Ok, I can't reply at length again (got to get ready for work, Bill Murray was on to something with that Punxsutawney Phil thing...
😛) but I have scanned the negatives.
Short answer: Much better. THANK YOU!
They're not perfect, I'm not sure I have ever had 100% squeaky clean negatives from anywhere (there's always a little teensy dot here or there) but rather than having Lake Windermere compressed to fit on a 35mm negative like I was getting before (see my last attachment, yep, that's a stain, not a stray ameoba getting into the frame) but just a few flecks here and there which I'm sure a gentle wipe with an anti-static brush would help.
The last frame (the roll of FP4+ I used had a weird kink in it at the end so there was no 1/4" or so at the end of the roll, it was literally the end of the roll after the end of the last frame) so my grubby fingers as hard as I tried did knock that frame, it wasn't an important one, but as a consequence it looks like much of the water run off gathered on the bottom of the last negative rather than the 1/4" you usually have at the end of a roll to put a clip on etc.
Here are some scans, I have no used any clone tools or healing brushes, but this is one picture which is apart from me fiddling in Photoshop with colour balance, as it is, with the method used above:
(Ilford FP4+, D-76 stock, 8mins, 22 deg C)
The full size scan (WARNING: 2MB download or so) is here:
Full size scan
As you can see, it's a lot better. It doesn't look like I have got some superglue out and smeered it merrily over my negatives with crazy wild abandon now!
So again, an emphatic thank you to everyone, I willy reply better later on.
My aim now is to reduce the amount of de-ionised water, see if I can get away with it in the last wash alone, and to reduce the flecks and get a whole roll of 24/36exp processed to at very least this standard, incl. the last frame!
Vicky