Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,218   Posts: 1,532,219   Online: 880
      
Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 71
  1. #21

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    496
    Quote Originally Posted by albada View Post
    The purpose of the testing is to see if bad film is the problem. For that, we don't want to try known work-arounds such as using more dev or a pre-wash.

    Mark Overton
    Mark, I'll be testing 120 so my results probably won't match yours. JohnW

  2. #22

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    OH
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,789
    Images
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by albada View Post
    Tim Gray:
    The date-and-batch codes of your latest TMY2 are the same as mine. Is this 35mm? And you've developed one of those rolls in XTOL with no pre-wash and it's okay? How much XTOL do you use per roll? If you use a lot, I suspect the problem won't be as bad.
    I actually haven't shot this specific brick. Yes, it's 35mm. I don't know what the codes were on the most recent TMY I've shot; it's probably not safe to assume it's the same. I just got this one a couple weeks ago and have been shooting Tri-X in the meantime. Next roll of film I shoot, I load one of these in and try it out for you. I never do a prewash and always do 1:1 in SS tanks filled to the top. So 4 oz of XTOL and 4 oz of water per roll.

  3. #23
    polyglot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    South Australia
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    3,186
    Images
    12
    If "use more developer" is a workaround, is not the conclusion to be made that someone is perhaps using insufficient developer? I haven't read the original thread, but is the OP using at least 100mL of XTOL stock per roll? If not, there will be trouble.

    Some films will exhaust a developer more than others; I've no idea if TMY2 is particularly rough on a developer but that might explain that "works with film X but not Y" if the OP is skimping on stock. FWIW, I use TMY2 in XTOL (300+300 for 3 rolls in a rotary tank) and it's fine. I don't seem to have any batch 0166 though.

  4. #24

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Oregon and Austria
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    833
    Just brainstorming here...

    ... but, if pre-soaking the film does the job, then it seems logical that something being removed in the pre-soak is what is adversely affecting the Xtol.

    I know that the Tri-X I develop has lately got a new anti-halation coating, one that comes out dark blue in the pre-soak water. Perhaps Kodak has re-formulated the anti-halation coating for TMY as well, and that is killing Xtol somehow. I can't think of anything else that gets removed with the pre-soak.

    FWIW, I always presoak, but have had some low density problems with Tri-X sheet film (320-Tri-X) lately as well, and have commented on it in a thread or two. I need to run some step-wedge tests to really be sure of this, which I'll be doing this summer when I get back into the darkroom. I do not use Xtol, usually PMK or occasionally HC-110.

    It is fairly well-known that Kodak makes modifications to their products from time to time without publicizing them, usually to increase the profit margin. With Kodak's current state and lack of R&D personnel to do testing, perhaps they are making changes that have unexpected effects.

    We need to test and quantify these things if we want to know what's going on; we can't rely on the Kodak labs anymore . I'm interested in the with/without presoak test with the same developer batch and the same film batch (and, hopefully, the same amount of exposure, so the developer loads are similar as well).

    Best,

    Doremus

    www.DoremusScudder.com

  5. #25
    Rudeofus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,590
    Images
    10
    Quote Originally Posted by polyglot View Post
    If "use more developer" is a workaround, is not the conclusion to be made that someone is perhaps using insufficient developer? I haven't read the original thread, but is the OP using at least 100mL of XTOL stock per roll?
    Bold face added by me.

    polyglot, please note that Mark Overton aka albada is not your average first time home developer, and if you did read his thread you would see that quite clearly.
    Trying to be the best of whatever I am, even if what I am is no good.

  6. #26
    Thomas Bertilsson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Minnesota
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    14,213
    Images
    296
    Quote Originally Posted by Doremus Scudder View Post
    ... but, if pre-soaking the film does the job, then it seems logical that something being removed in the pre-soak is what is adversely affecting the Xtol.
    I agree 100% with your entire post, except where you assume that the anti-halation coating is the only thing that washes away in the pre-wash. I have no way to prove that you're wrong, but just thought that assumption was a little too bold. No harm meant; I just like being the devil's advocate.

    The line quoted above is exactly the issue. "Something that gets washed away in the pre-soak affects ascorbate developers negatively". So the fast and easy cure is to always pre-soak TMY-2 prior to developing it. A more viable long-term solution is for Kodak to test the combination and come up with a fix where the film does not have to be pre-soaked prior to developing, which will require careful laboratory work, analysis, and problem solving.

    - Thomas
    "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. #27

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    OH
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,789
    Images
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by Doremus Scudder View Post
    I know that the Tri-X I develop has lately got a new anti-halation coating, one that comes out dark blue in the pre-soak water. Perhaps Kodak has re-formulated the anti-halation coating for TMY as well, and that is killing Xtol somehow. I can't think of anything else that gets removed with the pre-soak.
    The only change I've seen in the last year or so with Kodak's B&W films is that the 35mm Tri-X canister has different graphics. It used to be green text on a gray background at one spot; now it's black text on a gray background.

    Who knows if other changes have been made. And who knows what is causing your dark blue water - it's not necessarily anti-halation dyes/coatings.

  8. #28

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Daventry, Northamptonshire, England
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    6,908
    I await with interest Kodak's reply to the OP. I know Kodak is having major financial problems but to assume that it has changed TMY which has had an adverse effect on its own product Xtol without any testing and Kodak's lab cannot now be relied upon is I suspect baseless assumptions.

    pentaxuser

  9. #29
    palec's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Bratislava, Slovakia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    71
    This problem catched my attention, because I recently bought a pack of TMax 400-2 films in 135 format, by coincidence the same batch as Mark - 0166, and I usually develop in Xtol.
    I had an older TMY2 batch in camera, don't know exactly which one, so I decided to run a simple comparison.
    There are few differences to Mark's steps, however. I exposed both films at EI 200, because that's how the first film has been exposed from start.
    I developed at 23 °C, because that's my room temperature.
    And I used 4 months old Xtol stock (250ml in Jobo tank for two reels).

    I did some snapshots of the process just for record.





    There is a new cassette printing and code with batch 0166 (right), two colours instead of four and barcode is 310804 instead of 210804.

    I developed at 23 °C for 5:30 minutes with 4 inversions every minute.




    In both cases used Xtol ended with slight yellow tint (left before, right after, batch 0166 bottom row).

    Well, most important things, the results. I cannot tell them apart and I don't see anything wrong with any of them.



    I don't have a densitometer, but the films look ok (same) to me, the labels are not faint.
    12 frames are shots of grey card (blank, zone 0-10), batch 0166 (right).

    Larger photos are available at picassa album: http://tinyurl.com/tmy2b0166

    I'm curious about findings of others.

  10. #30

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Oregon and Austria
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    833
    Palec,

    Now for the $64,000 question .......... Did you pre-soak? Please let us know, since that is the crux of the matter. The real test would have been to duplicate the one you just did, but do one with and one without the pre-soak.

    And, thanks for following up on the, taking the initiative and doing the test. Just let us know about the pre-soak, okay?

    Best,

    Doremus

    www.DoremusScudder.com

Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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