PDA

View Full Version : TMY in PMK = spots/mottling?



paulbarden
16-Dec-2018, 15:57
I don't usually use Pyro (PMK) for processing 120 roll film but yesterday I decided I'd give it a go with a roll of TMY I shot under foggy conditions, as Pyro is reputed to be good at enhancing atmospheric effects like fog, making them more "tactile". While I do like the look of the images I got, I'm disturbed to discover that the negatives have some subtle spotting/mottling in the higher values. Here is an example. The marks are most evident in the upper right and left corners of the image, as lighter spots:

https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4899/31403457577_aaed38f2cb_c.jpg
A larger version can be viewed here to see the marks more clearly: https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4899/31403457577_3f28c1931d_k.jpg

Any idea what is going on here? Did I do something wrong?
I followed the directions exactly as written in the instruction sheet that came with the chemistry (Photographers Formulary PMK, 2 part solution) using a distilled water stop, the T4 fixer (made fresh) plus a final 2 minute immersion in the developer AFTER the fix. (Which I gather is no longer deemed necessary). Final wash was 20 minutes at 72F, and rinse in distilled water plus a few drops of Photo Flo at the very end. I did a 3 minute presoak in distilled water as well, and all solutions were within 3 degrees F at all times. I've used this exact procedure with other films and never seen this mottling before. This is the recent batch of TMY dated 2021 I believe. It has been stored at room temperature in dry conditions for about 14 months before I shot the roll.

Drew Wiley
16-Dec-2018, 16:48
Probably condensation on the film at the time of the shot.

paulbarden
17-Dec-2018, 08:16
Probably condensation on the film at the time of the shot.

Really? Every frame on the roll, exactly the same spotting? Seems unlikely, as there were only seconds between some shots - and that after the camera had cooled to match the environment (it was a mild 40F outside). I’ve shot under these conditions many times with the same camera and never seen this effect before. Why this time?

jp
17-Dec-2018, 08:21
I'd try refixing/washing/drying before guessing much more.

Rick A
17-Dec-2018, 08:49
Possibly an effect from reimmersion in spent developer. I never liked the results from that procedure and stopped doing it several years ago. The overall stain effect is rarely even or predictable.

koraks
17-Dec-2018, 09:10
Possibly an effect from reimmersion in spent developer.
Possibly, but I can't begin to explain how that would work. Either way, as you pointed out, I'd just omit that step.


Probably condensation on the film at the time of the shot.
Looking at the larger version of the image, I'd think this is a reasonable explanation. However, Paul brings up some relevant issues w.r.t. earlier experiences and shot-to-shot consistency. I'm drawing a blank on those issues.

This is one of those cases in which you'd like to have a really good (very close) look at the actual film. It may give some clues, e.g. as to the narrow band along the top of this frame that is relatively free of spots (which could be consistent with a condensation issue) and the nature of the spots themselves. Do they seem to 'sit' on top of the emulsion, or do they look like an integral part of it? How are they delineated? They're really really small, but a high-magnification loupe could help. Even a high-res scan could provide some more information.

bob carnie
17-Dec-2018, 09:24
Hi Paul

Even neutral grey is a real problem for PMK and for any developer for that matter... Totally looks like you need to agitate twist invert immediately to get the chemicals completely to the full surface of the film, specially roll film and the PMK is a hardening developer and I find I have to be fast to get even grey backgrounds smooth, I spent a two month period trying to figure out how to fix the problem.

Bob

Chauncey Walden
17-Dec-2018, 10:25
It looks like the edges that were in the reel suffered different development also. I'd say it is an agitation problem. What is your method?

koraks
17-Dec-2018, 10:33
Tiny plus-density spots like this are very extremely unlikely to be an agitation issue. I think some people are looking at the 'wrong' problem here. You need to open the big version on Flickr; it's the tiny little white spots all over the frame that Paul is informing about.

Fred L
17-Dec-2018, 12:36
tbh, when I looked at the super duper sized image, first thing I thought was fungus/mould. I haven't encountered this in the films I've processed in PMK, and I'm using city tap water which is not softened, but not hard.

Drew Wiley
17-Dec-2018, 14:20
It's the tiny mottling on the more detailed version that look like condensation to me. But why individual frames of roll film would have severe edge density unevenness looks more like a processing issue. As far as PMK stain, I find it entirely predictable and never uneven unless the development itself somehow was. Certain sheet film will naturally get a tad of extra density as the very edges of each sheet. But it's hard to say how this neg actually looks like from a web posting. If there are tiny white spots, it could be water mold, but that's mainly a Springtime issue. In cold weather, the Part B PMK sometimes get a cloudy deposit that settles, needing the B bottle to be well shaken or else held in a warm water bath awhile to certain ingredients unfrozen.

Willie
17-Dec-2018, 17:10
Are you sure it is not the water droplets in the fog?
My monitor screen doesn't show what I think is them well and they look like the fine water droplets that float in the air, making fog.

paulbarden
17-Dec-2018, 18:06
It's the tiny mottling on the more detailed version that look like condensation to me. But why individual frames of roll film would have severe edge density unevenness looks more like a processing issue. As far as PMK stain, I find it entirely predictable and never uneven unless the development itself somehow was. Certain sheet film will naturally get a tad of extra density as the very edges of each sheet. But it's hard to say how this neg actually looks like from a web posting. If there are tiny white spots, it could be water mold, but that's mainly a Springtime issue. In cold weather, the Part B PMK sometimes get a cloudy deposit that settles, needing the B bottle to be well shaken or else held in a warm water bath awhile to certain ingredients unfrozen.

Drew,
Part B was well shaken before measuring out the quantity needed, and it was stored at 65F before used.
The edge density is introduced post-processing as intentional vignette. Bear in mind this is a finished (processed) image, not a raw scan of the neg. The original scan shows zero unevenness of density in the higher values, edge to edge.

I’m going to assume this is a peculiarity with TMY used under foggy/cold weather conditions, perhaps enhanced by PMK. Bergger Pancro 400 shot in identical conditions with the same camera and processed in PMK did not produce this mottling effect. *shrug*

jp
17-Dec-2018, 18:17
I mostly use TMY2 in foggy/cold conditions and am not familiar with your problem. I have used it with pyrocat hd, hdc, and PMK. I do not redevelop after fixing. I'd repeat my suggestion of refixing/washing the negative and trying again. Shoot some more, develop it normally, fix/wash it plenty, skipping the redevelop step.

paulbarden
17-Dec-2018, 18:27
I mostly use TMY2 in foggy/cold conditions and am not familiar with your problem. I have used it with pyrocat hd, hdc, and PMK. I do not redevelop after fixing. I'd repeat my suggestion of refixing/washing the negative and trying again. Shoot some more, develop it normally, fix/wash it plenty, skipping the redevelop step.

All good ideas! Thank you, I will pursue more testing.

John Layton
17-Dec-2018, 18:47
Paul...when did you purchase this particular batch of film - and what is the expiration date?

paulbarden
18-Dec-2018, 10:35
Paul...when did you purchase this particular batch of film - and what is the expiration date?

I did not purchase this lot of TMY; it is from a batch of TMY I was sent directly by Kodak in 2017 to replace film from the known compromised batches:

Batch 0155 022, dated 05/2019

Drew Wiley
18-Dec-2018, 10:52
Thanks for the clarification, Paul. And what I perceived as fine mottling on the film might been some kind of scanner artifact not even present on the actual negative. But sooner or later, maybe some suggestion will land on target. I have only gotten the condensation issue twice in my entire life - once onto a sheet of 8X10 TMY on an very cold wet day, and once at high altitude very early in the morning after a heavy rain onto two frames of 120 Ektar in a roll film holder. I stopped doing the after-fix re-immersion into developer several years back after it was determined by Gordon Hutchings himself not to have any real value. Unpredictable edge density and fbf on certain films due to that practice are far more likely a source of issues than initial PMK development itself. I've been shooting various Kodak roll films all along (plus sheet films) and have not gotten a single bad roll. Maybe I was lucky that whoever I bought
film from (several sources) pulled any suspect batches before they had a chance to be sold. I did double check the batch numbers, which alleviated any suspicions about what might be stored in my own freezer.