Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,328   Posts: 1,537,122   Online: 894
      
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 27
  1. #1
    Poohblah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    433

    underfixing causing thin negs?

    i just got back from a shoot and developed my film only to pull VERY thin negs out of the fix - as in, no lettering or bar codes on the sides, etc. i think the developer was dead, but my classmate thinks that i underfixed my negs. his film, which he developed the same day with the same chemicals, turned out better, but still slightly thin. now, i've had underfixed negs in the past but they've never looked thin. is my classmate right?

    and finally, is there any possible way of saving the negs? this really pissed me off, as they were great photos...

    by the way, i was using Pan F 50, he was using Tri-X 400, both of us developed from the same gallon of D76, me for 6.5 minutes and him for 7.5 minutes. both of us fixed with the same Ilford rapid fix, me for 4.5 minutes and him for 7.5 minutes. both chemicals were at the stock dilution.

  2. #2
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    22,972
    Images
    65
    Underfixing cannot cause what you see! It is underdevelopment for one reason or another.

    PE

  3. #3
    SuzanneR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,733
    Images
    139
    Did you pour the fix in before the developer?

  4. #4
    Poohblah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    433
    that's what i thought... i didn't see his reasoning for underfixing causing thin negs...

    Quote Originally Posted by SuzanneR View Post
    Did you pour the fix in before the developer?
    nope. besides, there is still some density where the leader was and in the shadows... but nothing more.

  5. #5
    jovo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Jacksonville, Florida
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,085
    Images
    190
    What PE said is irrefutable. The fixer wasn't the problem. Exhausted fixer usually leaves a stain that is quite obvious and can be remedied be refixing in fresh solution, but time and temperature in unexhausted developer is responsible for thin or dense negatives assuming they were correctly exposed.

    Six and a half minutes seems way too brief a time to me. At least two or two and a half minutes longer would have been a better choice.

    If there is detail in the negs, you could try dipping them in selenium to intensify what's there. There are threads on apug you can search for recommended procedures (I've not ever done it.).
    John Voss

    My Blog

  6. #6
    Poohblah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    433
    Quote Originally Posted by jovo View Post
    What PE said is irrefutable. The fixer wasn't the problem. Exhausted fixer usually leaves a stain that is quite obvious and can be remedied be refixing in fresh solution, but time and temperature in unexhausted developer is responsible for thin or dense negatives assuming they were correctly exposed.

    Six and a half minutes seems way too brief a time to me. At least two or two and a half minutes longer would have been a better choice.

    If there is detail in the negs, you could try dipping them in selenium to intensify what's there. There are threads on apug you can search for recommended procedures (I've not ever done it.).
    in the past, i've had absolutely wonderful negatives come from Pan F in D76 for 6.5 minutes, and that's what the box recommends for the developer and temperature i'm using. i think the developer was exhausted, but that still doesn't explain why my classmate got better negs than I did.

  7. #7
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    22,972
    Images
    65
    Yes, 6 - 9 minutes should be enough, but the edge markngs are not strong. That is the clue here. Development was lacking.

    PE

  8. #8
    SuzanneR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,733
    Images
    139
    Perhaps the developer had been diluted? (Just another stab, here!!)

  9. #9
    David A. Goldfarb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Honolulu, Hawai'i
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    17,241
    Images
    20
    Did you use developer that had already been used? Did you dilute developer that had already been diluted?

    Did you and your friend both process at about the same time, or could something have happened to the developer in the interim?

    [edit: Suzanne and I are stabbing simultaneously]
    flickr--http://www.flickr.com/photos/davidagoldfarb/
    Photography (not as up to date as the flickr site)--http://www.davidagoldfarb.com/photo
    Academic (Slavic and Comparative Literature)--http://www.davidagoldfarb.com

  10. #10
    Thomas Bertilsson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Minnesota
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    14,251
    Images
    297
    Or contaminated! Perhaps the developing tank/reels/whatever, wasn't cleaned properly, with some remaining fixer in there?

    It's a strong contender if the developer was fine before.

    - Thomas

    [edit: lots of stabbing going on ]
    "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 3 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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