-wetting in anyway.
    In addition to this you may have to little agitation. Rodinal and R09 contans a development agent that is very sensible to bromide, so insuficcient agitation will give you bromide drag.
    As mentioned earlier, agitation with inversion of the tank works best.
    I can't tell a difference between pre-soak and no pre-soak.

    Rodinal and bromide drag... With 120 film I can safely extend my agitation intervals to every three minutes, and with 35mm every five minutes. I do this to control the tone curve of my negatives. No problems there either. Longer than that, you're on your own, but many people make standing development work just fine without bromide drag (although problems do get reported).

    What I DO notice, however, is that if I don't agitate properly, insuring sufficient flow within the tank, I get uneven development. AND, that initial agitation is so utterly important. I always agitate continuously for the whole first minute, using full tank inversion while rotating the tank along its long axis. Getting agitation technique properly under control is, to me, the most important aspect of film developing.

    Quote Originally Posted by ic-racer
    You can see that it moved up. Probably a centimeter each time you agitated. Try putting an empty reel in there to hold the lower one down.
    That's a really good point! If the film spool moved up the column, and gradually out of the developer, that would certainly be detrimental. Yup, always fill the tank up with as many reels as it will hold, whether there's film in them or not.
    "Often moments come looking for us". - Robert Frank

    "Make good art!" - Neil Gaiman

    "...the heart and mind are the true lens of the camera". - Yousuf Karsh

Page 1 of 9 1234567 ... LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin