PDA

View Full Version : Black Specs In Negative But Not On Prints?



m00dawg
28-Jul-2018, 07:58
I read through this (http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?67795-Getting-Clean-Negs/page3&highlight=black+specs+print) post which had a number of suggestions for eliminating dust/specs during processing that I want to try, but I'm wondering if my issue is different.

I took some 4x5 photos at the beach (for fellow Texans, it was the state park in Port Aransas) and knew going in sand was, of course, going to be an issue. I did get a few shots I'm happy with given the season and the African dust in the air (tended to ruin sunrises). Some abstract things in the dunes.

I've scanned these and at the time didn't notice really many dust spots - no more than usual. Well I went into the darkroom to finally wet print these and when I used the grain focuser, I noticed a lot of black specs. These don't show up in the 8x10 wet prints I made. When I hold the negatives up to the light and use a loupe, I can only see them when the light is directly behind the negative as well as some pits in the plastic even. I can't see them just looking at the negative normally.

This showed up in my BW and C-41 but wasn't as much in the E-6. I had those sent off but I'm not sure if that's a good test given how E-6 is processed. I haven't shot 4x5 since but I have shot some 35mm and noticed those negatives are basically void of the black specs and pits. Likewise 4x5 negatives I've shot before this trip look pretty good as well. That makes me think it's not my processing necessarily (though the idea in the above link are things I'm going to try for sure) but was the environment I shot the photos in.

I'm about to go on a trip in a week where I plan on taking 4x5 so my plan is to perhaps make a few sample exposures for comparison. Hoping everything comes up but the one thing I'm wondering about is why I can't see these in the prints I make but could see them in the grain focuser? The prints themselves look sharp (and actually turned out quite well) so I would have expected to see them.

John Layton
28-Jul-2018, 12:36
Black specs in negatives will typically show up as white specs in prints...which are generally easy to retouch. Then again...the specs you've mentioned here sound quite small - and since you aren't enlarging all that much to get an 8x10 print as you've indicated, you might not notice the (white) specs on the prints. Also keep in mind that such specs - especially small ones...can be fairly well camouflaged by the subject matter itself.

What I would suggest is that you raise your enlarger up as high as you can...then mask off a part of the focussed image with your 8x10 easel - ensuring that at least one of the "specs" appears in this image, and see if the resultant print displays the spec in question.

What creates more problems, at least in my case...is when I get clear specs on the negative, typically a result of dust that's fallen on the film prior to making an exposure. These clear specs print black and, especially in large, non-textured gray to light gray areas (such as sky) these are quite noticeable and are a real pain! My remedy is to painstakingly retouch the clear specs on the negatives (with spotting solution, or crocein scarlet, or "perfect liquid opaque, and/or sometimes with an etching needle and/or razor blade)...in hopes that they'll either print as white specs, or at least at a tonality that is as light or lighter than the surrounding area. Alas...after half century of trying - this still does not always work as well as I'd like!

m00dawg
28-Jul-2018, 14:06
Thanks John!

Yep I think you're right. I took some test photos today after I cleaned out my holders, camera, even my lenses, to see. Also have a roll on 120 to develop as a sort of test. Odd part is I spent a lot of time playing with the exposure last night where I had both a white sky and a dark one (the scene is of a sunrise so tons of dynamic range to play with) and I didn't really see the specs in either. I would have thought they would have come up in the white sky variants. I took a loupe to it and there are some white specs but not as many as what I saw in the loupe.

You're right though I bet it's a function of enlargement size too. Does it matter what kind of enlarger I'm using? It's an Omega D2 which I believe is a condenser. Wondering if the light through the negative is diffusing out in a way that makes them less noticeable (I could only see them via the grain focuser or when using a loupe and had a lightsource perfectly parallel to the negative).

Either way lesson learned. Not sure how to solve this problem if I ever take it back to that coast. Of all the coasts I've been around, it's, by far, the worst when it comes to sand. Might just have to go travel to better beaches :)

m00dawg
28-Jul-2018, 18:11
I think I figured out part of what's going on. I think the grain focuser and my loupe end up focusing on the imperfections on the plastic base and not the emulsion. When I look at the negatives on a light table, they look great! It's only when I hold the negative up to a light source and use the loupe to inspect that way where I see imperfections.

I took a negative from last year that I've scanned and contact printed (before I had an enlarger) with excellent results. Sure enough, print looks good, but if I hold the negative up to a light and use the loupe, it shows lots of imperfections.

I'm not sure why my grain focuser sees them though. I've never noticed them under the enlarger until now but I haven't made all that many 4x5 enlargements on it. I was using a Besseler 67 for 35mm and 120 before until I got the Omega so I dunno if that's the main difference (diffuser vs condenser) or just the size of the negative or what.

I'll need to do more tests by doing why I enjoy anyway (making prints!) but that's my best guess so far. Since I don't see nearly as many imperfections on the Velvia I've had lab developed, I do think there may be something in my process that might be causing those perhaps. I use distilled water everywhere except for the rinse after fixer (but I use distilled with Photo-Flo) and think that's one place that might be an issue so I'm going to see about a water filter of some kind. I don't want to use distilled water here because, even though it's relatively cheap, that's a lot of water to mow through when doing 4x5 for sure.

Using the Ilford method, that'd be 3 liters just for the wash. On the note, wondering if the Ilford method (or agitation/inversion in general) might be the issue. For the final wash I fill with water and invert 10 times, rinse, then 20, rinse, then 30, rinse. If my water has particulates, guessing that would exacerbate the problem.