PDA

View Full Version : What Happened here? Film Developing Help Please



Tobias Key
15-Mar-2015, 12:33
I'm having a problem with occasional strange steaks on my negatives and I'd like to get to the bottom of it.

My workflow is as follows
Ilford HP5+
Combiplan tank
ID-11 1+1 for 13 mins
I do to very slow inversions every 30 seconds, which take around 15 seconds to perform.
Plain Water Stop
Ilford rapid fixer for 3mins.

Wash by refilling and inverting the tank as per Ilford's recommendations, with 2ml of photoflo in the final wash (mixed beforehand)
All water is filtered with a filter jug.

The marks sometimes appear slightly greasy in nature.

130892

130893

The streaks in this case seem to run across the film in the perpendicular direction to my inversions.

My best guess is photoflo contamination in the tank, or old water getting trapped in the lower drain plug and settling on film after I load it, but I really appreciate any insights before I go crazy from the frustration of yet more wasted time and film.

bob carnie
15-Mar-2015, 12:37
Initial agitation is off,need to be more aggressive in the first 15 seconds... grey backgrounds will show every defect in process.

This is probably the most common problem in film processing.

djdister
15-Mar-2015, 14:10
Looks like Photoflo drying scum marks, so I'd check your washing/photoflo/drying process steps.

Tobias Key
15-Mar-2015, 15:47
Looks like Photoflo drying scum marks, so I'd check your washing/photoflo/drying process steps.
I think photoflo might be part of it, but I can't see any marks on the film. I think uneven development is more likely, but I'm not sure if it's not the time it takes to fill the combiplan tank, in which case it's unsolvable unless I buy a Jobo or sort out a darkroom for the first stage of the processing.

Nigel Smith
15-Mar-2015, 15:50
Not sure of the actual problem (very weird due to very distinct edges and shapes) but I agree with Bob, initial agitation should be 'robust'. Don't 'cocktail shaker' it but don't baby it either. I don't like your 15sec agitation every 30sec either actually... hardly gives the developer time to settle... but people do use continuous agitation so with appropriate time adjustment that shouldn't be an issue.

I don't think it's photoflo residual (have a close look at the negs... should be able to see that on the surface), however, 2ml of Photoflo sounds a lot. How much water are you mixing that in. 2-3 drops is enough in 1lt of water IMO. I'd also recommend deionised/distilled water for the final rinse (with the photoflo).

Fred L
15-Mar-2015, 15:54
I'm very curious about those rectangular shaped artifacts, if they weren't on the background. If they were introduced during a processing then that's baffling as it might indicate contact with something, possibly while drying ?

RSalles
15-Mar-2015, 17:50
Tobias,

What is your agitation procedure for palin water stop, if any?

1:1 is a very strong dilution, IMHO very good care of dev. procedures have to be taken as the developer is at it's maximum strength.

I would try a 1 min. constant agitation with plain water, following a acetic acid or similar stop bath for also 1 min. constant agitation, gently done.

Dark marks: increased dev in certains areas of the film would be my first bet,

Renato

jp
15-Mar-2015, 18:06
Use less photo flo.
check with Ilford; they've probably seen it all.
I don't use ID-11 but I do use a combiplan. I slowly agitate for the whole first minute, then 1 inversion agitation each minute for pyrocat hd.
Never had a problem with fill time with the combiplan, aside from my impatience.

Michael W
16-Mar-2015, 04:02
If you look at the shiny side of the film, held angled to the light, do the marks appear to be sitting on the surface, or to be part of the image? If they appear to be on the surface then it is some sort of mark that can be cleaned off, most likely water marks. You can prevent this in future by altering your process such as using distilled water for the final soak. If it appears to be part of the image then it will be something going wrong in the initial developing stages.

Tobias Key
16-Mar-2015, 04:23
If you look at the shiny side of the film, held angled to the light, do the marks appear to be sitting on the surface, or to be part of the image? If they appear to be on the surface then it is some sort of mark that can be cleaned off, most likely water marks. You can prevent this in future by altering your process such as using distilled water for the final soak. If it appears to be part of the image then it will be something going wrong in the initial developing stages.

The negative looks totally clean, I live in a very hard water area so I always use filtered or distilled water for the wash and I'm only too familiar with what water marks look like. At the moment I'm thinking that I should wash all my film processing equipment in the dishwasher, and beef up the initial agitation stage of the development. It's all very frustrating, I used to pride myself on my processing and printing in the good old days, so it's a grind to feel like a beginner again.

bob carnie
16-Mar-2015, 06:19
Tobias

grey backgrounds are very difficult to keep even.... I even give initial manual inversion and twist as well bang the bottom for the first 15 seconds when using a jobo then put it on the machine.

Photo flow marks will print white... this really looks like insufficient agitation in the very beginning.


Bob

Tobias Key
16-Mar-2015, 07:33
Tobias

grey backgrounds are very difficult to keep even.... I even give initial manual inversion and twist as well bang the bottom for the first 15 seconds when using a jobo then put it on the machine.

Photo flow marks will print white... this really looks like insufficient agitation in the very beginning.


Bob

Thanks Bob, everything you are saying is really helpful. At the moment I'm putting all my developing gear through the dishwasher to rule out contamination, then I'm certainly going to try what you say. I think I got thrown off course when I first used the tank, I think I got some Tanol that was old, and that has lead me to fix things that probably didn't need fixing. I originally agitated more aggressively than I do now but changed it along the way, I think I've mistaken uneven developing for surge marks on other negs and so haven't solved the problem. With the initial agitation should I do agitate for a full minute after the fill is complete and then do 2 inversions at the top of every minute? Does that sound like a reasonable staring point?

bob carnie
16-Mar-2015, 07:47
Tobias

I think a full minute initial agitation is too much... I count 15-20 seconds and I try to get the developer in really fast... no pre soak btw as people have issues with minus development areas when using a pre soak.

then I will revert to my normal dev, in my case it is rotary process.... I think this is something that should be part of everyone's development procedure as it seems to give lots of people here and on other sites huge problems.

With very complicated scenes one never sees this issue as the streaking is camoflaged.. but grey backgrounds or open grey sky's are really unforgiving.

Bob

Thanks Bob, everything you are saying is really helpful. At the moment I'm putting all my developing gear through the dishwasher to rule out contamination, then I'm certainly going to try what you say. I think I got thrown off course when I first used the tank, I think I got some Tanol that was old, and that has lead me to fix things that probably didn't need fixing. I originally agitated more aggressively than I do now but changed it along the way, I think I've mistaken uneven developing for surge marks on other negs and so haven't solved the problem. With the initial agitation should I do agitate for a full minute after the fill is complete and then do 2 inversions at the top of every minute? Does that sound like a reasonable staring point?

Lenny Eiger
16-Mar-2015, 11:56
I would also suggest a pre-soak. That usually stops this in its tracks... I have no issues with minus development, not sure what Bob has experienced in this regard...

I'm using a Jobo these days, but I used to agitate for the first 30 and the last 30 and 6 seconds every 30 seconds. It worked fine...

I also disagree about the comments on the photoflo... I use a little extra Formaflo and leave it in there for 3 minutes. It's supposed to allow the film to dry in one single sheet and when you leave it in long enough it actually does that....

Lenny

djdister
16-Mar-2015, 12:27
Your original post said the marks are slightly greasy and irregular in nature, which still owe more to an overuse of Photoflo than anything else. An overly high concentration of wetting agent leaves greasy marks on the film, potentially on either side. And due to the potential irregularity of Photoflo scum, they will not leave any sort of regular marks as they drip and/or evaporate off the surface of the film. If you do research on agitation problems in the developer, you will see very different patterns of density showing up on the negative, relative to the edges of the film, contact of the film edges with the tank, and etc.

Those marks are not symptomatic of agitation problems in the developer or fixer. After washing the film normally for 30 minutes (or whatever), try just a couple of drops of Photoflo with distilled water in the final rinse only.

bob carnie
16-Mar-2015, 13:12
My terms- Minus development means that something has prevented the developer to fully cover the grey backround and I have seen many , odd shapes due to this, It also can happen in mural printing when developer is uneven and slow to
get on areas of the paper.

the dark pattern is because developer has not gotten on this paticular section of the film the OP shows. thus my term Minus Development..these odd areas will print dark.

I have seen in Jobo the exact same Minus Development ,,, major road ruts in grey backgrounds that were only solved by the agitation sequence explained above.

I do not see how we can be discussing photo flow marks... as they would be plus density on the print or scan and show up as white.... I have seen photo flow issues, they are white in the positive form, and as M Wesik pointed out
if its on the base side of the film you can wipe it off, if it is on the emulsion side of the film you are SOOL.

There was a thread on APUG about uneven marks due to pre soak.. its all about getting the emulsion ready at the same time.

djdister
16-Mar-2015, 14:00
If you want to see a textbook example of uneven developing, look at the 8x10 xray shot (cropped) by Randy in the "Waters Edge" thread. This looks nothing like that.

DennisD
16-Mar-2015, 19:49
If you can't see a film or deposit on the negative surface, those spots really wouldn't be caused by photo flow. Also doubtful that photo flow deposits would form in those shapes and add that much density. If there's nothing on the negative surface, what exactly is the "greasy" look you refer to ? Excess photo flow might appear greasy, but it would be visible on the film surface.

IMHO the marks are related to the development process --- The observed pattern is strange and really suggests uneven development. The question is what prevented proper development ? There are some unanswered questions:

- Did anything come in contact with the negatives before you loaded them into the combiplan holder ?
- We're all the negatives in the same development batch affected ?
- is this a random occurrence ? Are there particular conditions when it occurs ?
- what's your film handling procedure ? You may have laid the film down on something that has affected development
- how is your film stored ? Dampness or moisture may have had some effect on the film at some point.

It's also very possible that, in a combiplan tank, one negative might have touched against another or stuck to another long enough for the developing to progress unevenly, if only briefly, perhaps at the outset.

Cleaning the combiplan tank and film holder carefully is a good starting point.

Tobias Key
17-Mar-2015, 03:08
If you can't see a film or deposit on the negative surface, those spots really wouldn't be caused by photo flow. Also doubtful that photo flow deposits would form in those shapes and add that much density. If there's nothing on the negative surface, what exactly is the "greasy" look you refer to ? Excess photo flow might appear greasy, but it would be visible on the film surface.

IMHO the marks are related to the development process --- The observed pattern is strange and really suggests uneven development. The question is what prevented proper development ? There are some unanswered questions:

- Did anything come in contact with the negatives before you loaded them into the combiplan holder ?
- We're all the negatives in the same development batch affected ?
- is this a random occurrence ? Are there particular conditions when it occurs ?
- what's your film handling procedure ? You may have laid the film down on something that has affected development
- how is your film stored ? Dampness or moisture may have had some effect on the film at some point.

It's also very possible that, in a combiplan tank, one negative might have touched against another or stuck to another long enough for the developing to progress unevenly, if only briefly, perhaps at the outset.

Cleaning the combiplan tank and film holder carefully is a good starting point.

Hi Dennis

I'm inclined to agree that it's in the development process. It's either something contaminating the film before development, something like trapped water dripping out of the filling valve when I put the lid on, but two sheets sticking together momentarily might be a good call. Next time I have a batch film to develop I'm going to up the initial agitation and be a little more vigorous. It's a tricky problem because it's minimal enough to be disguised in most negatives, so it's something that may have happened before but wasn't visible.

I'm just going to have to shoot some film and develop as meticulously as I can and see what happens.

DennisD
17-Mar-2015, 19:17
Tobias,

A couple of thoughts---
1) I've used combiplan tanks and like them. In this case you might try leaving the middle slot empty (thus allowing more space between sheets). See if there's still an issue. You need not aggressively agitate because the film could dislodge from the slot or the holding guides. Just consistent agitation for the initial startup as others suggested. (With fewer sheets loaded, aggressive agitation might create more fluid pressure on the film)

2) Have you developed film from different original batches or film of different types/brands and experienced this very same problem ?
I would want to be sure the film itself did not have some hidden issue or defect that is not related to your handling and/or processing.

Good wishes and hope to hear your new tests are successful.