pepeguitarra
Well-known
This is what I did differently:
This is what I did differently:
1) I washed every single developing gear for at least 3 minutes with hot water, dry it and let it rest (per Chris Crawford video).
2) I made sure all the chemicals and water were at 68F exactly.
3) I measured every chemical very carefully to make sure the exact amount were used.
4) Agitated as Chris Crawford does it (at the beginning, I thought it was took vigorously, but it seems that it works!!). I made sure I match the exact times for filling, agitation and discharge. I agitated the first full minute, then 60 minutes later, I agitated 10 seconds, and repeated until the end of the 6:30 min. Immediately after the developer dump, I poured the stop bath and agitated for a minute. Discharged and immediately poured the fixer agitating as before for 5 minutes. Dump fixer and wash six rinse-agitation and dump, and let the water run for additional 8 minutes. Poured Photo Flow and distilled water and agitated up an down the reel for 1 minute, and let it sit for 1 minute. Then: Hanged it.
----------
Preliminary conclusions:
1) The TmaxRS used could be already expired or damaged (not sure yet)
2) Potential for contamination for lack of washing cups, graduated cylinders, thermometer, tank, reels, etc. I heard from Chris about this potential and decided to wash carefully.
3) I used Rodinal (R-09, or so), but this does not mean the culprit was the prior-used developer. I need to investigate more.
4) There are couple photos with drops. How did this happen?
This is what I did differently:
1) I washed every single developing gear for at least 3 minutes with hot water, dry it and let it rest (per Chris Crawford video).
2) I made sure all the chemicals and water were at 68F exactly.
3) I measured every chemical very carefully to make sure the exact amount were used.
4) Agitated as Chris Crawford does it (at the beginning, I thought it was took vigorously, but it seems that it works!!). I made sure I match the exact times for filling, agitation and discharge. I agitated the first full minute, then 60 minutes later, I agitated 10 seconds, and repeated until the end of the 6:30 min. Immediately after the developer dump, I poured the stop bath and agitated for a minute. Discharged and immediately poured the fixer agitating as before for 5 minutes. Dump fixer and wash six rinse-agitation and dump, and let the water run for additional 8 minutes. Poured Photo Flow and distilled water and agitated up an down the reel for 1 minute, and let it sit for 1 minute. Then: Hanged it.
----------
Preliminary conclusions:
1) The TmaxRS used could be already expired or damaged (not sure yet)
2) Potential for contamination for lack of washing cups, graduated cylinders, thermometer, tank, reels, etc. I heard from Chris about this potential and decided to wash carefully.
3) I used Rodinal (R-09, or so), but this does not mean the culprit was the prior-used developer. I need to investigate more.
4) There are couple photos with drops. How did this happen?
lynnb
Veteran
Data sheets usually warn to use a (diluted) working solution asap. That and the high 80s storage conditions is likely to have affected your developer.
As I've found to my cost, it's false economy to use outdated developer or working solution that's not fresh.
As to bromide drag (uneven development patches on film, more pronounced near the edges and corresponding to location of sprocket holes), by trial and error I found that to be through using gentle inversions, whether straight or "toroidal" motion. Once I followed the Kodak recommended procedure using fast/vigorous inversions with a wrist-twisting motion, the problem no longer appeared. I now follow the manufacturer's recommendations wherever possible (apart from stand development, where this problem sometimes still happens).
pepeguitarra
Well-known
Here are some more pics, some still show problems
Here are some more pics, some still show problems
These three seem OK:
1Neo100Acros-CanonP-ROH9022 by Palenquero Photography, on Flickr
1Neo100Acros-CanonP-ROH9024 by Palenquero Photography, on Flickr
1Neo100Acros-CanonP-ROH9013 by Palenquero Photography, on Flickr
However, these show problems. That tells me that it must be the technique used for agitation.
1Neo100Acros-CanonP-ROH9021 by Palenquero Photography, on Flickr
1Neo100Acros-CanonP-ROH9020 by Palenquero Photography, on Flickr
This one shows drops of water. I may have to do the tap tap for the fixer too. I did not do it for the fixer.
1Neo100Acros-CanonP-ROH9015 by Palenquero Photography, on Flickr
Here are some more pics, some still show problems
These three seem OK:
1Neo100Acros-CanonP-ROH9022 by Palenquero Photography, on Flickr1Neo100Acros-CanonP-ROH9024 by Palenquero Photography, on Flickr1Neo100Acros-CanonP-ROH9013 by Palenquero Photography, on FlickrHowever, these show problems. That tells me that it must be the technique used for agitation.
1Neo100Acros-CanonP-ROH9021 by Palenquero Photography, on Flickr1Neo100Acros-CanonP-ROH9020 by Palenquero Photography, on FlickrThis one shows drops of water. I may have to do the tap tap for the fixer too. I did not do it for the fixer.
1Neo100Acros-CanonP-ROH9015 by Palenquero Photography, on Flickr
pepeguitarra
Well-known
Question!
Question!
Does anyone think that the camera being used has something to do with it? Someone mentioned light leaks. I am sure my change bag and the tanks are completely dark. Is this the way a camera leak shows? The Canon P is old, but it is a wonderful camera. Just checking is this is a possibility. Tomorrow, I will shoot a roll with the M5.
Question!
Does anyone think that the camera being used has something to do with it? Someone mentioned light leaks. I am sure my change bag and the tanks are completely dark. Is this the way a camera leak shows? The Canon P is old, but it is a wonderful camera. Just checking is this is a possibility. Tomorrow, I will shoot a roll with the M5.
lynnb
Veteran
Film can be exposed to light in the camera, film cassette, or processing tank.
If there's a light leak in the camera, it would be most evident when the part of the camera that has the leak (e.g. poor light seal along edge of film back) is in direct sunlight. Do you remember whether that was the case when you took the affected frames?
If there's a leak in the film cassette, my guess is that it would be
- at the top or bottom cap, in which case only one edge of the film would be affected
- at the light trap where the film feeds out, in which case it would probably only be at one end of the film
However, it seems unlikely to me that multiple cassettes would have similar leaks, unless you were re-using old cassettes and they no longer have a proper light seal.
Or, in development, where I'd expect the edge of the film closest to the tank opening to be exposed (but I would think it'd be more evenly exposed).
It would be useful to show a scan of the negative strip, or even a photo of it, to help identify the problem.
My only experience with light leaks is with an old Isolette folder, where I got consistent dark blotches on each neg in the same quadrant, and with a Mju-II, which gave an arc of darkness on the lower part of the neg corresponding to the curve of the extending lens barrel that was uppermost i.e. in sunshine. In both these cases the light leak evidence was consistent in all frames where it occurred; in your examples above it is not.
If there's a light leak in the camera, it would be most evident when the part of the camera that has the leak (e.g. poor light seal along edge of film back) is in direct sunlight. Do you remember whether that was the case when you took the affected frames?
If there's a leak in the film cassette, my guess is that it would be
- at the top or bottom cap, in which case only one edge of the film would be affected
- at the light trap where the film feeds out, in which case it would probably only be at one end of the film
However, it seems unlikely to me that multiple cassettes would have similar leaks, unless you were re-using old cassettes and they no longer have a proper light seal.
Or, in development, where I'd expect the edge of the film closest to the tank opening to be exposed (but I would think it'd be more evenly exposed).
It would be useful to show a scan of the negative strip, or even a photo of it, to help identify the problem.
My only experience with light leaks is with an old Isolette folder, where I got consistent dark blotches on each neg in the same quadrant, and with a Mju-II, which gave an arc of darkness on the lower part of the neg corresponding to the curve of the extending lens barrel that was uppermost i.e. in sunshine. In both these cases the light leak evidence was consistent in all frames where it occurred; in your examples above it is not.
pepeguitarra
Well-known
I have been developing at 68 F, the Kodak Data Sheet .....
I have been developing at 68 F, the Kodak Data Sheet .....
Kodak recommends developing with TmaxRS at 75.2F. So, I decided to develop today a Tmax 100 at 75.2F, for 6 minutes. I will be posting the results later tonight or tomorrow. The negative is drying and seems OK. However, let's wait and see.
I have been developing at 68 F, the Kodak Data Sheet .....
Kodak recommends developing with TmaxRS at 75.2F. So, I decided to develop today a Tmax 100 at 75.2F, for 6 minutes. I will be posting the results later tonight or tomorrow. The negative is drying and seems OK. However, let's wait and see.
pepeguitarra
Well-known
Here is the result of developing a Tmax 100 with TmaxRS (stock) at 6min @75.2F. No shot was damaged. However, since I used the vigorous agitation recommended by Kodak at the recomended temperature of 75.2F, I think I got more grain than what I wanted. I will try slow agitation next time. I added some contrast and mino adjustment on LR4. Here are some shots of the roll:
Guardian by Palenquero Photography, on Flickr
Door by Palenquero Photography, on Flickr
Heater by Palenquero Photography, on Flickr
Otras Mandarinas by Palenquero Photography, on Flickr
Sherry Blossoms by Palenquero Photography, on Flickr
Too small by Palenquero Photography, on Flickr
These photos were shot with no concern of composition or artistic intention. I just want to shoot something to develop the film. Comments are welcome.
Guardian by Palenquero Photography, on FlickrDoor by Palenquero Photography, on FlickrHeater by Palenquero Photography, on FlickrOtras Mandarinas by Palenquero Photography, on FlickrSherry Blossoms by Palenquero Photography, on FlickrToo small by Palenquero Photography, on FlickrThese photos were shot with no concern of composition or artistic intention. I just want to shoot something to develop the film. Comments are welcome.
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
Here's some ideas.
1: Make sure to fill the tank. If it says to use 500ml, use 500ml. Using too little causes there to be too much air space, so that the developer moved too much when you invert the tank. This causes two problems. Over-agitation, and it also means the film will be in contact with air during the agitation.
The film should always be covered in developer, even if the tank is inverted to agitate. If you use a two roll tank with just one roll, fill it to the amount given for two rolls, even though you have only one in the tank. Same reason as above: avoiding too much air space in the tank.
2: Don't mix your developer until you're ready to develop film, and only mix the amount you need. Most liquid developers last a long time in concentrate form, but have a short shelf life once diluted. I know that Tmax RS is designed to be diluted all at once and stored in a large jug until use. That's one of the reasons I do not recommend Tmax RS. That developer was made for labs doing high-volume processing. You should use the regular Tmax Developer, which is made to be diluted in small amounts right before use. Storing any developer in a hot place will reduce its shelf life.
3: Another thing that kills developers is exposure to light! Store the developer in a dark place. Bright sunlight, especially if the chemical is stored in a clear bottle or jug, will cause the developer to age prematurely. This is mostly an issue with developers; I don't think that fixers, stop baths, and other chemicals we use are affected by light. Kodak used to sell their developers in opaque gray bottles when I was younger. Long ago, before I was born, they sold developers in brown glass bottles that blocked UV light. Today, they use plain clear plastic bottles. Not good!
4: The stuff you're seeing on your film is probably from a combination of over-agitation (caused by there not being enough developer in the tank) and exhausted developer caused by diluting it and storing it in a hot place too long.
1: Make sure to fill the tank. If it says to use 500ml, use 500ml. Using too little causes there to be too much air space, so that the developer moved too much when you invert the tank. This causes two problems. Over-agitation, and it also means the film will be in contact with air during the agitation.
The film should always be covered in developer, even if the tank is inverted to agitate. If you use a two roll tank with just one roll, fill it to the amount given for two rolls, even though you have only one in the tank. Same reason as above: avoiding too much air space in the tank.
2: Don't mix your developer until you're ready to develop film, and only mix the amount you need. Most liquid developers last a long time in concentrate form, but have a short shelf life once diluted. I know that Tmax RS is designed to be diluted all at once and stored in a large jug until use. That's one of the reasons I do not recommend Tmax RS. That developer was made for labs doing high-volume processing. You should use the regular Tmax Developer, which is made to be diluted in small amounts right before use. Storing any developer in a hot place will reduce its shelf life.
3: Another thing that kills developers is exposure to light! Store the developer in a dark place. Bright sunlight, especially if the chemical is stored in a clear bottle or jug, will cause the developer to age prematurely. This is mostly an issue with developers; I don't think that fixers, stop baths, and other chemicals we use are affected by light. Kodak used to sell their developers in opaque gray bottles when I was younger. Long ago, before I was born, they sold developers in brown glass bottles that blocked UV light. Today, they use plain clear plastic bottles. Not good!
4: The stuff you're seeing on your film is probably from a combination of over-agitation (caused by there not being enough developer in the tank) and exhausted developer caused by diluting it and storing it in a hot place too long.
pepeguitarra
Well-known
Thank you Chris. Your videos are very helpful. This is my 4th roll, I hope the next will be perfect.