Round Marks on Negatives [Archive] - Large Format Photography Forum

Bruce Watson

13-Dec-2016, 09:58

Occasionally, not every time, I get these round marks on my 4x5 negatives which appear to be more noticeable in bright skies.

Has anyone else experienced this?

Is the attached image the entire film, or just a piece of it? IOW, how big are the spots?

Is the image a positive or a negative of the film? IOW, are the spots slightly lower density on a high density area, or are they slightly more density in a low density area? Since you talk about skies, and skies tend to be high density areas on B&W negative film, I'm thinking you're showing a negative of the film, so the spots are slightly lower density in a high density area.

If the spots are small, and are slightly lower density than their surroundings, I'm thinking they might be out of focus dust. When was the last time you cleaned out the inside of the camera bellows? The fact that it doesn't occur every sheet might just be that it only occurs when you've stirred up the dust, or not given it sufficient time to settle.

Without more information...

IanBarber

13-Dec-2016, 10:05

The attached image is a 100% scanned positive crop of the offending area.

Dust in the bellows is something I haven't thought about to be honest and will now make this a priority to clean them.

Willie

13-Dec-2016, 10:14

Air bubbles on the negative?
Do you use a good pre-soak?

Drew Wiley

13-Dec-2016, 10:32

Looks like typical air bell marks to me. How are you developing, in trays? If so, you need to practice your shuffling technique. The importance of the pre-wet
step has already been mentioned. Can you be more specific about your method?

Ken Lee

13-Dec-2016, 10:55

Air bells can appear if you use a developing tank.

When no darkroom is available, even a small bathroom can work for tray development. Infra red goggles make it easier to work in the dark.

Bob Salomon

13-Dec-2016, 11:04

Air bells can appear if you use a developing tank.

When no darkroom is available, even a small bathroom can work for tray development. Infra red goggles make it easier to work in the dark.

If you use a tank, even a tank with holders, you must rap the edge of the tank, after filling it or rap the hangers against the tank after putting the hangers in the tank to dislodge air bells.

IanG

13-Dec-2016, 11:08

Like others that's air bells. Get a Britta or similar water filter jug (UK brand) it uses a small ion exchange cartridge to soften the water that should eliminate the problem.

Ian

IanBarber

13-Dec-2016, 11:13

Thanks for the suggestions.

I always use a paterson tank to develop in.

I never pre-soak (how long do you suggest)

On this occasion, I know I did not rap the tank after pouring in the developer

Like others that's air bells. Get a Britta or similar water filter jug (UK brand) it uses a small ion exchange cartridge to soften the water that should eliminate the problem.
I like this idea and will invest in one

Bob Salomon

13-Dec-2016, 11:19

Thanks for the suggestions.

I always use a paterson tank to develop in.

I never pre-soak (how long do you suggest)

On this occasion, I know I did not rap the tank after pouring in the developer

I like this idea and will invest in one

Don't spend money, just make sure that you always rap the tank on the table and you will not get anymore air bells.

Jerry Bodine

13-Dec-2016, 11:22

Infra red goggles make it easier to work in the dark.

Off topic - sorry. Ken, how is it that infra-red goggles allow vision in the dark? Might you have a link or two that explains? I haven't tried to google to find out.

Bruce Watson

13-Dec-2016, 11:22

Thanks for the suggestions.

I always use a paterson tank to develop in.

I never pre-soak (how long do you suggest)

On this occasion, I know I did not rap the tank after pouring in the developer.

Good chance of air bells then. But you should still keep the inside of the bellows clean. ;-)

Ken Lee

13-Dec-2016, 13:08

Off topic - sorry. Ken, how is it that infra-red goggles allow vision in the dark? Might you have a link or two that explains? I haven't tried to google to find out.

There have been several threads here on IR goggles of various types.

The googles we're talking about here are low-end and comparatively affordable: they are equipped with an IR lamp. The lamp illuminates the subject and the goggle reads that light. See http://www.kennethleegallery.com/html/tech/index.php#Monocular

Some people put IR emitting lamps on the walls of their darkroom and then use goggles which don't have a lamp on them.

Jerry Bodine

13-Dec-2016, 13:18

Thanks, Ken.

IanBarber

13-Dec-2016, 13:24

Thanks everyone for all the advice, camera bellows now dusted out, rapped the tank a little harder on the counter top and this test negative seems to be bubble free.

Drew Wiley

13-Dec-2016, 16:15

Lots of faucets also have screens in them which greatly increase bubbles. If that's the case use "stand water" which has sat in a large beaker or bucket long enough
for the bubbles to dissipate. Prewetting the film also greatly helps. I can't imagine developing film without a prewet. But as general advice, even when using a
hand drum for roll film, immediately after filling with developer, I rap it hard on the bottom a couple times with my knuckles prior to beginning agitation, to clear any bubbles.

LabRat

13-Dec-2016, 19:56

Also, look at the emulsion surface with reflected light, and look if it is a drying mark... If so, mix the PF with distilled water, and make sure the dilution is correct...

Steve K

IanBarber

14-Dec-2016, 02:43

Also, look at the emulsion surface with reflected light, and look if it is a drying mark... If so, mix the PF with distilled water, and make sure the dilution is correct...

Steve K

Something else I need to consider. Sometimes, not often, I will just add a few drops of PF without actually measuring it.

I need to tighten up a little on my procedures

LabRat

14-Dec-2016, 03:42

Something else I need to consider. Sometimes, not often, I will just add a few drops of PF without actually measuring it.

I need to tighten up a little on my procedures

The dilution of PF 200 stock solution I use is to get a small glass dropper bottle and mix the stock 1:2 with distilled water, then use 1 drop/per liter with distilled water for a working solution bath...

The few drops you are using are WAY too much!!!

Steve K

IanG

14-Dec-2016, 03:50

Something else I need to consider. Sometimes, not often, I will just add a few drops of PF without actually measuring it.

I need to tighten up a little on my procedures

If you're adding wetting agent (Photo Flow) to the developer it needs to be sparingly as an excess can cause foaming which is worse than air bells.

I had an issue with air bells in Turkey where our tap water has a high salt content - it's undrinkable. I did various tests to eliminate them, a pre-soak didn't, rapping the tank on the work surface only removed a few, adding two drops of wetting agent per litre and they went with a gentle rap.

http://lostlabours.co.uk/Uploads/air_bubbles.jpg

Ian

IanBarber

14-Dec-2016, 03:56

After adding the Photo Flo, do you invert it or just let it stand for about 30 seconds

LabRat

14-Dec-2016, 04:03

After adding the Photo Flo, do you invert it or just let it stand for about 30 seconds

Just rap or re-dunk the film as it sits in in it to release bubbles...

Don't leave in for more than 30 sec, as the solution starts to soak into the film (past the surface) and will leave a slimy haze while drying...

Steve K

IanG

14-Dec-2016, 04:06

After adding the Photo Flo, do you invert it or just let it stand for about 30 seconds

I add it when mixing (diluting) the developer.

Ian

Pere Casals

14-Dec-2016, 05:00

Occasionally, not every time, I get these round marks on my 4x5 negatives which appear to be more noticeable in bright skies.

Has anyone else experienced this ?

Film: Fomapan 100
Developed in HC110
Ilford Stop bath
Ilford Fixer
Kodak Photoflo
Tap Water

I am wondering if it's either something to do with the Photoflo or tap water ?

158642

A possibility:

Stop bath can insert gas bubbles inside emulsion. Developer is a chemical Base and Stop is an Acid. They react inside emulsion, and in some cases it can form gas bubbles, for example in the case of developers that contain sodium carbonate, or the like.

If you drop vineager (Acetic) on Sodium Carbonate it is well seen.

So you can substitute Stop Bath with plain Water Bath, it's nearly the same, and see if that solves problem. Are your stop bath too concentrate?

I guess that Ilford fixers (PH 5.5) are not to form bubbles...

Also Kodak says:

"Before using any developer, make sure that the solution is free of very small air bubbles. If bubbles adhere to the emulsion, they may cause small undeveloped clear spots on the film (dark spots on the print). Bubbles may form more easily if you mix cold and hot water. If bubbles do form, let the developer stand until they dissipate. Attaching an aerator to the water supply will help eliminate small bubbles."

Probably you mix HC-110 just before using it, those very small bubbles won't go out because you hit the tank !!! So use water that rested in a bottle since the day before at least. After water passes the tap there is a pressure drop and dilluted air may form those very tinny bubbles, just as like pepsi.

Pere Casals

14-Dec-2016, 05:09

Also a similar side effect of Photo Flo is described. It happens when it remains some contamination of it from last processed roll and pre-soaking is used for the next roll...

IanBarber

14-Dec-2016, 05:19

A possibility:

Stop bath can insert gas bubbles inside emulsion. Developer is a chemical Base and Stop is an Acid. They react inside emulsion, and in some cases it can form gas bubbles, for example in the case of developers that contain sodium carbonate, or the like.

If you drop vineager (Acetic) on Sodium Carbonate it is well seen.

So you can substitute Stop Bath with plain Water Bath, it's nearly the same, and see if that solves problem. Are your stop bath too concentrate?

I guess that Ilford fixers (PH 5.5) are not to form bubbles...

Also Kodak says:

"Before using any developer, make sure that the solution is free of very small air bubbles. If bubbles adhere to the emulsion, they may cause small undeveloped clear spots on the film (dark spots on the print). Bubbles may form more easily if you mix cold and hot water. If bubbles do form, let the developer stand until they dissipate. Attaching an aerator to the water supply will help eliminate small bubbles."

Probably you mix HC-110 just before using it, those very small bubbles won't go out because you hit the tank !!! So use water that rested in a bottle since the day before at least. After water passes the tap there is a pressure drop and dilluted air may form those very tinny bubbles, just as like pepsi.

Yes, I do mix the HC-110 just before using it so something else to be aware of.

The information from Kodak, is that from a web source or out of a book, sounds interesting reading

LabRat

14-Dec-2016, 05:22

I add it when mixing (diluting) the developer.

Ian

I use it in a pre-soak bath, but don't add it to developer... Detergents (like PF) are strongly alkaline when undiluted, and I think might change the pH of the dev (if too strong), but seem OK very diluted for a pre-bath...

I have been commenting about the final dip, as I have seen strange round shapes like yours when students have used strong solutions there that caused them... But anywhere in the process that PF is too strong (or long), it will penetrate deeply into emulsion, and leave slimy-like rings or streaks upon drying as it comes to the surface later...

Steve K

Pere Casals

14-Dec-2016, 05:37

Yes, I do mix the HC-110 just before using it so something else to be aware of.

The information from Kodak, is that from a web source or out of a book, sounds interesting reading

Tech Pan datasheet, page 8

http://www.astrosurf.com/luxorion/Documents/kodak-tp2415-p255.pdf

Consider that very small air bubbles cannot be eliminated at all by hitting the tank. Best way is to let it dissipate.

Randy

14-Dec-2016, 05:55

I had the exact same problem a couple years ago, but with 8X10 X-ray film. Turned out it was the film, not my processing. Also, I had a similar problem a few years back with Arista 120 film ISO 100, which I had heard was made by Foma. I had to stop using it. But I have recently shot some Foma 120 in ISO 100 with no problems.

IanG

14-Dec-2016, 06:17

I use it in a pre-soak bath, but don't add it to developer... Detergents (like PF) are strongly alkaline when undiluted, and I think might change the pH of the dev (if too strong), but seem OK very diluted for a pre-bath...

I have been commenting about the final dip, as I have seen strange round shapes like yours when students have used strong solutions there that caused them... But anywhere in the process that PF is too strong (or long), it will penetrate deeply into emulsion, and leave slimy-like rings or streaks upon drying as it comes to the surface later...

Steve K

The wetting agents I use is pH7 so neutral pH, Ilford's is pH when concentrated, Kodak's pH 7, so I don't think we need worry about altering the developers pH with a couple of drops per litre :D

Commercial developers contain surfactants in very small quantities, I add it now when I make up my Pyrocat HD concentrate rather than later when I mix for use. It's worth adding that most film and paper emulsions also contain surfactants as coating aids, but this is also to help with issues like air bells and uneven processing. The surfactants are quite noticeable in some B&W papers..

Ian

loonatic45414

15-Dec-2016, 08:35

koraks

15-Dec-2016, 08:55

The problems with foma 200 cannot be extrapolated to foma 100 or 400; they're different films. I don't recognize the bubble issues with foma films despite having used quite a bit of the 100 throughout the past few years. Air bubbles in the developer are a lot more likely to be the cause in my opinion.

Pere Casals

16-Dec-2016, 01:29

I also had problems with Foma & spots before... maybe THEY need to rap harder on the tank when making the film. I don't use Foma anymore after having their 120 film (ISO 200) come up with clear spots randomly throughout the roll on the negative.

Sent from my 0PJA2 using Tapatalk

The problems with foma 200 cannot be extrapolated to foma 100 or 400; they're different films. I don't recognize the bubble issues with foma films despite having used quite a bit of the 100 throughout the past few years. Air bubbles in the developer are a lot more likely to be the cause in my opinion.

"Spots in FP200 is typical a defect when using a too strong stop bath.
Use an Acetic Acid stop less then 1,5% or a Citric Acid of 15g/ltr. maximum (also 1,5%) or less.

My last FP200 films, with Clear Polyester layer are all free of any defects."

(Quoting from an expert FP200 user...)

Developers with carbonate (of the like) produce CO2 gas in contact with acid stop, some emulsions are more prone to retain that gas, forming bubbles, IMHO...

IMHO, air bubles in developer can be an issue (with most films) only if soup recently mixed with tap water (that has not rested to disipate bubbles).

Factors that will make tap water have bubbles:

Particular Air concentration in your tap water,
high pressure in supply,
mixing cold and hot watter.

I think that fomapan 100 is a very good/cheap for LF, in certain (not extreme) light conditions...

https://www.flickr.com/search/?text=fomapan%20100%208x10

I find 200 and 400 less atractive to me... may be good for some effects, but I find I'm not able to control well 200/400 to get what I want, even when rating ISO way lower than box says.

koraks

16-Dec-2016, 02:31

loonatic45414

16-Dec-2016, 03:10

Koraks, that was about the time I tried it too. My question is, why didn't they test their film better & issue recommendations?

For stop bath, I either use water or something very close to water depending on the developer. As for the developer, D-76, Xtol, HC-110, nothing fancy, always used with bottled distilled water.

Sent from my 0PJA2 using Tapatalk

koraks

16-Dec-2016, 04:15

I guess it's a manufacturing (possibly an equipment cleaning) issue that only occurs intermittently and/or is difficult to detect in QC. The defects I had were really tiny specks of only a few microns.

Pere Casals

16-Dec-2016, 06:52

Pere, the spots in FP200 are not all necessarily stop bath related. I had a batch of 120 FP200 that was probably manufactured in 2014 and that I used this summer where the tiny spots appeared. I contacted foma, they tested the film and indicated that it was a production and not a processing problem. Hopefully they have sorted it out for good now. I didn't find FP200 to be hard to control - in fact, it seemed easier to work with than FP100. I haven't used FP400.

Yes... the spots in 120 it were because backing paper, if I remember well. Paper emited tinny speck, that moved inside the camera, landing some on the film and casting small spots from shadows... while 135 and sheets were free from that problem.

At some time Foma was in the soviet system, privatized in 1995 they evolved. They had not the same QC background than kodak or Fuji, but they managed to go forward and now they supply interesting products.

I found a very high reciprocity failure, higher with 200...

From what you say, I think I'll give another try to FP200.

koraks

16-Dec-2016, 07:06

Maybe it was the backing paper, maybe not. They didn't mention an exact cause. All I know is that people using sheet film experienced similar issues and that has no backing paper.

Pere Casals

16-Dec-2016, 07:22

Maybe it was the backing paper, maybe not. They didn't mention an exact cause. All I know is that people using sheet film experienced similar issues and that has no backing paper.

Then it had to be another manufacturing problem...

jaymus

16-Dec-2016, 23:32

Religiously, precisely, consistently and with authority, tap the bottom of the tank.

IanBarber

17-Dec-2016, 02:31

Pere Casals

17-Dec-2016, 03:27

They are still here...

158792

Just developed a test negative and the spots are still there.

This time I ...

Let the mixed developer stand so the air bubbles could naturally go away.
Rapped the Paterson tank several times on the table to dislodge any bubbles
Replaced Stop Bath with tap water
Only used 2ml of PhotoFlo mixed with 998ml of water

I guess I need to try another one, this time not using the Photoflo

Hmmm....

See this sample:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/arsenjev_ki/2062520752/in/photolist-49fXyC-g5LBcX-aWF4ax-9U43Zj-9sb8t6-bwrmhL-e82aHz-9yeKJD-ap8ij3-ecarw6-7EFnNE-as9FnL-nrgKcx-7meBX8-jEKuZm-bEQeP8-itF4hS-ar7i93-oTDTvF-n9Wbfu-7uLPwq-9jAAK7-bDd9ms-rm6dpv-cyTEcq-dnzG6e-ne7LvB-ggZFpx-ebG7ye-oKiKPb-aeTnRa-nLpkfN-7VEJg2-dVKDbk-e4fA17-ryLDTR-bpvQyt-nkRqzs-r9GCNY-dtwCiK-hn5H5s-bZF7MY-gJXnMF-bWdZm3-dsN6zo-ddW3Pp-bR2Tze-gm6CFk-9yo5dQ-7icUD8

Can it be an erosion? Try placing the emulsion up. Develop it in a tray in darkness with very gentle agitation. Be very careful when drying. I that sample there are also scratches, indicating concurrent mechanical damage.

also that

http://startstudioarts.si.edu/2011/02/troubleshooting-film-series-bubbles-on-negatives.html

There says that PhotoFlo may produce problems in the development because contamination from the previous batch... so clean tank very, very well to discard that.

It is not stop bath, not air bubbles... we can guess developer/ fixer is good... so IMHO it only can be a chemical contamination or a manufacturing defect.

(also you have to try very gentle handling (in tray))

After next try you may contact Foma: foma@foma.cz asking for help, include manufacturing batch info like that:

158794

IanBarber

17-Dec-2016, 04:07

There says that PhotoFlo may produce problems in the development because contamination from the previous batch... so clean tank very, very well to discard that.

I will clean the tank and Mod54 holder with very hot water, in fact I will leave them to soak in the water for some time.

The fixer looks ok, not sure if its worth mixing a fresh batch but I would not have thought fixer could have caused this issue, having got the same results with just using tap water for stop tells me its not a stop bath issue.

It could be a film batch issue, I will also try a different brand, I have some Delta 100 in the fridge.

loonatic45414

17-Dec-2016, 04:23

I don't know why it's so important to make Foma work. Yes, I've gotten great results with it, but I'm not taking a chance on losing that once in a lifetime shot because of some film with poor production standards.

Sent from my 0PJA2 using Tapatalk

IanG

17-Dec-2016, 04:46

You live in an area listed as being in the top 10 areas in the UK for hard water,some parts are listed as being very hard. So the first step is to change the water used to mix the developer, either get a Britta or similar water filter or buy de-ionised water.

Ian

koraks

17-Dec-2016, 05:28

These issues are not the issues that have plagued foma 200 and no widescale manufacturing issues are known with the other foma films; I'd say the issues here aren't likely to be caused by the film. No such bubble issues are known to be inherent to foma films as far as I'm aware and contacting foma about them at this point seems premature.

On a sidenote: 2ml of photoFlo on a liter of developer sounds excessive and unnecessary to me. Wetting agents tend to create foam and as far as I'm concerned this only makes matters worse during development. I never add photoflo to my developers and I have never experienced the issues seen here. When using the MOD54, be sure to clean the tank and holder thoroughly so no remnants of the surfactant remain, use regular water (or demi water if you're paranoid) to make up the developer. As long as you use a sufficient amount of developer you should be fine. If you insist on using PhotoFlo in the developer, try 2 drops instead of 2 ml; that would be a much more reasonable concentration.

I don't know why it's so important to make Foma work. Yes, I've gotten great results with it, but I'm not taking a chance on losing that once in a lifetime shot because of some film with poor production standards.

There's nothing particular about making Foma films work. The only consistent issue known is with Foma 200 and with a bit of luck, that's solved now. Foma 100 in any case is not plagued by quality issue and has thousands of users worldwide who use it successfully. I can't comment on 400 as I don't use it and haven't spent much time looking into it, but I've never come across quality issues with it. The suggestion that Foma's QC is horrible makes me wonder what people make of companies like Kodak, with the notorious incident with the backing paper on TMX and TMY 120 last year. What would you suggest using - a magic film you know 100% certain (how??) that it's always free of defects?

IanBarber

17-Dec-2016, 09:28

Thanks to everyone for their input to this issue.

I have just finished developing a further 2 images and they are currently drying.

You live in an area listed as being in the top 10 areas in the UK for hard water,some parts are listed as being very hard. So the first step is to change the water used to mix the developer, either get a Britta or similar water filter or buy de-ionised water.

Ian

I was not aware we lived in a hard water area until I just checked on the Water company website. I am not to sure what hard water would do to the development but I have now ordered a Britta Jug just to be on the safe side.

IanG

17-Dec-2016, 10:00

I was not aware we lived in a hard water area until I just checked on the Water company website. I am not to sure what hard water would do to the development but I have now ordered a Britta Jug just to be on the safe side.

It can be very much harder to dislodge air bells if the water used when making up the developer is very hard, and they can form as you're pouring the developer into the developing tank, or during inversion agitation. So you need to eliminate this risk, commercial developer usually contain enough EDTA or similar to help with hard water, but in some circumstances this isn't enough. So softening the water or buying de-ionised is going to minimise the air bels risk. The Britta water filter us a small de-ionising cartridge.

Ian

IanBarber

17-Dec-2016, 10:15

It can be very much harder to dislodge air bells if the water used when making up the developer is very hard, and they can form as you're pouring the developer into the developing tank, or during inversion agitation. So you need to eliminate this risk, commercial developer usually contain enough EDTA or similar to help with hard water, but in some circumstances this isn't enough. So softening the water or buying de-ionised is going to minimise the air bels risk. The Britta water filter us a small de-ionising cartridge.

Ian

Do you think the water used for car batteries would be just as effective. I see Halfords sell de-ionsed water in 10 litre containers