Support our Sponsors, they keep FADU free:   AG Photographic   Keyphoto   The Imaging Warehouse   Process Supplies   RH Designs   RK Photo   Second-hand Darkroom Supplies   Silverprint Ltd

Notices


  ***   Click here for the FADU 2015/2014 Yearbooks   ***

  Home · Search · Register  
Please note: The posting of negative scans is prohibited in FADU, except within the Help or Discussion Galleries when requesting help with negative faults or the like.   Click for details.

Home » FADU Galleries » Help Gallery Photo Options
more
wettingprob1.jpg
London_Trip_11.jpg
Image_2_Web_.jpg
Image_5_Web_.jpg
Sean_image.jpg
more

Previous image   Slide Show   Next image

Please Help
Click on image to view larger image

Previous image   Slide Show   Next image


Photo Details
Eriktheviking


Friend

Registered: May 2013
Location: Wick, Caithness, Scotland
Posts: 100
users gallery
This is my first pinhole film (FP4+) which I processed myself with these results.
Not all the images are affected this way, but there does appear to be something wrong with the dark areas
· Date: Tue, 10, September, 2013 · Views: 2256
· Filesize: 15.7kb, 119.3kb · Dimensions: 1000 x 659 ·
Additional Info
Keywords: Pinhole solarized shadow areas
Film make, size & rating:: Ilford FP4+ 120mm
Film developer & temp:: Rodinal 1+25 20c 9mins

Author
Thread  
skellum

Friend

Registered: December 2011
Location: Isle of Lewis
Posts: 981
Wed, 11, September, 2013 12:19am

First impression on this is partial solarisation, or sabbatier effect. Light has struck the film at some point during development, 'exposing' the shadow areas and partially reversing the tone.
Did light get to the film while dumping the dev and pouring in fix??
This user is offline
Click here to see this users profile Click here to Send this user a Private Message Find more posts by this user Visit this user's gallery  
Terry S
Friend

Registered: December 2011
Location: Southend on Sea, Essex, England UK
Posts: 2,111
Wed, 11, September, 2013 10:08am

I think Skellum has hit the nail on the head.


Was your dark area TOTALLY dark during loading and development?


Really good effort and really quite sharp though Erik. Smile


Terry S
This user is offline
Click here to see this users profile Click here to Send this user a Private Message Find more posts by this user Visit this user's gallery  
Eriktheviking
Friend

Registered: May 2013
Location: Wick, Caithness, Scotland
Posts: 100
Wed, 11, September, 2013 6:14pm

Thanks guys I did have some problems loading the film into the camera and I wondered if some light got in at this time.
All my films are loaded in total darkness

------------------------------
Erik “You don't take a photograph, you make it.” ― Ansel Adams “Who would believe that so small a space could contain the images of the whole universe?” - Leonardo da Vinci about the camera obscura, today also called pinhole camera
This user is offline
Click here to see this users profile Click here to Send this user a Private Message Find more posts by this user Visit this user's gallery  
JamesK
Friend

Registered: June 2011
Location: West Yorkshire, England
Posts: 260
Fri, 13, September, 2013 11:06am

Light getting to the film when loading the camera would show up as white / lighter areas on the print, not a reversal like this.


As Skellum says, this has happened during the development process, when the film was at least partly developed, so it looks like this has happened between development and fixing.
This user is offline
Click here to see this users profile Click here to Send this user a Private Message Find more posts by this user Visit this user's gallery  
Eriktheviking
Friend

Registered: May 2013
Location: Wick, Caithness, Scotland
Posts: 100
Fri, 13, September, 2013 6:13pm

Thanks for the advice I find it interesting this film was developed in a Paterson system 4 tank and was the bottom film. The second 120 film had issues with poor fixing but nothing like this.
I will keep an eye on my developing and see if it happens again

------------------------------
Erik “You don't take a photograph, you make it.” ― Ansel Adams “Who would believe that so small a space could contain the images of the whole universe?” - Leonardo da Vinci about the camera obscura, today also called pinhole camera
This user is offline
Click here to see this users profile Click here to Send this user a Private Message Find more posts by this user Visit this user's gallery  
JamesK
Friend

Registered: June 2011
Location: West Yorkshire, England
Posts: 260
Sat, 14, September, 2013 12:16am

I can't quite make the connection here, but it's interesting that you say both films in the tank had some kind of chemical problem.


I'm probably wrong, but as there were fixing issues with this batch, I'm wondering if the solarisation could be due to insufficient fixing such that the affected frame(s) never were fixed properly and were still developing when the tank was opened to take the films out.
This user is offline
Click here to see this users profile Click here to Send this user a Private Message Find more posts by this user Visit this user's gallery  
Eriktheviking
Friend

Registered: May 2013
Location: Wick, Caithness, Scotland
Posts: 100
Sat, 14, September, 2013 11:36am

Hi James


The other film in the tank did have a fixing problem so maybe you are right that this just kept developing and wasn't fixed properly. I have always liked the sabatier effect so I was curious how it had occurred

------------------------------
Erik “You don't take a photograph, you make it.” ― Ansel Adams “Who would believe that so small a space could contain the images of the whole universe?” - Leonardo da Vinci about the camera obscura, today also called pinhole camera
This user is offline
Click here to see this users profile Click here to Send this user a Private Message Find more posts by this user Visit this user's gallery  
skellum

Friend

Registered: December 2011
Location: Isle of Lewis
Posts: 981
Sat, 14, September, 2013 8:34pm

Hi Erik- good lively discussion you've got going.
I think James may have it. If you have underfixed you can probably tell from the negs. If the shadow areas (which ought to be nearly clear film) have 'milky' look they're underfixed. Or, viewing the emulsion side of the film at an angle by reflected light you might see a patchy sheen.
If in doubt, soak in water for a couple of minutes then refix. It can't hurt.
As an aside, the Sabatier effect (also called pseudo-solarisation) is easy to do, so don't hold back. Halfway through development allow light to re-expose the film briefly. Full daylight might be a bit harsh. Under indoor tungsten lighting (with the source a few feet away) open the tank and pull the reel out for a couple of seconds.
The amount of tone reversal you get will depend how far into the dev, and how dramatically, you re-expose.
This user is offline
Click here to see this users profile Click here to Send this user a Private Message Find more posts by this user Visit this user's gallery  


Photo Sharing Gallery by PhotoPost
Copyright © 2007 All Enthusiast, Inc.


All times are GMT. The time now is 06:21 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.