Development Tragedy: Banding along frames

[helvetica]

I am stumped as to what went so horribly wrong here, can anyone give me a hint?



I shot two rolls of HP5 bulk rolled, one in an F2 one in an EOS 1N, put them in a two reel tank, left them in a dark closet over night, and then developed them the next evening.

I mix a 1 gallon bag of D76 to stock solution, then pour off enough to make a 1:1 working solution, which I use one-shot. My fixer might be getting old, now that I think about it, but otherwise this is the same setup I used with plenty of success. Tap water for pre-wash and stop bath, all chemicals at room temperature. (69F) Plenty of chemicals and water to cover the film. Other than the banding, the development looks like it went as intended. (this is obviously a blank frame)

Note how the bands seem to come from the sprocket holes - and they are like this all the way up and down the rolls of film. It's as if extra (or not enough) chemistry is somehow flowing?


********** UPDATE *********

As per Rodinal's suggestion, I threw it back in my Kodak fixer as the negs where pretty much ruined in their current state. If it was just an exhausted fixer problem, then another 5+ minutes in the soup should clean it up. While not precise, it is at least a single-variable experiment.



That is the frame after another 5+ min in the exhausted fixer - mystery solved! Things are looking much better here.

I disposed of all of my existing fixer and mixed up a fresh batch, and developed another set of rolls. Same temp, same working 1+1 D76 from the existing stock for 11 minutes and it looks so far so good. I don't see any of my mysterious banding issues. Thanks to everyone for their input and suggestions!

 

[Highway 61]

1. Pre-wash is of NO interest with 135 film. But this is not the cause for your problem, of course.

2. Uneven development. Look at the obvious undeveloped areas. Why, I don't know.

 

[blue4130]

It's bromide drag caused by your agitation method and/or developer. Change up both and you should be ok.

http://photo.net/black-and-white-photo-film-processing-forum/00HYru

 

[Photo_Smith]

Very hard to say, looking at the top and bottom fogging and knowing it's bulk loaded it would be tempting to say fogging.
The lighter bands don't come from the sprockets and seem to be spaced between them and are too defined (almost square) at the lower edge to be surge marks or developer based faults like bromide drag IMO.

If you had to force me to guess I'd say fogging possibly during the time you waited after loading.

 

[rodinal]

I usually leave my films loaded in the tank (Jobo, Patterson) for days before developing, that should not be an issue.
I would recommend you to re-fix with fresh fixer... nothing to loose.

 

[aoresteen]

Looks to me a combination of exhausted developer and agitation issues.

 

[maddoc]

Exhausted fixer ... and I second that pre-washing 135 film is counter productive

 

[helvetica]

I would recommend you to re-fix with fresh fixer... nothing to loose.

I did just that and it seemed to clear it up just fine. I'll check the rest of the roll soon.

What agitation issue would there be? Not enough? I've had bad luck in the past with overly vigorous agitation leading to "chrunchy" looking negatives, perhaps I erred too far on the side of caution.

 

[helvetica]

I second that pre-washing 135 film is counter productive

How is it counter productive? It wouldn't seem like tap water would hurt the film, if anything it would seem to equalize all of the temperatures - but that was my operating understanding, please tell me if I'm missing something. I assumed it was a negligible positive if completely neutral - is it actually bad?

 

[maddoc]

The recommended developing / temperature / agitating values (from the film manufacturer) are for dry film that gets into contact with developer. However, if you pre-wash your film you not only wash the dye out but also the emulsion starts swelling by uptake of water. When this (washed) wet film gets into contact with developer solution it will take a different time until the chemicals diluted into the developer will diffuse into the emulsion. Therefore if you want to get exact & reproducible results you would have to carefully check the effect of pre-washing onto the developing time.

 

[helvetica]

thanks Maddoc, that makes a lot of sense. More risk & variability for no real gain!

 

[noisycheese]

@ helvetica,

Your banding (called surge lines) is most probably caused by not pre-washing and by improper agitation (improper agitation is the primary cause, I would suspect). If you address these two issues, your next batch of HP5+ should come out in good condition.

Regarding agitation, I pour in the developer, tap the tank (to dislodge air bubbles from the emulsion) once on the counter top and invert the tank continously for the first ten seconds, then tap the tank, invert five times every 30 seconds thereafter. I follow this procedure for each chemical step in the developing prcess. This is a fairly standard agitation technique, regardless of film type.

Standardization of your agitation technique is mandatory for goo developing results; agitate the tank identically each time you agitate.

Regarding pre-washing, see posts 3 and 10 here: http://www.apug.org/forums/forum37/119128-how-important-pre-wash-film-before-develop.html

Some will lambaste prewashing, some will praise it. It is recommended by Bernhard Seuss ( http://www.amazon.com/Mastering-Black-White-Photography-Darkroom/dp/1581153066 ) p.52 and by Henry Horenstein
( http://www.amazon.com/Black-White-P...d=1386566036&sr=1-1&keywords=henry+horenstein ) p. 145 & 149, although Horenstein categorizes it as optional.

The purpose of prewashing is to promote even development; with B&W film it is optional but with C-41 developing it is mandatory, according to Tetenal.

I have always prewashed my B&W film and have never found it to cause underdeveloping of my film, even when I adhere to standard developing times. I have always prewashed all my roll film, both 120 and 35mm format. Roll film size is not relevant to whether or not to prewash; at least not that I have ever heard or read.

Hope this helps...

 

[rodinal]

What agitation issue would there be? Not enough? I've had bad luck in the past with overly vigorous agitation leading to "chrunchy" looking negatives, perhaps I erred too far on the side of caution.

If you had any agitation issue, I'd say it is a little bit too strong... if.

Vigorous agitation tends to produce stronger action of the chemicals close to the perforations of the film, thus, uneven processing. As you describe your agitation procedure seems about right, I suggest you better count how many times you invert the tank (e.g. three times every 60 sec) In this case, the main problem seemed to be the just the exhausted fixer.

 

[helvetica]

... In this case, the main problem seemed to be the just the exhausted fixer.

Thanks for the suggestion. I updated the original post with my findings.

 

[Moto-Uno]

As a follow up on some earlier remarks made concerning prewashing negatives, the Ilford site specifically recommends against prewashing their films as it can lead to uneven
development ! But it appears some people have luck with it, so who knows? YMMV .
Peter

 

[Steve M.]

That's fortunate you were able to save the negs. I was wondering about my fixer just last night, and did a clip test to ck it. Just clip off a little of the leader from a fresh roll, pour some fixer into a dish, and submerge the clip. I bend mine to get it sorta straight. Time it to see how long it takes to become translucent. It's a little difficult to see, so hang onto one end of the clip w/ some tweezers and pull it out after about 30-35 seconds to ck on it. If you're using a rapid fixer like Kodak's, you should be able to see through it by then. If it doesn't clear by twice that long throw it out. You can google things to find a similar test for checking your developer, but most people know by their last roll how that is holding up. In the interests of keeping things simple I don't do a pre wash, but everyone has their own methods that they're comfortable with.