Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,515   Posts: 1,543,726   Online: 899
      
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 25
  1. #11
    ann
    ann is online now

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    2,878
    Images
    26
    laughing out loud on that one david, thanks i needed a good chuckle today
    http://www.aclancyphotography.com

  2. #12
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    23,015
    Images
    65
    If anyone is an expert on this subject it would be the team of Dick and Sylvia. I think that we have the definitive word from them.

    PE

  3. #13
    Ian Grant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    West Midlands, UK, and Turkey
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    16,267
    Images
    148
    Quote Originally Posted by pgomena View Post
    The current issue of Photo Techniques has an article by Dick Dickerson and Silvia Zawadski that debunks "grain clumping" in long wet times. They basically say wet time has no effect on apparent graininess.

    For my two cents worth, I've found inconsistent temperatures. . . . .
    Peter Gomena
    Micro reticulation which is also better known as grain clumping is usually the result of poor temperature control and inconsistent temperatures between the Dev, Stop-bath, Fix or wash water. Its caused by rapid shrinking & expansion of the emulsion.

    Ian

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,146
    Quote Originally Posted by David Brown View Post
    Actually, the cycles of the moon effect grain more than anything ...
    And women should not be allowed in darkrooms when menstruating!

  5. #15
    JBrunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    6,780
    Quote Originally Posted by argus View Post
    And women should not be allowed in darkrooms when menstruating!
    Wanna get some weird stuff? Get your silver stuff contaminated with Pt/PD or vice versa.

    Ian's statement sounds more likely than something to do with fixing times.
    Last edited by JBrunner; 12-28-2007 at 12:58 PM. Click to view previous post history. Reason: added an es.

  6. #16
    PhotoJim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Regina, SK, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,221
    Quote Originally Posted by richard ide View Post
    Thanks for volunteering Jim.
    I might just do it too.

    Personally I don't think wet time matters (within reason; maybe a week in water might matter, but 22 minutes instead of 14 won't matter, I bet).

    What I think I will do is do two rolls of film with the same test subjects - identical films, of course. I'll give each a water bath so it's apples to apples. One will get a couple of minutes in the water, then on to development. The other will get a couple of hours in the water bath, then on to development. If this doesn't show a difference then for all practical purposes, wet time is irrelevant unless you are doing day-long stand development.
    Jim MacKenzie - Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada

    A bunch of Nikons; Feds, Zorkis and a Kiev; Pentax 67-II (inherited from my deceased father-in-law); Bronica SQ-A; and a nice Shen Hao 4x5 field camera with 3 decent lenses that needs to be taken outside more. Oh, and as of mid-2012, one of those bodies we don't talk about here.

    Favourite film: do I need to pick only one?

  7. #17
    Ian Grant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    West Midlands, UK, and Turkey
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    16,267
    Images
    148
    Long wet times could easily lead to a greater probability of grain clumping occurring as the emulsion will be softer, particularly if wash water temperatures are not controlled properly an often a neglected area fo temperature control.

    Ian
    Last edited by Ian Grant; 12-28-2007 at 02:11 PM. Click to view previous post history. Reason: missed a word out

  8. #18

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Daventry, Northamptonshire, England
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    6,962
    I feel we haven't quite answered the OP's question except to imply that he can't trust the evidence of his eyes or, more likely I think, that as no-one else has seen this phenomenon then maybe something was different about his process to anyone's else's. He mentions seeing the extra grain after scanning. Can I ask you OP: Did you scan each neg batch on all the previous occasions and on the other occasions with longer fix times you haven't seen this phenomenon or is scanning a departure?

    Can you look alternatively look at neg grain under a grain focuser as used for an enlarger? Is the phenomenon still the same? Could it all be connected to the scanning in some way?

    Just some thoughts.

    I appreciate how frustrating it must be to be in a minority of one.

    pentaxuser

  9. #19

    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,055
    Quote Originally Posted by argus View Post
    And women should not be allowed in darkrooms when menstruating!
    Men as well!

  10. #20
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    23,015
    Images
    65
    While doing homework for a post by Patrick Gainer, I found a chart in Haist, Vol I, P 565, which shows the effect of extended times in the fixer for two films. The times were 5mins, 30mins and 60mins. Effectively, anything much over 10mins IMHO would be bad. Since he shows only the 3 widely spaced times, the actual rate is not evident, and would have to be quantitatively determined.

    PE

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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