Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,909   Posts: 1,521,569   Online: 805
      
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 22
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    UK
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,100

    a scratchy mystery

    Here we have a bit of a frame (Fomapan 200 135/36) showing myriad tiny scratches in the emulsion layer, all at very similar angles; these are visible quite uniformly over the full length of the roll , over the full width of the roll, and all at the same similar angles. The developed leader has these too, but the undeveloped leader is long gone, so I can't examine that.

    The film was loaded into and developed in a Paterson tank on a Paterson reel, in APH09 (Rodinal) and fixed in Ilford rapid fix.

    I've developed many rolls from the same batch of Fomapan, without seeing anything remotely similar, so I can't imagine it's a manufacturing problem; Never seen it on any other negatives either, come to that, so I'm assuming it must be something particular to the processing of this roll. I can't conceive how scratches like this - across the width of the film - could come about from a physical cause within camera, or from loading onto the reel.

    It's as if there was some quite abrasive material suspended in either developer or fixer that has abraded the emulsion layer during agitation. So perhaps something nasty came out of the tap that night ...

    any other hypotheses to account for it?
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails 20131115_6748-37-P_OM1n-Foma200-APH09-16bitHDR-3600-037-1.jpg  

  2. #2
    AgX
    AgX is offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,331
    Are those really scratches? As there is seemingly zero-density they must reach quite deep.

    I also see a lot of zero-density dots.

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    UK
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,100
    they really are scratches

  4. #4
    hdeyong's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Central Canada and Southern France
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    269
    I've never seen anything like it. They look like rain.

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Georgia, USA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    211
    Weird. Looks like rain to me, especially since it is a negative image. Scratches would be the other way around. Light on the positive and dark on the negative. These are light on a negative.

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    UK
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,100
    let me assure you that no rain fell that day

    and scratches on a negative are not dark, and would not be light on a positive ...

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Georgia, USA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    211
    Let me qualify my statement. In my scans scratches show up on the negative image as dark. When reversed to a positive they are light. Light doesn't get through or is redirected due to the imperfection in the negative. In this case it does appear that light is passing completely through the film and onto the scanning sensor.

    Quote Originally Posted by pdeeh View Post
    let me assure you that no rain fell that day

    and scratches on a negative are not dark, and would not be light on a positive ...
    Last edited by Lamar; 11-22-2013 at 10:45 AM. Click to view previous post history.

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Superior, Colorado USA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    172
    [QUOTE=pdeeh;1571335]let me assure you that no rain fell that day

    ...especially since the marks appear on the film leader too. So it makes sense to me that these are some sort of film/processing artifact rather than something actually in the image.

    How did you store these after processing? Any chance that you placed the strips into film sleeves or top-loading film storage pages, and perhaps the film wasn't 100% dry at the time? My early film experience was frought with all manner of scratching due to inserting strips into film storage pages. Other than that, the only thing I can think of is that it is just some manufacturing defect on that one particular role. It is strange though, and I really don't recall seeing those particular kinds of marks before.

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    UK
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,100
    It really is weird isn't it?
    My habit is to cut strips from the hanging roll after drying, scan them, and only then do the strips go into sleeves; contacts or enlargements will get made made when I have time & inclination. So there's no possible way sleeve damage could have occurred at this point (plus I use end-opening sleeves so would get longitudinal marks anyway).

    @Lamar, I'm sorry but your rationale still doesn't make sense to me; as AgX says, a scratch is equivalent to an area of zero density - the emulsion layer is missing in the area of the scratch. It will therefore appear on a negative as light line, and it will appear on a scan or a print as a dark line. This is the logical and physical consequence of the negative/positive process. Perhaps you are thinking of scanning transparencies (positives) rather than negatives, however?

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,066
    Lamar makes a good point about scratches being able to deflect light, but my experience is that scratches on the e-side pass more light and are dark or black on the print, clear on the neg. However, scratches on the base side can indeed, and usually do deflect light and print lighter. Careful inspection needs to confirm which side, not by looking through the neg, but by glancing the light across the surface to see the "marks".
    Not to say pdeeh has not done this already.
    Either way, this is a strange one for me. It does look like rain or snow in motion, but the density is backwards for this to be the case, if the scan image is negative.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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