Help - 4x5 Negative Developing Issue - Looking for Ideas

[tacomaken]

Hello -
I am struggling to understand what might be going on with my developing, and am looking for suggestions on what I should be looking for to solve the issue. The image was taken using Fomapan 100 classic. This image was using a Crown Graphic with a 150mm 6.3 lens at f/32 for 1/15 second.

Developed with Cinestill DF96 monobath at the recommended 80 degrees F. The developer is unexpired and had just 3 35mm rolls and 2 4x5 sheeds developed in it previously. It has been open about 2 weeks and kept at room temperature. I developed using a Patterson tank with MOD54 sheet holder and developed six sheets. Same issue on each sheet. I pre-rinsed with 80-degree F tap water until the water ran clear, then developed for 4 minutes 15 seconds, rinsed for 10 minutes. I then did a final rinse with photo flow (about 3 drops per 2 Liters of 80-degree water. I used tap water that is not considered hard water (Tacoma area water from local river watershed). This has also happened in a Stearman tank.

Thank you for your ideas.
232302.

[paulbarden]

My guess is that Cinestill monobath isn't a good match for this film.

[tacomaken]

Thank you - I'm planning on trying a more standard approach with D76 on the next images. I wondered the same as you suggested. - K

[nolindan]

You might try fixing the film. As in, worth a shot, not much to lose.

[tacomaken]

You might try fixing the film. As in, worth a shot, not much to lose.

I'll give that a go. Thank you.

[koraks]

It looks like an agitation issue, but I'm sure that the use of a monobath has exacerbated the problem. Rest assured that you can get pretty nice and even development with the mod54 and fomapan 100 using a normal developer and fixer.
I did use to have issues with unevenness along the edges of the film where the mod54's "claws" hold the film. I never really solved that issue because I moved to Jobo and tray processing fairly soon.

[lenshustle]

the cinestill monobath is very very very temperamental.

Some films need special treatment to get it right, but in the long run its best and cheapest to use a real film developer.

[j enea]

i have seen a lot of recent posts over the last few months in many different places with development issues and monobaths. hmmm, is there a correlation here? never really understood why people use it. is there something that it does that other normal development and fix don't/can't do besides saving a few minutes?

john

[jnantz]

warm chemicals and processing for less than 5 minutes can always lead to problems. I've never used cinestil but hear good things about it, is there any way you can use it at a colder temperature and develop for a longer length of time? good luck!

[Bernice Loui]

Give up the monolith developer, use a traditional developer with a development time of no less than 6-7 minutes..
Development tank used and agitation are other factors..

Why f32 as the exposure aperture?

Bernice

[Ben Calwell]

As Koraks suggested, it might be an agitation problem, i.e., surge pattern or bromide drag. Tray processing sheet film solved a similar problem for me. I don’t mind being in total darkness shuffling film sheets in a tray, but many people don’t like doing that.

[jnantz]

Hello -
I am struggling to understand what might be going on with my developing, and am looking for suggestions on what I should be looking for to solve the issue. The image was taken using Fomapan 100 classic. This image was using a Crown Graphic with a 150mm 6.3 lens at f/32 for 1/15 second.

Developed with Cinestill DF96 monobath at the recommended 80 degrees F. The developer is unexpired and had just 3 35mm rolls and 2 4x5 sheeds developed in it previously. It has been open about 2 weeks and kept at room temperature. I developed using a Patterson tank with MOD54 sheet holder and developed six sheets. Same issue on each sheet. I pre-rinsed with 80-degree F tap water until the water ran clear, then developed for 4 minutes 15 seconds, rinsed for 10 minutes. I then did a final rinse with photo flow (about 3 drops per 2 Liters of 80-degree water. I used tap water that is not considered hard water (Tacoma area water from local river watershed). This has also happened in a Stearman tank.

Thank you for your ideas.
232302.

it seems the people that make cinestill have a great help section and an email address, it might be worth emailing them directly, and including the image and ask what they think went wrong with your film
.. https://cinestillfilm.com/

[Keith F]

I have never used the Monobath but have seen that result myself when using a fix that was exhausted.


Keith

[Robert Opheim]

I agree with Keith - it could be the fixer. What does the surface of the negative look like? is there any clouding? Is there any chance of a light leak from the holder not seating or the bellows or camera?

[jtomasella]

Never had a problem developing my Fomapan 100. I'm not a big developer switcher and only use HC110. It's been fine pre rinsing or not pre rinsing.

[moggi1964]

I've used the Ars Imago Monobath on 120 and 35mm and had good results. They were my first films and the instructions were easy to follow and they just worked.

I'm now trying other developers and types of development and reading a lot to figure out where there might be consensus of approach on different films.

Perhaps semi-stand development using 510 Pyro is worth a go or something more standard like ID11 which I have read (not tried) can offer reasonable times at stock ratio (not the long times like a pyro).

Anyway, there are lots more experienced and talented darkroom folks on here than me so I am sure there will be plenty of suggestions. Good luck.

[domaz]

In this day and age is a Monobath even useful? It's not like anyone is in a hurry needed to get their negatives developed before the Newspaper goes to print. Even in limited situations like developing in a hotel room, camper van etc B&W development is not that hard to do.

[jtomasella]

Give up the monolith developer, use a traditional developer with a development time of no less than 6-7 minutes..
Development tank used and agitation are other factors..

Why f32 as the exposure aperture?

Bernice

His tank and holder are fine, I use the same without issue.

[lungovw]

It gave a sort of Van Gogh texture. I would try going in two ways: How to get rid of it and also how to enhance it :-)

[Kevin Crisp]

You can't go wrong with D76. Start off simple. Gentle constant agitation in a tray.

My first thought was the same as Benice's -- why f:32?

[campy]

i have seen a lot of recent posts over the last few months in many different places with development issues and monobaths. hmmm, is there a correlation here? never really understood why people use it. is there something that it does that other normal development and fix don't/can't do besides saving a few minutes?

john

I used it to develop a couple of 5x7 sheets in a tray put in the Photoflex changing room because I don't have a lightproof area to develop it.

[Paul Ron]

developer wasnt mixed prior to use.... or not enough agitation.