ADOX CHS 100 ART and strange markings

[jvuokko]

I have used ADOX CHS 100 Art for a long time and really like it when developed with Pyrocat-HD.
Mostly I have used Paterson Orbital with motorized base for developing and results has been good. Perhaps sometimes there's a bit too much density at the edges but I was able to live with that.


But some times ago, I ran sudden problems with CHS 50 ART and CHS 100 ART.
Sometimes there was strange markings on the negative, like finger prints, dirt marks or something. I blame myself for that. Or my Paterson Orbital processor.

Here's a good examples (crop from scan):
http://jukkavuokko.com/linkatut/lf/skraiduja-negassa2.jpg


http://jukkavuokko.com/linkatut/lf/en-ees-yrita-prikata.jpg
This is CHS 100 ART. I have no idea where scratches came from. Also the sky has marks that at first glance against the light seemed like result of uneven development but when you look closer, there's kind a pattern in the marks.


Recently almost every negative has been more or less faulty and I did some test to see what is the problem.

As I wanted to close out camera and film holders, I exposed six test sheets under the enlarger. So they got even exposure and there was no dirt, no way to get scratches, no any source to get finger prints.

I developed film sheet using two paterson orbital tanks and jobo 2509 reel with 2523 drum. Pre-soak, 24 degree celsius, 11 minutes in Pyrocat-HD 1:1:100. Water stop and hardening fixer.


The result was shocking. Not only the result of Paterson Orbital and Jobo 2523 drum showed uneveness as I suspected (it seems that the only way to get evenly developed sheet film is the tray development), but they also show markings like this:

http://jukkavuokko.com/linkatut/lf/45_adox_chs_100-orbitalA-2.jpg

Not quite even gray. And when contrast is enhanced bit more, the result is this:
http://jukkavuokko.com/linkatut/lf/45_adox_chs_100-orbitalA-2-korostettu.jpg


Now I am a bit lost. What could cause these? This one was developed on Paterson Orbital and at first I thought that it's roughtened base is the cause. But it's not.

My strongest suspect is that these are from the manufactory. It would not be big news as I have once encountered bad banding effect with faulty Adox Pan 25 sheet film.

But this happens with two different films, with CHS 50 ART and CHS 100 ART. It seems also bit random.


Has anyone seen anything similar with Adox/Efke films?

[ret wisner]

yes i wont use adox as its quality control is too low, there paper is better though

[rguinter]

I know nothing about developing as I have never done it. But all those smudges and marks look very much like hand-prints and finger-smudges to me... Bob G.

[jvuokko]

Yes, they surely looks like fingerprints and smudges. But where they came from?


Heres examples from another negatives, I haven't touched the negatives with my fingers and the negative has been only contact with the clean black paper at the enlarger's base during exposure.

As the one of my suspected sources for markings was the roughtened base of the Orbital tank (http://www.rogerandfrances.com/photoschool/ps%20how%20orbital.html), I used also Jobo 2523 tank with test.


First one is developed with JOBO:
http://jukkavuokko.com/linkatut/lf/45_adox_chs_100-jobo-2-korostettu.jpg





And this is with Paterson Orbital:

http://jukkavuokko.com/linkatut/lf/45_adox_chs_100-orbitalB-2-korostettu.jpg

[jvuokko]

I just developed remaining negatives that were from same batch, same box. I used Tetenal Emofin for half of negatives and D-23 thornton's modification for another half.

They seem to be very clean. But negatives that was taken from box before them and after them and developed in pyrocat-hd shows all those marks.

Can it be that pyrocat-hd (or other staining developers) somehow are more sensitive to any kind of dirt, like fingerprints?