View Full Version : What has gone wrong here??
What looks like dust particles all over the negative, however I've no idea what it is, can someone tell me.
So I decided to do some pictures using the Imagon 300mm, on HP5, Sinar shutter, that is not likely to be where the problem exists, but i'm no expert. The lens glass is clean as a whistle. The film has been kept in the freezer and is a year off its expiry date. Development: Rodinal 1:100, stand development, no agitation, 40 min. The stopper is nearly finished, about 12 months old, the fixer is only recently opened.
To run a finger over the emulsion side of the neg I can feel slight roughness caused by whatever those marks are, but they are not solid or can they be removed, it's like they are imperfections in the film but this is the first time I've had the problem so I sought of excluded the film, but who knows.
I suspect the development is where the problem lies, it has happened twice now, the second time I took extra care with handling the negative from one solution to the next, but no different.
Over to you good folks for some suggestions.
120569
Jac@stafford.net
26-Aug-2014, 05:31
OMG! Sorry it happened to you.
To me it appears to be a hugely defective emulsion. Sacrifice the next sheet in the box and look at it under 8 to 10x magnification. Is there stuff stuck to the film? Is the emulsion full of irregular holes?
Did you let the film defrost before loading it?
Holy S*** ! I don't think I've ever seen anything like this !
Things to check in no particular order are -
- Was the film bought fresh or "second hand " ?
- As Jac said, sacrifice a sheet or two develop one examine the other.
Does an unexposed , undeveloped sheet have the same rough feel ?
- check your developing chemicals, are the solutions clear without any particulate matter
and not discolored, I use Tmax, Microdol X and HC110, they should be water clear except for HC110 which has
a slight yellow tint to it.
- How were you developing, tray, tank, Jobo, etc ?
Just to add a little humor... perhaps the place you took the picture has paranormal activity ;)
Peter De Smidt
26-Aug-2014, 06:48
Is there particulate, such as from a new carbon filter, in your water?
Jim Noel
26-Aug-2014, 08:33
IS your water supply filtered? It appears there are numerous small solids in the supply which have stuck to the emulsion. These can easily be picked up as the water moves through the supply system including in your home.
Jac@stafford.net
26-Aug-2014, 09:04
IS your water supply filtered? It appears there are numerous small solids in the supply which have stuck to the emulsion. These can easily be picked up as the water moves through the supply system including in your home.
Particulate matter would be white on a B&W print. This looks like true emulsion damage - holes or tears. It is unlikely to be from over-concentrate of stop bath because those holes are usually round.
...or do I need more coffee?
.
It's interesting that the 'specks' have a depth to them some seem in focus ( grayer <sp?> ) others not,
would emulsion damage look like that ?
Kirk Gittings
26-Aug-2014, 10:24
Back in the sixties on a beach in Mexico, I once had tiny ants crawl inside my Leica 3C-I think to chew on the emulsion. When I shot a frame they were silhouetted on the image. As I advanced the film the fluid in their abdomen squished out which also showed on the film making them look like giant ant comets. That was a bitch (but a lot of fun) to reverse engineer when I got back to the states and developed the film. I showed the prints to Beaumont Newhall who I was taking a class from at the time and I thought he was going to have a coronary he was laughing so hard.
I've been developing film since I was in the 6th grade and have no idea what happened to your film. Good luck this will be a challenge to figure out and whatever we come up with may never be more than a guess.
Ok, plenty to consider for this mystery. The film had been in the holder for a day before I exposed it so that should count out any problems with ice or wetness. While the stopper looks clear, I'm going to change to a fresh bottle. I know fixer crystallises but the bottle is pretty fresh and there are no signs of it doing this.
The dirty water idea is credible. In my developing room is a sink I use for water, this I have not used for a while so maybe some particles have built up in the pipes over time. I have access to filtered water in the house so maybe I'll change to that source. The film has been sitting around in the holders for about a month, but I wouldn't think that is the issue.
It's weird that whatever it is/was no longer exists on the sheet but has left a very faint mark I can feel, which indicates it has been there then either dissolved or been removed during the developing. To be absolutely sure I might take one fresh sheet out of the box and check it.
Another thought, at one stage I defrosted the freezer. Is it possible letting the sheets thaw then putting them back in to refreeze could be the problem?
Cheers
BC
Peter De Smidt
26-Aug-2014, 14:40
"Another thought, at one stage I defrosted the freezer. Is it possible letting the sheets thaw then putting them back in to refreeze could be the problem?" If they weren't sealed air-tight, then yes. Jac is right. Particulate would show up as white.
Darin Boville
26-Aug-2014, 15:39
That's a new one. But an interesting effect. Make use of it!
--Darin
"Another thought, at one stage I defrosted the freezer. Is it possible letting the sheets thaw then putting them back in to refreeze could be the problem?" If they weren't sealed air-tight, then yes. Jac is right. Particulate would show up as white.
This sounds very much the source of the problem then. Tonight I will take out a sheet and examine for the sake of knowing one way or the other. I susppose I am looking for damage to the emulsion caused by thawing out the opened packet of sheets, which may have caused condensation drops which are then frozen onto the film and damaging the emulsion, creating this effect :(
If this is the problem then rule number 1 is not to thaw sheets unless using them.
Did you drop it emulsion-side down?
Don't believe so cyrus, but next time I'll take note of this.
bc
The mystery continues. I took one of the exposed sheets out in a dark bag and fan my fingers over the emulsion side. There was no roughness like I found on the two flawed sheets. Unless it only becomes apparent after development the thaw and freeze theory might not be the problem after all. I'll try another sheet from the same batch, this time developed in a drum rather than a tray, and I'll use filtered water. I'm really hoping this works as I have some exposed film of my wife in front of the same mirror and lamp using the Imagon and apart from the obvious problem of the first two it looks like a reasonable picture could be made.
bc
When you took the picture, did you notice a plague of locusts flying around the room...?
Jmarmck
27-Aug-2014, 07:40
When you took the picture, did you notice a plague of locusts flying around the room...?
......or in the bellows.
Other than that I am going with a water problem.
Peter De Smidt
27-Aug-2014, 08:13
Expose and develop a test negative.
What kind of bottles are you using for fixer storage?
The insides of the brown plastic photo bottles can flake off if fix is stored for too long.
When you took the picture, did you notice a plague of locusts flying around the room...?
That would be a biblical proportion plague, nope, was in a nice apartment for the weekend.
What kind of bottles are you using for fixer storage?
The insides of the brown plastic photo bottles can flake off if fix is stored for too long.
Fixer was my first thought but the solution is in the original bottle and I only opened it recently, but it is worth a closer look.
As for the water supply it comes via old copper pipes, and I haven't used them for a while. Looking at a sample in a clear bottle there is no sign of sediment that I can see.
......or in the bellows.
Other than that I am going with a water problem.
Now bellows is something I haven't considered. I'll check that too, process of elimination here.
If the problem is particulates in the neg, then can a particulate be removed and inspected? Just a thought, but magnification could lead to identification. Can the particle be isolated from the emulsion?
Could be here: http://www.mccroneatlas.com/
Could be in another "microanalytical atlas"
Could remain a mystery.
Sounds like fun.
Jac@stafford.net
27-Aug-2014, 18:18
If the problem is particulates in the neg, then can a particulate be removed and inspected?
As has been mentioned, particulates sticking to the negative would produce white spots on a print, not black
.
Whether a particle, or not, providing the manufacturer with product and lot number can identify a manufacturing problem.
When not a manufacturing problem, then negative processing forensics can be useful.
Have you seen this since?
ic-racer
27-Aug-2014, 18:34
I believe your negative scan is reversed in the original post, making it look like a positive on my monitor and making it look like some black spots on the negative. I'll bet the areas in question are actually clear, unexposed areas in the negative. What does the inside of your camera look like? Is something flaking off the lining of the bellows?
polyglot
28-Aug-2014, 04:00
That's impressive. When you look at the neg under some magnification, is the emulsion missing outright from the dark bits, or is it still there but has no developed silver in it? Did you by any chance put your film face down on some 40-grit sandpaper and stomp on it a little?
What is the scale, i.e. how much film does that image represent? What film is it?
Only thing I can think of is maybe you had some sheets stick together from moisture and in the process of pulling them apart, ripped some emulsion off.
djdister
28-Aug-2014, 04:28
How about particulates/contaminant stuck to the emulsion in the developer which prevented proper development, leading to clear/clearish spots which appear dark in the print or final scan?
And as an extra bonus, he probably won't be able to duplicate the problem exactly...
Reminds me of the time in Istanbul where a friend wanted to use chemistry he picked up in Bolivia on the street, including clumped together D-76 and some mystery fixer.
http://ftp.tuebingen.mpg.de/pub/kyb/towolf/devbio%20scans/IST/Scan-110630-0017.jpg
Or the other time where some old Tetenal Neofin Doku stripped the emulsion off some 35mm film
120672
Jac@stafford.net
28-Aug-2014, 07:21
Reminds me of the time in Istanbul where a friend wanted to use chemistry he picked up in Bolivia on the street, including clumped together D-76 and some mystery fixer.
That's a good lead - incomplete developer mixture! Could be, considering he did stand development with no agitation, especially if it was flat in a tray.
That's a awesome lead, the particulates look virtually the same with the questionable developer from Boliva.
Ok, I believe the culprit has been unmasked. I did two tests, one in an expert drum and the other in a tray. Before mixing the solutions I made a point of pouring some fixer into a clear bottle. There appeared to be some microscopic suspended solids in the liquid, or they were tiny bubbles that were not moving. My theory then went along the lines of this, if the fixer is the problem then the developing process needed agitation to prevent the solids from settling on the emulsion and damaging the film Both sets of negatives came out clear this time.
At least on face value this appears to be the answer. I did also change to filtered water but from my observation I'm not confident that was the problem because the blemishes were even and not randomly spread across the film.
Hopefully this is resolution to an intriguing problem.
120737
I'm not sure if this is also relevant, but I also made sure the water was heated to 20 degrees, with the first two sheets one wasn't at all, and the other minimally, with no agitation.
bc
That's impressive. When you look at the neg under some magnification, is the emulsion missing outright from the dark bits, or is it still there but has no developed silver in it? Did you by any chance put your film face down on some 40-grit sandpaper and stomp on it a little?
What is the scale, i.e. how much film does that image represent? What film is it?
Only thing I can think of is maybe you had some sheets stick together from moisture and in the process of pulling them apart, ripped some emulsion off.
The emulsion is missing where the spots are, which indicates that something was stuck to it and has been removed or it has dissolved. Also of interest is how evenly spread the spots are across the entire film. To me this indicated something in the water or solution settling onto the emulsion, and eventually it looks like fixer was the problem. Perhaps some tiny crystals? The image is a scan of 100% of the film.
I believe your negative scan is reversed in the original post, making it look like a positive on my monitor and making it look like some black spots on the negative. I'll bet the areas in question are actually clear, unexposed areas in the negative. What does the inside of your camera look like? Is something flaking off the lining of the bellows?
Film was scanned the correct side up.
And as an extra bonus, he probably won't be able to duplicate the problem exactly...
Yes, a one off run, could be my signature shots :o
Hm, Bolivian developer mixed in Istanbul with well water imported from Gdańsk, not to mention locust or dead ants (deadant deadant deadant . . .).
A lab operator noticed light stripes on developed photo test strips meant for scanning densitometer measurements. Turns out that the light stripe position coincided with the aluminum actuator that slides over the photo paper. The take-away is that aluminum, and not much, can inhibit development at the site. Aluminum isn't the only suspect, just an example.
Which other suspects are causing divots or inclusions in the subject, lens, camera, water, chemical mix, negative, print or all of the above?
"What has gone wrong here??" I haven't re-read the four pages, but can you try similar dev but with agitation rather than 40 min stand development? If the suspected particulates keep moving . . .
Scratch that last paragraph. But are there still persistent bits in your system?
Scratch that last paragraph. But are there still persistent bits in your system?
As far as I can tell nothing is in there to crater the film. The successful scan is very low resolution so doesn't give a true indication, but as far as I can tell there are now no bats flying across the image like some Hitchcock scene :O
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.