What did I do wrong?

[matt352]

Hello. I recently developed a couple of rolls of Tri-X in DDX and the negatives came out a bit cloudy and covered with vertical stripes lining up with the perforation holes. Might anyone know how I screwed up? Thanks in advance!

(Here's a sample: not a great image, but shows the stripes well)

 

[sleepyhead]

Are you sure that they line up with the sprocket holes? the spacing seems abit variable in the example you provided.

I have to confess that I've not seen anything EXACTLY like this streaking problem before. If the stripes DO line up with the sprocket holes then it could be an agitation during development problem. But this usually shows up stronger near the edges of the film, while your stripes are strong in the centre as well...

I'm wondering about your fixing step. Are you sure that the fixer ws fresh? You could try sacrificing a test frame and stick it in dish of fixer for a while - do the streaks on the film look at all brown-ish or purple-ish or pink-ish? If so, they should disappear on re-fixing. Rinse with water as usual afterwards.

My third hypothesis is some kinda light leak from the back of your M body - again if the streaks line up with the sprocket holes perhaps the problem is with your camera back/pressure plate assembly...

 

[like2fiddle]

I think probably initial agitation a little too aggressive.

 

[retro]

I think probably initial agitation a little too aggressive.

Looks to me like in-camera light leaks from bad seals entering
through film sprocket holes.

What is the camera and condition of its seals?

 

[David William White]

Refix the film. Today.

 

[shadowfox]

Hello. I recently developed a couple of rolls of Tri-X in DDX and the negatives came out a bit cloudy and covered with vertical stripes lining up with the perforation holes. Might anyone know how I screwed up? Thanks in advance!

(Here's a sample: not a great image, but shows the stripes well)

If the "cloud" on the negatives are opaque (some people describe it as "milky"), then the fixer is not reaching those parts of the film.

If you suspect the camera, shoot a throw-away color negative film and give it to a minilab to develop, if you still see the stripes and this time it's orange when scanned, then it's a light leak from behind the film (i.e the back or bottom of the camera).

 

[KenD]

Do the stripes appear in all of the frames, or just some?

A light leak seems unlikely - it would involve a series of roughly equally spaced leaks. Were there any unusual things about developing this roll - problems feeding onto the reel, etc., etc.?

 

[retro]

Do the stripes appear in all of the frames, or just some?

A light leak seems unlikely - it would involve a series of roughly equally spaced leaks.

Why? Light leaking through rotten seals would not produce
uniform leaks. These days rotten seals are common on
older 35mm cameras and newbies often don't know they
should be replaced. It's a very likely reason for the effect
shown in the OP. Leaky seals around the film chamber do
produce effects that look just like that.

 

[David William White]

No, these 'light leaks' are from light coming through the sprocket holes while the film is wound on the developing reel after it has been insufficiently fixed. It looks 'mechanical' and one would first think of the camera, but the effect is generated while the film is in the reel.

Refixing will clear the negatives. Either mixing up a fresh batch, replenishing the fixer straight from the bottle, or (last), just fixing longer. I've refixed film after days and it has cleared the streaks. Also need to mention that there is no danger of over-fixing.

Hope the original requestor takes just 10 minutes to refix before selling his camera.

D.

 

[ChrisN]

This has an appearance that is consistent with many descriptions and examples of bromide drag - uneven development from under-agitation in the development step. Google for the term and you will find a lot of discussion and examples.

eg http://www.flickr.com/photos/heliophile/2226476625/

 

[naruto]

This has an appearance that is consistent with many descriptions and examples of bromide drag - uneven development from under-agitation in the development step. Google for the term and you will find a lot of discussion and examples.

eg http://www.flickr.com/photos/heliophile/2226476625/

Chris, that was my first thought too. But, the lines seem way too uniform for bromide drag. And, as mentioned they seem to line up with the sprocket holes. Looks like a light leak... 😕

 

[trix]

david said it all...just refix

 

[ChrisN]

Chris, that was my first thought too. But, the lines seem way too uniform for bromide drag. And, as mentioned they seem to line up with the sprocket holes. Looks like a light leak... 😕

I can't think how an M2 could leak light in a way that would cause that pattern associated with the sprocket holes. When you study the M-cameras closely in that department, you see they designed it so that's almost impossible. I have had this effect only once myself, and that was stand development for 1 hour with Rodinal 1+100, with no agitation after the initial agitation on filling the tank. And in that case, the streaking was tied to the sprocket holes. Since then I've done several rolls with semi-stand development, with mild agitation at 30 minutes, with good, even development.

 

[naruto]

I can't think how an M2 could leak light in a way that would cause that pattern associated with the sprocket holes. When you study the M-cameras closely in that department, you see they designed it so that's almost impossible. I have had this effect only once myself, and that was stand development ...

yeah, that's why I was wondering 🙂confused🙂 about the explanation myself. But, if he has agitated during development, even semi-stand, the uniform streaking seems a rather improbable case. The agitation should create an uneven bromide drag. I usually add in a bit more developer solution than the prescribed amount.

 

[like2fiddle]

I still say they look like surge marks from agitating. Another possibility might be exhausted developer.

 

[matt352]

Thanks everyone for their helpful suggestions. The answer doesn't seem a straightforward one, so perhaps some more detailed information is in order.

sleepyhead - Yes, the stripes line up exactly with the perforation holes.

KenD - Yes, all the frames show some striping, though some are more noticeable than others. Ditto milky-ness

And here's a tracing of my development steps:

Camera was M4-2, using Tri-X rated at 400. No problems with light leaks before.

1. Developer was fresh DDX 1+9 for 12.5 minutes, with 3 agitations after the first minute and 1 agitation every three minutes after

2. Stop bath for 30s

3. Fixer was Ilford diluted to 1+9. I agitated ~20 times for the first minute then a couple of times every minute for a total of 5 minutes. I had used the batch once the day before.

4. Wash (Ilford method)

5. Hypoclear 2mins

6. Wash (Ilford method)

7. Photoflo for 30s

8. Hang to dry

I just tested the same batch of fixer using a strip from a bulk spool. It cleared entirely in 5 mins.

 

[matt352]

Here are a couple more samples.



The milky-ness and striped-ness are more noticeable on this one than the other below. The milkiness look beside her left arm is also milky looking on the negative.



To show the spectrum, this one shows the least of the effect.

 

[David William White]

You tested the fixer, but you didn't try refixing the film! You are supposed to use double the clear time of a test strip.

Just drop the film in a bowl or tray of fixer (skip the reel) and wash. You don't need to agitate the fixer, either.

 

[DGA]

This has an appearance that is consistent with many descriptions and examples of bromide drag - uneven development from under-agitation in the development step. Google for the term and you will find a lot of discussion and examples.

eg http://www.flickr.com/photos/heliophile/2226476625/

I tend to agree on that.
Once I did some experiments on develop times for Neopan ACROS 100.
Until then I only developed this film with continuous agitation and I got tired of it (and wanted to try to have less contrasty results 🙂 )
So I cut off a roll into 5cm pieces and development tests in an open tank.
in one of the tests I let the film strip lay down in the developer without any agitation for reasonable time (that was one of the last test for the experiment, so I knew approximately the dev times)
I'm telling you all that because that film slip has the same marks as shown here.
According to what matt wrote:
"1. Developer was fresh DDX 1+9 for 12.5 minutes, with 3 agitations after the first minute and 1 agitation every three minutes after"
that is way too little agitation, to my knowledge.
Try to agitate more.

 

[Melvin]

Ilford fix should be mixed 1:4 for film, 1:9 for paper only.