Well, it looks like my son will be able to come up for a brief time this afternoon so I will get a chance to investigate better. The more we were looking at the marks on the prints last evening and comparing it to his hand, the more it looks like something related to his hand. My ex-hubby last night was asking if any residue from his hand on the back of one sheet could have been pressed into the emulsion side of the next print as they sat overnight, then showed up during processing. I'm not sure how to check this though. I guess we will have him handle a couple pieces and put a phone book on top to add weight over night then process tomorrow.

Yes, lee you are right, about the copy cameras. Though I have rarely had issues with newton rings on the copy board, usually it is with the original negative on the light deck vacuum back. Although when I was shooting dnmilikan's enlarged negatives, the film definitely newton ringed if I got too vigorous about squeegee'ing the air out. . . .hmmmm, now that I think of it, I was putting a hand on the back of those negatives during exposure also, because negatives being more slick tend to try to slip down. HMMMMM....

Ed, I am going to try the stop issue this morning by exposing a print then developing, then I will tear that in half and stop one very well . . .15-30 secs; and I will then tear the other in half again and swish one through stop in a hurry and then not stop the last quarter at all, as I proceed to blix. This should give me good answers. Over the past year I have run both the developer and blix through lots of odd little tests like this, but I really never focused on the quality of the stop step.