Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 68,693   Posts: 1,482,453   Online: 879
      
Results 1 to 7 of 7
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    5

    Jobo 2509n 4x5, light leak or uneven development? HELP PLEASE!

    Hi!

    I am new to the 4x5 world. I recently purchased my first camera and a used Jobo CPP2 processor.

    I am using a 2509 tank with a 6 sheet spiral, 5 minutes pre soak, 300cc TMAX-RS 75 degrees 1:9 dilution for 8.5 minutes. Stop and fixer. Al using position 4 for the motor rotation.

    In one of the first batches I developed an unexposed sheet by mistake and I found strange bands in it. I assumed it was the sheet was fogged when loading or unloading.

    So I repeated the experience, 3 exposed sheets and one unexposed. This time I used the black accesories that came with the spiral. I thaught it can be a problem with chemistry distribution. The result was the same.

    Repeated again, I loaded 2 brand new sheets from the box (Tmax100) This time I was completely sure there was no problem with loading or unloading since I skipped the holder, from the box to the tank. Same results.



    In this photo you can se the bands. Exagerated for viewing pourposes.
    The two sheets are from diferent batches, and the pattern is ALWAYS the SAME

    I discarded: film problems, loading and unloading problems.

    I only can think of a light leak in the tank or uneven development. But the patters are SO alike I think it can only be a light leak.

    I tried to find the same band pattern in exposed sheets but none of them have them as far as I can see.

    Please help me!

    Thanks in advance

    Alejandro

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    789
    Was the film x-rayed in transit to you ? Possibly a normal exposure would swamp the banding, but it does look pretty strong.

    Alternatively, what is the developer flow in your tank during rotation - like you say, it could be that although the exposed sheets would also look odd ?? I'm curious as I'm just about to start getting 'proper' with large format, after a gap of nearly twenty years (previously i worked in a lab and we used deep-tanks, perfect results).

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by MartinP View Post
    Was the film x-rayed in transit to you ? Possibly a normal exposure would swamp the banding, but it does look pretty strong.

    Alternatively, what is the developer flow in your tank during rotation - like you say, it could be that although the exposed sheets would also look odd ?? I'm curious as I'm just about to start getting 'proper' with large format, after a gap of nearly twenty years (previously i worked in a lab and we used deep-tanks, perfect results).
    YES!

    It could be the answer. I brought the box from USA to Argentina in my lugagge! The security people told me there are no problems up to ISO800.

    I will buy a new box and tried again!

    Thanks a lot!

    Alejandro

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Southern Ontario-ish
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    503
    Carry on or check in luggage ? I've never had an issue with passenger security scans, ie-4x5 Tri X getting five or six passes. Check in luggage however will fry film so to speak.

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Long Island, New York
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,067
    Looks exactly like checked luggage fogging to me - a clearly identifiable pattern. In 35mm I've seen a continuous "sine wave" fogging down the entire length of the film.

    Bob H
    "Why is there always a better way?"

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    26
    Standards for x-ray exposure are probably set for 35mm film protected inside a metal canister. Sheet film, normally packaged in a cardboard box, and is probably more susceptible. 120 format roll film would be similar.

    Signs in the airport also indicate the sensitivity of the film is a factor. I don't know whether its true or not but I've heard that the reason that Kodak didn't market its T-Max 3200 speed b&w film as a 120 roll film is that they thought it would be too vulnerable to cosmic radiation. Ilford came along later and didn't think it was such a big issue, and seems to have been proved largely right, unless they have different expiry dates on the 35mm and 120 Delta 3200?

    Philip Jackson

  7. #7
    paul_c5x4's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Ye Olde England
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    1,326
    Images
    22
    Quote Originally Posted by Philip Jackson View Post
    Signs in the airport also indicate the sensitivity of the film is a factor.
    I found this document from Kodak regarding the affect of xray machines and baggage - http://www.kodak.com/global/en/servi.../tib5201.shtml

    I believe you can insist on a hand check of film at airports in the USA. In Europe, it isn't so easy, so I pack a sacrificial roll of Delta 3200 and the Kodak document - When challenged, point to the film, warning sign, and printout.



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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