Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 68,686   Posts: 1,482,314   Online: 948
      
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 13 of 13
  1. #11
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    22,709
    Images
    65
    Can you post a straight scan of the negative as a negative or positive image?

    PE

  2. #12
    polyglot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    South Australia
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,953
    Images
    12
    How about you use the correct developer instead of paper developer? I realise that it "sometimes" works, but it may be that it works with only certain times or temps or whatever, and that you're on the borderline of what works with that chemistry.

  3. #13
    David Lyga's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA USA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,165
    Sorry to say this but I have no computer and the scan would simply show a perfect negative, except that it had a completely even green cast in the unexposed areas, throughout, instead of a light orange cast in the unexposed areas. It's that simple.

    Polyglot, on a theoretical basis your chiding is warranted ... but for 12 years I have done as I do and with no problems. At least give me credit for the 'track record'. No, I believe it is with the film or developer (?), itself, and since it comes from a 100 ft bulk roll (Fuji Super G +, ISO 100) no lab will accept a bulk loaded roll to process. But only three days previously I processed it in the SAME chemicals and procedure and the negs were great. It cannot be the film because, at room temp, it cannot go bad in two days. But thanks to all. My problems are of my own making.

    Last night I made a print from the film exposed in tungsten light with no filter on the camera. That would necessitate much yellow in the enlarger. My final pack was 205Y and 105M. The print was fully acceptable and included a grey scale and color swash. I just wish that that light green fog' on the unexposed areas was not there. This was absolutely not light fog. I will also say that there is a light, oily deposit (easily cleaned off) after the processing on the film. I remember someone once complaining about a tar buildup with the RA4 developer. Don't know the details. - David Lyga
    Last edited by David Lyga; 10-13-2011 at 07:45 AM. Click to view previous post history.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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