developed my b&w roll !!

[ywenz]

It's been 7 or 8 years since I've last processed b&w film. I picked up a diafine kit a month ago and last night developed a roll of Delta 100 and Tri-X 400. I couldn't believe how simple it was and now I'm all geeked out about b&w film! I'll be scouring ebay for expired b&w film today...

Also, since I hardly use low iso C-41 film, I made the discovery of how much more easier it is to scan low iso b&w filme. WOW!

In the third pic, you can see white ghosting of the film perforation. Is this due to the chemical not making to that part of the film surface because I didn't load it into the reel properly?

 

[jlw]

Your sprocket-hole "shadowing" can be caused by improper loading, or by light leakage, but in my experience this particular type of mark is more likely caused by improper agitation or nearly-exhausted chemicals.

Simplified explanation of why it happens: Developer or fixer flowing through the sprocket holes gives a bit of extra chemical activity compared to the surrounding area.

What to do: Make sure your darkroom is really dark; check that your developer and fixer are fresh; use correct agitation technique for your style of tank.

Another thing: about halfway up on the left side of your top image is an arc-shaped light-colored mark. This could be a lens flare from the light sources in the picture, but it also looks like the type of mark you get if you kink the film while flexing it to load onto the reel. You might want to make a few more dry runs with scrap film to make sure you're loading the reels smoothly.

Other than that, your scans look good and the images themselves are very nice. Congrats!

 

[LazyHammock]

I think the sprocket hole issue is from overly aggressive agitation - I've made that mistake before. I use a Paterson reel tank and found it is better to slowly rotate the wheels as opposed to my former spinning technique. I love the first shot, in particular the haloes on the lights.
Cheers,
Nick

 

[SolaresLarrave]

Doesn't it feel nice? 🙂

I think I recognize Millenium Park (first) and Wabash Street (3). Which are the other two?

BTW, I've had the same problem a couple of times. It goes away when you use constant agitation and then short periods of repose.

 

[rover]

Ha!!! He is just like the rest of us.

Good Job! 😉

 

[Benjamin Marks]

Ah, the glories of B&W film. . . bwahahahaha.

 

[back alley]

good job
nice shots

good to see you upbeat & excited about something!

joe

 

[salred]

Good inspiration!!

Good inspiration!!

I put away my changing bag a few years ago, but it's time for some Tri-X!

BTW: I bought my first darkroom gear at the old Altman's (R.I.P.) on Wabash in 1972. Gave that Omega B-22 (with a Zone VI head) to an up and coming college student a few years ago when I went to inkjet printing.

Steve A.

M6, IIIf, and a bunch of other stuff

 

[ywenz]

thanks for the comments!

I do think the sprocket-hole ghosting is caused by improper loading. The roll of Delta 100 did not exhibit this. I need to buy some fancier reels. The plastic ones that came with my tank are pretty bad since I've had trouble loading both rolls into them. Any good reels you can recommend?

The way I agitate is to rotate the whole tank(with the cover on) 180 deg. Should I agitate by rotating the reel insteat?

Solares: The first shot is the walkway at my work. The third shot is of Wabash, right by Central Camera.

 

[kaiyen]

Personally, I think the sprocket hole issues are from over-agitation, or a light leak. Your agitation scheme is sub-optical. Rotating the tank will only create a swirling motion in the liquid. It will not break up the flow in a sufficiently random motion. Consider, at the least, swirling the reels instead or, prefereably, a combination of inversion and rotation.

The little crescent shaped area of density is absoultely kinked film as you load. Make sure your reels are dry, and don't force it.

allan

 

[rogue_designer]

thanks for the comments!
The way I agitate is to rotate the whole tank(with the cover on) 180 deg. Should I agitate by rotating the reel insteat?

Solares: The first shot is the walkway at my work. The third shot is of Wabash, right by Central Camera.

I agitate that way too - never had any issues. Which makes me think the loading is the culprit.

I'll check out the pics when I get home... wherever they are hotlinked from is blocked by the firewall at the office. (no suprise there... no fun allowed). I love Central Camera - I think not having that in walking distance, is one of the things I miss most about not working downtown anymore.

 

[boilerdoc2]

Agreed, it is agitation issue. Need to 'mix it up' so to speak. Alter your agitation technique thru out the development. Careful not to be overly aggressive. Rotate, then spin the reel, etc. Randomness will mke for no 'patterns' in the flow of the developer. Good shots ywenz!
Steve

 

[Nachkebia]

Very nice!!! Film is alive like never! 😀

 

[kaiyen]

Bear in mind that I didn't say that agitation through simple rotation will produce bad results. I said that the bad results are through insufficient breakup of the flow of solution in fixed patterns (well, different words).

At least, that's what I meant.
allan

 

[Nick R.]

It looks like under agitation. When developing in Diafine there is a very short time where film is actually loaded with developer, the three minutes of dilution A. For best results, agitate just like the instructions say. For other developers other agitation methods may work well, but my experience with Diafine is that doing it by the book works best. As far as way of agitating, I use the invert and roll wrist method.

 

[Trius]

ywenz: Nice scanning, too ... what scanner did you use?

The scan I had a friend do was great, he has a Canon 4000, I think. Lots of dust spotting, but this was just a test. He says he prefers the Canon to the Nikon for b&w, which is the opposite of what I had thought.

Film is a gas; I'm not a Diafine fan, but these are really good. Hate it when I'm wrong! 😱

 

[ywenz]

Trius: thanks, I used my Epson 4800 flatbed, scanned at 1200dpi. The ones posted here have been resized by flickr.

 

[kmack]

Trius: thanks, I used my Epson 4800 flatbed, scanned at 1200dpi. The ones posted here have been resized by flickr.

Nice job, I would not have thought a flatbed would produce such nice images from 35mm.

 

[sbug]

One other thing, if you're having trouble loading the film onto plastic reels, make sure they are dry. It is noticably more difficult when plastic reels are wet.

Nice shots BTW!