Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,536   Posts: 1,544,231   Online: 739
      
Page 2 of 14 FirstFirst 1234567812 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 137
  1. #11
    Thomas Bertilsson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Minnesota
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    14,289
    Images
    301
    Like others have suggested I think you're over-agitating.

    1. When you fill your tank, make sure you have a lot of chemistry, but leaving just a little bit of room for the liquid to move around.
    2. When you agitate - slow down, it shouldn't be vigorous. One inversion could take 2-3 seconds. When you agitate the liquid should not rush through the tank.
    3. I don't know your agitation intervals, but I keep them modest between 1 and 3 minutes. 1 minute when I need some more contrast from flat lighting, and longer intervals when I need to keep the highlights from blocking up.

    I had exactly your problem a while back, and changing my agitation technique solved it. Use a single (120) / dual (35mm) tank and do some tests with unimportant film.

    I'm not sure about the Photo-Flo issues (I never let Photo-Flo into my tank, and I had the problem you describe anyway), and light leaks (never had one).
    "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. #12

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Woonsocket, RI USA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    2,725
    Quote Originally Posted by Thomas Bertilsson View Post
    2. When you agitate - slow down, it shouldn't be vigorous. One inversion could take 2-3 seconds. When you agitate the liquid should not rush through the tank.
    I've seen this advice before, but I've also seen very different advice. Here's what Kodak says about agitation in their Color Darkroom Dataguide (1996 edition, p. 20): "rotate [the tank] upside down and then back to the upright position at the rate of one cycle per second for 30 seconds as the initial agitation." (Subsequent interleaved standing and agitation is then described, without explicitly mentioning rate of inversions.) I believe Kodak gives the same advice for B&W development, but I don't have a reference handy.

    That said, agitation seems to be a very personal thing. I use the ~1-cycle-per-second agitation speed with no problems, but when combined with other variables, some of them perhaps quite subtle, that speed might be too much. It's quite possible that cutting back the rate of agitation will have good results for the OP -- but that speed is definitely not excessive in an absolute sense.

  3. #13
    Thomas Bertilsson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Minnesota
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    14,289
    Images
    301
    At least we're in the same realm. When you 'shake' the tank, you're at fractions of seconds. 1s for an inversion is pretty slow.
    "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

  4. #14
    Bertil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Northern Sweden
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    183
    Images
    181
    Brent, you say "The only time they do not [have this edge problem] is when a lab does my processing." In view of that your own conclusion seems reasonable: that it is your developing process that is the problem.

    I had problems with overdeveloped edges for years! Particularly with 120 film; and it is not at all uncommon to see prints with this problem (I can show you pictures in printed books by professional photographers, using for example Hasselblad or Rollieflex, with light left and right edges, perhaps not that obvious as in your picture, but the tendency quite obvious when you are alert to it!)

    My diagnosis: problem with proper agitation during the development process.
    My general idea about agitation: each time you agitate the substitution of fresh developer for the more or less used chemicals, which contains some bad substances, must be thoroughly performed over the whole surface of the emulsion. You need not agitate very often: It’s often quite enough with: agitation the first minute, then agitation 15 second each second minute (or each minute if you prefer that), if the developing time is around, say, 10 minutes. But in each agitation session the substitution of the chemicals must be as complete as possible (very little development is performed during the agitation period, it’s more a question of fully substituting god for bad chemicals).
    How to do that? Well, I do it like this (and have now hundreds of developed 120 and 35 mm film with no edge problems): I use a 1 liter developing tank and with 1 120 film reel or 2 35 mm reel, such that the reel(s) are staying at the bottom of the tank and not jumping around when you invert it; roughly 500 cl developer such that it covers the reels with a reasonable marginal, not more. You rotate and invert the tank, up and down back and forth, during the agitation period, not violent but not very smooth either. If your tank is filled up with the developer, the movement of the developer over the film surface when you invert and move the tank will not be enough for fully substituting the chemicals, and the substitution will quite probably be more complete around the edges of the reel (where the movement is more turbulent) compared to the middle of the film.
    I use stainless reels and tanks, but I guess that the problem will be less with a Paterson tank with this huge “mouth” where a lot of the developer goes into the “mouth” when you turn the tank up side down, but I have less experience with this Paterson tank (but no problems with some 120 rolls in C-41 developing using a Paterson tank recently).
    At least this procedure have solved my edge problem, and using my general idea (complete substitution of chemicals... each agitation period, even if in few periods) works as good for developing 4x5, 5x7, 8x10 film, which I had some problems with at the beginning. Some people seem to solve their problems with uneven development by making their agitation softer. It hasn't worked for me, at least not always!
    Nothing has irritated me as much as my uneven developed negatives, particularly when the labs do it perfect!
    Good luck with more tries, and wait with the important rolls!
    //Bertil

  5. #15
    Scruff McGruff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    SF Bay Area
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    56
    Wow, thank you all for the prompt and thorough responses! This is fantastic!

    I load my SS reels in a changing bag. AFAIK my reel loading technique is fine, but I've been wrong before!

    On this particular roll, I did inversion cycles for the first 30 seconds (about one per 3 seconds) and did three inversion cycles in 10 seconds every minute. I guess I'll have to do more thorough testing with slower and faster inversions.

    I wish it were a light leak, but lab-developed film (color and B&W) comes out fine, both before and after I replaced the light seals.

    I use 135 format film, but I wonder if not loading the reels tight enough could have the same effect on 135 as it does on 120?

    I have one generic SS reel and one Hewes. I use a two-roll (135) tank. The reels slide a bit inside the tank, but there isn't all that much space for them to move around in.

    As far as I can tell, there is no fogging of the film except for a bit near the leader end. There are some odd dark marks occasionally, but I chalked those up to contact with the reel. I could be wrong though, hopefully the pictures clear this up.

    I do put my reels in photo-flo; I will definitely try to clean them up as you suggested. I hadn't thought of this before, thank you!

    Here is a whole film (not the one with the above photo, but this roll has the same problem). The digital camera method wasn't working so well so I just scanned it on platen mode. There seems to be a bit of ghosting, but hopefully it is still helpful.



    Zoomed in on the top-left:



    Again, thank you for all the great feedback!
    Last edited by Scruff McGruff; 05-13-2009 at 01:19 PM. Click to view previous post history. Reason: typo

  6. #16
    jmcd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    715
    Images
    41
    I have had this problem with some 120 in the past. If there is a half inch or so of air space the reel will slide that far when the tank is turned upside-down. Some of my 35mm tanks hold the reel almost snug, while others allow a lot of movement. Anyway, I now add a small piece of rubber on top of the loaded reel inside the tank to limit movement. This solved uneven edge density with my 120 film.

  7. #17
    Thomas Bertilsson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Minnesota
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    14,289
    Images
    301
    This is really good advice.

    And, by the way, nice name Bertil! My grandfather and father are both named Bertil, and you can see where I got my last name from.

    Heja Sverige!

    - Thomas

    Quote Originally Posted by Bertil View Post
    Brent, you say "The only time they do not [have this edge problem] is when a lab does my processing." In view of that your own conclusion seems reasonable: that it is your developing process that is the problem.

    I had problems with overdeveloped edges for years! Particularly with 120 film; and it is not at all uncommon to see prints with this problem (I can show you pictures in printed books by professional photographers, using for example Hasselblad or Rollieflex, with light left and right edges, perhaps not that obvious as in your picture, but the tendency quite obvious when you are alert to it!)

    My diagnosis: problem with proper agitation during the development process.
    My general idea about agitation: each time you agitate the substitution of fresh developer for the more or less used chemicals, which contains some bad substances, must be thoroughly performed over the whole surface of the emulsion. You need not agitate very often: It’s often quite enough with: agitation the first minute, then agitation 15 second each second minute (or each minute if you prefer that), if the developing time is around, say, 10 minutes. But in each agitation session the substitution of the chemicals must be as complete as possible (very little development is performed during the agitation period, it’s more a question of fully substituting god for bad chemicals).
    How to do that? Well, I do it like this (and have now hundreds of developed 120 and 35 mm film with no edge problems): I use a 1 liter developing tank and with 1 120 film reel or 2 35 mm reel, such that the reel(s) are staying at the bottom of the tank and not jumping around when you invert it; roughly 500 cl developer such that it covers the reels with a reasonable marginal, not more. You rotate and invert the tank, up and down back and forth, during the agitation period, not violent but not very smooth either. If your tank is filled up with the developer, the movement of the developer over the film surface when you invert and move the tank will not be enough for fully substituting the chemicals, and the substitution will quite probably be more complete around the edges of the reel (where the movement is more turbulent) compared to the middle of the film.
    I use stainless reels and tanks, but I guess that the problem will be less with a Paterson tank with this huge “mouth” where a lot of the developer goes into the “mouth” when you turn the tank up side down, but I have less experience with this Paterson tank (but no problems with some 120 rolls in C-41 developing using a Paterson tank recently).
    At least this procedure have solved my edge problem, and using my general idea (complete substitution of chemicals... each agitation period, even if in few periods) works as good for developing 4x5, 5x7, 8x10 film, which I had some problems with at the beginning. Some people seem to solve their problems with uneven development by making their agitation softer. It hasn't worked for me, at least not always!
    Nothing has irritated me as much as my uneven developed negatives, particularly when the labs do it perfect!
    Good luck with more tries, and wait with the important rolls!
    //Bertil
    "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

  8. #18

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Woonsocket, RI USA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    2,725
    I'm going to make a radical suggestion: Switch to a plastic tank. Although I personally prefer SS tanks, I also know that agitation -- and agitation problems like this -- is 90% science and 10% voodoo. Given all the tests you've already tried, I think you're in voodoo territory, and given that, the best approach may be to simply try something as different as you can find. That means a plastic tank. Making that switch will change a lot of little variables all at once, with any luck fixing the problem more quickly than it would take you to track it down and fix it by experimenting with all the little things one by one. It'll probably be cheaper, too -- you're wasting a certain amount of money every time you process a roll and get suboptimal results. OTOH, if switching to plastic doesn't help, then you'll have wasted the money on the plastic tank and reel(s).

  9. #19
    Anscojohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,727
    Images
    13
    I think I detect surge marks coming from the sprocket area of your enlarged contact. I may be wrong.

    And even over-development along film edges is, very often, from rotary processors. If you are "rolling" your tank as well as inverting it, that might be the cause.

    With SS tank and reels, inversion should be so gentle that the movement of the reels in the tank should make a "click" sound about half the volume of the gentle opening of a snap-open beverage can. Any louder and one is agitating with too much vigor, in my experience.

    And if you are souping fewer rolls than the max the tank can hold, be sure to place an empty reel(s) in the tank to keep the reel with the film loaded in it from sloshing back and forth, which leads to over agitation.

    Good luck.
    John, Mount Vernon, Virginia USA

  10. #20
    Scruff McGruff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    SF Bay Area
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    56
    jmcd - Thanks for the tip, I'll see if I can find a shim.

    srs5694 - Voodoo, haha. If things don't get better soon, I may just switch over. The price of a new tank system would be undoubtedly worth it if it gives results.

    Anscojohn - FWIW, I can't really see the same sprocket surge marks on the actual negatives; maybe the plastic negative sleeves refracted some light when scanning. Hmm, I do twist my tank when I invert it, I'll try without the twist on my next test roll. I do add the empty reel when just developing one roll.

    I just shot/developed a test roll today. I tried a number of the suggestions posted in this thread, so hopefully this comes out well. If not... must be voodoo. I'll post more details and the results when the negs are done drying.

Page 2 of 14 FirstFirst 1234567812 ... LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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