Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,904   Posts: 1,584,578   Online: 988
      
Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 71
  1. #21
    Thomas Bertilsson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Minnesota
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    14,560
    Images
    300
    Keith,

    your developer suggestions doesn't make sense, since the two other rolls in the same batch came out perfect - shot through the same camera, back, lens, system, everything on the same day even. There must be something either with that roll of film, or the combination of Plus-X and Pyrocat that just doesn't work.
    By developing a roll in Xtol later today I'll eliminate one of those problems.

    Quote Originally Posted by keithwms View Post
    Curious. Well, before investing a lot of time in understanding what may have been spurious, why not do another test with fresh developer. Maybe just snip some film off another roll and see what results.

    Who knows, maybe there was a localized Gamma-Ray Burst while you were developing your film. I, like, totally hate it when that happens.

    Another thing you could do is print it fuzzy and call it art.
    "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

  2. #22

    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,070
    Socks--gotta go with Argyles!

  3. #23
    df cardwell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Dearborn,Michigan & Cape Breton Island
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,342
    Images
    8
    Socks - black, my friend. I always wear black socks when I photograph. Perhaps time for a change?

    That leaves Dark Matter.

    Whatever you do, don't use Gray Market Dark Matter.

  4. #24
    glbeas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Roswell, Ga. USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,307
    Images
    109
    Looks a lot to me like the film was wiped with something not quite clean before it was fully dry.
    Gary Beasley

  5. #25
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    23,545
    Images
    65
    Gary;

    Good thought, but how about this... It was wiped with something not quite clean before it was developed.

    That would retard development. I can't see how wiping it after development would decrease the film density, but, it would decrease film density if you wiped it before processing.

    PE

  6. #26
    gainer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    3,726
    Images
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by Photo Engineer View Post
    Thomas;

    Pressure marks are generally dark on the negative and therefore light on the positive image. These appear dark. It therefore was something that reduced development in the developer. Can't say otherwise.

    PE
    Maybe I AM getting old after all. Could have been a coating error, but I have never seen one that got away from Kodak. Maybe this is THE one. Was the patern generally across or along the length of the roll?
    Gadget Gainer

  7. #27

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Southern Ontario-ish
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    547
    I'm inclined to agree with PE. Was the Plus X reeled same time as the other two rolls or was it put on the reel while the two rolls were developing ?

  8. #28

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Southern Ontario-ish
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    547
    Just to ask the obvious dumb question...you had enough chemistry for all three rolls ?

  9. #29
    Thomas Bertilsson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Minnesota
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    14,560
    Images
    300
    Let's see.

    - Clean socks.
    - No wiping done, although I might weap...
    - I wonder if I may have fumbled when I loaded the film and gotten my hands onto the film surface. The Plus-X behaves differently as I reeled up the film, and if I got my fingers onto the film surface, perhaps that 'contaminated' the emulsion? Hmmm, interesting Ron. I'll have to try with more thoroughly washed hands this time.
    - Pattern is sort of not the same in all the rolls, but seem to go along the length of the roll.
    - Reeled at the same time.
    - Tank filled to the brim. Actually, it takes 1.6 liters, I always mix 2 liters and fill it until no more can fit, and pour the last bit off again so agitation is effective.

    Thanks for chiming in, folks. It's most helpful. It's amazing how many factors can play into a situation when doing something this simple!

    - 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

  10. #30
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    23,545
    Images
    65
    Quote Originally Posted by gainer View Post
    Maybe I AM getting old after all. Could have been a coating error, but I have never seen one that got away from Kodak. Maybe this is THE one. Was the patern generally across or along the length of the roll?
    Patrick;

    It might be a coating defect, but it is an unusual one and large. That large, and I would think the equipment for scanning for defects would find it. It looks like it was smeared with something before procssing. A wet sweaty hand? Did you lick the film Thomas?

    PE

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