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: 1,544,142   Online: 891
      
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 26
  1. #11

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,025
    I just tried to clear the original film leader (not been processed) and it is having none of it. It is completely impervious to the fix! I tried another leader in addition to the HP5 plus of yesterday, (delta 100 this time) and it has cleared fine. I can only conclude that this is a film fault. The only thing that could have have happened to the film is that it could have been somehow fogged. If this was the case, it would still clear in fix, leaving a bullet proof layer of silver. This stuff looks alsmost unprocessed. There are some patches around the edges of the film where it is more transluscent as if there is a patchiness to the tiny amount of clearing that has enabled me to at least see that there is a developed silver image withing the emulsion. It does not appear to be silver density that is casuing this opacity as it would not enable me to see a that teh silver image within has shadows, highlights etc as you would expect. I said after the some Fp4 plus sheet film had deep gouges/scratches (after seeing the processed images I looked at the unprocessed film and it was the same) and ilford did not respod to my letter and sample that I would not use their products again. I am going full time professional an absolutely cannot afford for this sort of rubbish to happen. Expiry of film was 2006 by the way and it has been stored ina fridge in its sealed container. One cannot ever be 100% sure that something weird has not happened to the film inside camera or film tank, but I cannot see that this is anything other than a films fault

    It is worth noting that I have not once had problems with supposedly dodgy Eastern European film or paper......Efke.....Forte etc

    Tom

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,025
    just noticed something really weird...the image is positive! It hard to see the image within the emulsion but it is undoubtedly posistive. All the film information down the edges is also positive...clear on the neg (but largely obscured by the semi opaque base). I just devd a roll from the same camera from the same shoot in the same chems in the same way (APX400 this time) and it is 100% fine. This is one for the photographic X files!

  3. #13
    Ed Sukach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Ipswich, Massachusetts, USA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    4,520
    Images
    26
    Quote Originally Posted by Tom Stanworth
    just noticed something really weird...the image is positive! It hard to see the image within the emulsion but it is undoubtedly posistive. All the film information down the edges is also positive...clear on the neg (but largely obscured by the semi opaque base). I just devd a roll from the same camera from the same shoot in the same chems in the same way (APX400 this time) and it is 100% fine. This is one for the photographic X files!
    Been watching this with interest.

    As far as I know, there are only two ways this could have happened: there was some sort of exposure to light during development (old-time E6 reversal exposure) or some sort of chemical anomaly that caused the same effect
    (see modern E6 reversal-exposure-less processing).
    That would explain why additional fixing had no effect.

    Is a contamination of chemicals possible?
    Carpe erratum!!

    Ed Sukach, FFP.

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,025
    All the same chems were used for subsequesnt APX400 roll and that was perfect. I have never used and E6 chems or reversal kits for B&W so no possibility of this sort of contamination. There are also some strage marks along the film edges in places which look almost look like in places teh base has cleared largely, but there is a sort of tidal mark nature to them (wavy and not with clearly defined edges) Light exposure cannot be ruled out, but It cannot be teh camera (other rolls fine) . Also as I used a motordrive at points, one would expect some to be less fogged than the oned sitting ready to be exposed in the camera between frames. This is not so. Changing bag is always double checked, proocessing tank likewise. If there has been some form of fogging, it looks too even. Film canister leak? To me it looks intrinsic to the film makeup. If it had fogged it would have looked like any fogged frame (darkslide removed off camer etc). This does not look like this. As I say, teh undeveloped leader from the same film does not clear either. I bet something strange happed during manufacture...This is unlike something I have ever seen...the base still has a that sort of unprocessed look to it...I may even try to print one, though the exposure would probably be a minute or two....

  5. #15
    Ed Sukach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Ipswich, Massachusetts, USA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    4,520
    Images
    26
    Quote Originally Posted by Tom Stanworth
    If it had fogged it would have looked like any fogged frame (darkslide removed off camer etc). This does not look like this. As I say, teh undeveloped leader from the same film does not clear either. I bet something strange happed during manufacture...This is unlike something I have ever seen...the base still has a that sort of unprocessed look to it...I may even try to print one, though the exposure would probably be a minute or two....
    The "reversal exposure" would have occurred DURING processing... somewhere around the mid-point (??) of development.

    Hmm... A thought ... did you use a developing tank? If it was a JOBO (??? I can't remember - did you say it was a 1500 series?), was the conical light trap in the cap (fits into the central "spindle") in place? That might explain light entering the tank during filling and emptying - if not during the development itself.
    Carpe erratum!!

    Ed Sukach, FFP.

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,025
    I used a standard Jessops tank (similar to Paterson tank) taking two 35mm rolls. This is the same tank used for the second roll (APX) this morning. In both cases I used the rubber lid, so I cannot see how light could have got in part way thru exposure? It still would not explain why the undeveloped leader which I clipped off in the changing bag will also not clear, as this has not been touched by any chemistry.

    If anyone can explain this one I'll be really impressed.

  7. #17
    hitcher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Michigan
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    83
    Just a thought here, maybe the roll of film was exposed to some type of infusion of an outside chemical i.e. ; aerosol, or perfume. I have in my photolab experience had films that were treated as such and had some very strange results.

    Good luck with this one.

  8. #18
    gainer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    3,726
    Images
    2
    I didn't think modern emulsions were susceptible to this, but it used to be possible to get a positive image by exposing the film to uniform light before exposing it to the imaging light. The uniform exposure had to be greater than that required for Dmax. There are in fact direct positive emulsions based on this phenomenon.

    If this is what happened, it could be a manufacturing defect, but one would expect other rolls of the same emulsion batch to have the same defect.
    Gadget Gainer

  9. #19
    Les McLean's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Northern England on the Scottish border
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,610
    I think Ed's got the answer, I remember having a similar problem in my early days caused by my novice fumbling loading a film in a darkroom leaking light and this gave me a partial positive image. The problem was compounded as I had been told by a member of the camera club that I had joined to dunk the film in a weak solution of hydrogen peroxide to help it clear and speed up the process. This caused dichroic fog suggested by Jorge as a possible problem. I cleared the dichroic fog by mixing a weak solution of Thoiurea and Citric acid and soaked the negatives in it. It's a very dodgy process for it reduces the emulsion to a jelly and if left too long in the solution the emulsion is removed from the backing material. I remeber trying this with an unwanted negative on the strip before I cleared the important negative.
    "Digital circuits are made from analogue parts"
    Fourtune Cookie-Brooklyn May 2006

    Website: www.lesmcleanphotography.com

  10. #20

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,025
    It certainly sound like it could be right, but again, it still does not explain why the unprocessed leader would not clear, when other leaders thru the same fixer did, as they should - why would it not clear, as it had not ben developed it should behave like any film leader when checking clearance time. For light to have got in, the only thing I can think of is that somehow the elastic bands around the arms did not seal in my changing bag, but again, I always check this prior to starting and check the lid for correct fit before removing my arms. This is certainly a first for me and does no good for confidence when handling valuable exposures (thankfully these were not of any commervial value!), whatever the cause of the fault. Thanks all for your great efforts to save the day, but all I can say is perhaps several factors cause this as the positive image would suit a light leak, but does not explain why the leader will not clear - even in Hypam 1+1!
    Last edited by Tom Stanworth; 09-06-2004 at 03:05 PM. Click to view previous post history.

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