help identify neg processing problems

[lynnb]

Fed up with getting fingerprints and scratches on my XP2 and BW400CN negs returned from the local Big W and Camera House (C-41 process) minilabs, I took my latest roll of XP2 to a local pro lab.

I told them of my dissatisfaction with retail processing quality control and how important it was to have correctly processed, fingerprint-free negs for high resolution scanning.

Below you can see the results of their efforts. I was very unhappy after scanning the negs so I took them back, showed them the problem areas under a loupe and asked the lab to re-wash them.

Today they called me to say they were ready. When I arrived, they told me that after washing them again they were worse than the first time, so they had scanned and retouched them for me (as it turns out, at lower resolution than I do, and in JPG format) and saved the files to DVD.

I've rescanned the negs and can see no difference. Obviously I won't be taking my business there again. What I would like to know is, what is the cause of these artefacts?

I'll mention that these are definitely visible on the negs and I have not had these sorts of artefacts appear before. Looks like chemical splashes?

1. round blobby marks, looks a bit like Newton Rings
2. horizontal scratches looks like film transport scratches during processing (never had this occur in-camera)
3. worm like marks as if liquid has run over negative leaving trace

Thanks for your opinion!
- Lynn

 

[Photo_Smith]

The worms look like drying marks probably bubbles in the photoflow.
I doubt the horizontal marks are scratches as they are white scratches would be black. Therefore they are more likely to be some sort of crud off a squeegee probably the exit rollers if it was a minilab.

Probably they could be cleaned off with a cotton bud and weak solution of photo flow especially if they are on the base (shiny side)
Then re wash your negs (load in a spiral) and hang them on a fishing line or wire using a paperclip through a sprocket.

 

[V-12]

Blobs and worms like that are often caused by rapid drying, especially if the rinse had dust in it, or dust had fallen on the neg before drying. The white steaks look to me like contamination as the film goes through the machine, possibly off a roller that has some chemical crude built up on it.

 

[joeswe]

Wow, this lab definitely has some quality problems. Some of the worst processing I have seen in a while.
When I returned to shooting film a couple of years ago, I tested the three remaining labs that do in-house C41 developing here in my area. The results (including one "pro lab") were "bad" and "worse" and "worst". As I have been explained by a guy who was running one of the labs, it has in part to do with the fact that typical mini labs are difficult to keep "clean" and produce consistent results without a throughput of a given number of rolls/week. Many labs, including smaller local pro labs, struggle to reach this level. It will show in the results as dust embedded in the emulsion during development and inconsistencies. These usually cannot be cleaned up afterwards. The bottom line is: Change your lab again.
If you cannot find a better lab in your vicinity, consider mail-in development at a bigger lab that has a reputation for delivering good quality. I understand the idea to support local labs, but it doesn't make any sense if you have to compromise on quality. I collect my "serious" C41 stuff in the fridge and from time to time send it to a pro-lab that uses hanger machines for development instead of a mini-lab setup. The results are excellent, very consistent and absolutely free of scratches, embedded dust and other annoyances. The price is around 4 Euros/roll. For more "casual" stuff, where I can live with a bit of dust here and there, I use a local drugstore chain that sends its photo stuff to a big consumer lab. It's dirt cheap at 1 Euro/roll, but the quality is usually okay.
So, yes, it can be done and although I usually try to buy as much locally and personally as I can, in this case I would rather give my money to a prospering bigger lab somewhere far away that gives satisfactory results than to a smaller local one that offers C41 but is obviously not capable of doing the job properly.

 

[lynnb]

thanks very much for your responses. I'll try the weak photo-flo swab and then washing to see if it makes any difference.
I was shooting a wedding reception with DSLR and took a few frames with the Fed-3 on this roll of film to compare with digital. I am so glad I hadn't shot all film and trusted this lab! By coincidence the 4 frames at the wedding were the least affected. But some of the best shots on the roll were.
That's good advice about using high-volume labs. I'll do that in future.

 

[gsgary]

Why not develope it yourself in Rodinal
19min agitate 7 times every minute rodinal 1+25 20degs, i love how they come out

 

[lynnb]

thanks for the suggestion gsgary, I wasn't aware you could process C41 in Rodinal with such good results! What would you say are the main differences in the neg, comparing the two methods?

 

[colyn]

thanks for the suggestion gsgary, I wasn't aware you could process C41 in Rodinal with such good results! What would you say are the main differences in the neg, comparing the two methods?

Rodinal is a black & white developer. Don't soup C-41 film unless you are into weird results...

 

[lynnb]

Hi Colyn, gsgary's result above looks OK to me (accepting the limitations of web jpg samples, and not knowing what format it was shot in) - what sort of weird results would one expect using Rodinal on C41 films? e.g. increased grain, reduced density?
Cheers,

 

[gsgary]

thanks for the suggestion gsgary, I wasn't aware you could process C41 in Rodinal with such good results! What would you say are the main differences in the neg, comparing the two methods?

I have never used XP2 before but was given 10 rolls free by calling Ilford about having a trip round their plant in Cheshire for our camera club, but was told it was not possible and was sent 10 free rolls. This shot was taken with M4 and 28mmF2 Ultron if had a digital print done at 10X15 and it looks great