morback
Martin N. Hinze
Hi all,
I've been quietly processing my films for the past months, hoping to like Tri-X (under Arista's name). So far I'm underwhelmed, but the roll processed with stand development gave me the nicest result, even though I had this brownish fog going right through the entire roll.
Let me post a picture:
From left to right we have:
The one I'm most curious about is the first one, with that wave. I remember also developing a roll with the inverted version of that shape: instead of having a snake weave its way through, I had a series of hills on one side of the negative.
The Adoxes are also weird, with the burns from the sprocket holes going along and not across the negative, and the different burn marks through the negative...They burned all the way through fram 0 and sometimes 1. I can't tell if that happened further in the film yet (not scanned).
Those are all leads, the beginning of the film roll.
Please enlighten me!
m.
I've been quietly processing my films for the past months, hoping to like Tri-X (under Arista's name). So far I'm underwhelmed, but the roll processed with stand development gave me the nicest result, even though I had this brownish fog going right through the entire roll.
Let me post a picture:
From left to right we have:
- Tri-X processed at 1:50 in Rodinal. 13mn, 1mn initial agitaton, 2 inversions every minute thereafter.
- Tri-x stand processing in Rodinal, 1:100, 1 hour, 1mn initial agitation then nothing. I filled my Hewes tank to the brim, even though it was the only reel in there (it's a 2 reel SS tank).
- Adox 100, same processing as described above.
- Adox 100, same procesing as described above.
The one I'm most curious about is the first one, with that wave. I remember also developing a roll with the inverted version of that shape: instead of having a snake weave its way through, I had a series of hills on one side of the negative.
The Adoxes are also weird, with the burns from the sprocket holes going along and not across the negative, and the different burn marks through the negative...They burned all the way through fram 0 and sometimes 1. I can't tell if that happened further in the film yet (not scanned).
Those are all leads, the beginning of the film roll.
Please enlighten me!
m.
The issue of what? National Geographic?
I'm sure what you mean is "identify the problem".
I'm sure what you mean is "identify the problem".
newsgrunt
Well-known
first one looks like xray artifact. travel by air recently ?
squirrel$$$bandit
Veteran
Oscar, correcting people's grammar on the internet is a far greater crime, in most people's estimation, than using incorrect grammar in the first place. We're not applying for Guggenheims here, we're just having a casual chat. I say this as a professional writer and full-time English professor: let it go.
I think the battle of the misuse of the word "issue" has been lost for quite a while now.
The floodgates are open and even "official" publications are calling "problems" "issues".
I guess that has to be expected in a world where most people under the age of 25 can only write in "texting", u know? LOL.
The floodgates are open and even "official" publications are calling "problems" "issues".
I guess that has to be expected in a world where most people under the age of 25 can only write in "texting", u know? LOL.
morback
Martin N. Hinze
Yes I did travel by air recently. But, this is the first time it would have ever happened, and it would only be on one (maybe 2) of the 20 rolls I took on that trip? Is Tri-X a delicate film? I never had problems with APX or Ilford before.
How about that brown fog on the second strip? Overdeveloping? It was done with the bottom rests of my bottle of Rodinal...
Thanks!
m.
P.S: Thanks for correcting my english! (Don't worry, this shall be the only exclamation mark I use in this posting
). One learns new things every day from the most unexpected places. And please don't make a problem out of people correcting each other, or in this particular case, me. I am glad for it.
newsgrunt
Well-known
I've only gotten these types of artifacts when film was accidentally packed in checked baggage.
The brown stains look like insufficient fixing.
The brown stains look like insufficient fixing.
Rogrund
Antti Sivén
I think the battle of the misuse of the word "issue" has been lost for quite a while now.
The floodgates are open and even "official" publications are calling "problems" "issues".
I guess that has to be expected in a world where most people under the age of 25 can only write in "texting", u know? LOL.
I think this (mis)use of the word "issue" is more provoking for an American, for the rest of us it's only American English...
antiquark
Derek Ross
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/issue
It's amusing how know-it-alls often know very little.
newsgrunt
Well-known
get a digicam :angel:
<sorry, couldn't resist. as penance, will process logjam of film today>
Ronald M
Veteran
I never could get stand to work. the streaks are bromide drag from insufficient agitation.
There is also overall fog and some heavy fog around the sprocket holes. I find the edge exposure from junky loose fitting caps on reloadable cassettes. The overall fog could be from many places.
I strongly suggest you follow manufactures directions and quit trying to improve on them.
If their film could be developed better, they would tell you.
Film can not be overagitated. Guard against setting up a pattern so it needs to be somewhat random and vigorous enough to remove the developer by products that cause streaking. Non random agitation makes so called flow marks which is really lack of developer getting to one area.
http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/support/databanks/filmDatabankBW.jhtml
They tell you how long to develope and how much to agitate. It works and is dead accureate for a condenser enlarger. Use 10% less for a condenser or scanning.
Do not fill the tank with more developer than it takes to cover the film, usually 8 oz. The liquid MUST have room to move.
There is also overall fog and some heavy fog around the sprocket holes. I find the edge exposure from junky loose fitting caps on reloadable cassettes. The overall fog could be from many places.
I strongly suggest you follow manufactures directions and quit trying to improve on them.
If their film could be developed better, they would tell you.
Film can not be overagitated. Guard against setting up a pattern so it needs to be somewhat random and vigorous enough to remove the developer by products that cause streaking. Non random agitation makes so called flow marks which is really lack of developer getting to one area.
http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/support/databanks/filmDatabankBW.jhtml
They tell you how long to develope and how much to agitate. It works and is dead accureate for a condenser enlarger. Use 10% less for a condenser or scanning.
Do not fill the tank with more developer than it takes to cover the film, usually 8 oz. The liquid MUST have room to move.
morback
Martin N. Hinze
Thank you for your answers. Indeed, it looks like my fixer has gone bad.
As for the checked luggage, they were in my carry on and got x-rayed at the usual check-in gates. When you take the plane with film, do you separate the films from your carry-on luggage and don't put them on the belt to be scanned?
Again, I took many brand of films through airports and never saw any issues. And this time it only affected 2 out of 20 rolls. Maybe it's hot or miss?
m.
newsgrunt
Well-known
hmmm. carry on eh ?
I've never had any problems when the film is scanned at the security checkpoint. If I remember, I ask for a hand inspection otherwise I have no probs letting it run through the scanner and have let 4x5 Trix handle 5 or 6 passes with no 'noticeable to my eyes' affects.
I've never had any problems when the film is scanned at the security checkpoint. If I remember, I ask for a hand inspection otherwise I have no probs letting it run through the scanner and have let 4x5 Trix handle 5 or 6 passes with no 'noticeable to my eyes' affects.
sepiareverb
genius and moron
Well, it will develop if you agitate constantly, but one gets more traditional pictorial results from normal scenes using a standard agitation scheme, 5 inversions per minute or some such. Contrast increases with agitation, so if you're trying to add contrast to a flat scene agitate more. Agitation also increases grain size, so to make Tri-X shot at 400 look more like Tri-X shot at 800 agitate it more. Agitation is one of the variables that effects how images look, and in some situations it is very easy to overagitate. One might say film can be developed at any temperature, and while technically this might be true (after the developer becomes liquid and before it becomes a gas- or would gaseous development work???) it hardly is good practice to develop at 145°. I suppose someone will argue that you just have to print through the dense negatives you get after 3 minutes at 145° to get adequate results...:bang:
To your fog Morbak, I've had similar fog around the sprocket holes with the Adox, and I too put it down to the cassettes. I had a batch of 120 Adox that seemed very loose on the spool coming out of the foil, and not surprisingly had some edge fog. Quality control seems a problem (or did when I was using Adox 3 years ago). Film #2 seems underfixed to me as well- looks just like a T-grain film that has gotten only 3 minutes of fixer instead of the needed 4- worse in the middle than along the edges. Students do this all the time in my classes. I'd dunk that one back in the fixer for a minute and see if it clears fully.
Last edited:
I think the battle of the misuse of the word "issue" has been lost for quite a while now.
The floodgates are open and even "official" publications are calling "problems" "issues".
I guess that has to be expected in a world where most people under the age of 25 can only write in "texting", u know? LOL.
Another battle that appears to be lost is the misuse of uncountable nouns. For example:
gear - gears
equipment - equipments
advice - advices
staff - staffs
I know that many non-native speakers of English have difficulties grasping the concept, but reading RFF lately it appears that even native speakers of English are doing it
We're well on the road to something like the sentence below becoming correct usage :bang:
alkos
Member
1 - xray damage
2 - Underfixed : fix again, will be fine. Or dichroic fog from standing development, can't be cured.
3 - fog from lightleak and creasing (white mark)
4 - fog from lightleak
2 - Underfixed : fix again, will be fine. Or dichroic fog from standing development, can't be cured.
3 - fog from lightleak and creasing (white mark)
4 - fog from lightleak