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

Notices

Go Back   Film and Darkroom User > Site Forums > Introductions

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #31  
Old 10th April 2015, 12:04 PM
photomi7ch's Avatar
photomi7ch photomi7ch is offline
Friend
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: East Midlands
Posts: 2,516
Default

I have processed hundreds of film over the years without paying any special attention to the wetting agent afterward. In that time the fault has happened three times. The tell is when you take the top off the tank if it has bubbles in there then it is wetting agent.

In the run up to the first time the neg's had this fault I noticed there were bubbles in the top of the tank. I think I mentioned it in another thread some years back.
__________________
Mitch

http://photomi7ch.blogspot.com/

If you eliminate the impossible whatever remains no matter how improbable must be the truth.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 10th April 2015, 07:01 PM
Mike O'Pray Mike O'Pray is offline
Friend
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Daventry, Northants
Posts: 8,968
Default

I wonder when Tedward's jpg will get approval? Seeing it might help us give more useful comments

Mike
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 19th April 2015, 03:58 PM
photomi7ch's Avatar
photomi7ch photomi7ch is offline
Friend
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: East Midlands
Posts: 2,516
Default

Here are two photographs I printed from the contaminated negatives.

http://www.film-and-darkroom-user.or...php/photo/2070

http://www.film-and-darkroom-user.or...php/photo/2069
__________________
Mitch

http://photomi7ch.blogspot.com/

If you eliminate the impossible whatever remains no matter how improbable must be the truth.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 23rd April 2015, 08:49 AM
Tedward Tedward is offline
Friend
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Portsmouth
Posts: 12
Default

Interesting! Those two links look remarkably like the problems I've been having with mine Mitch....

Looks like my pix are not going to be 'approved' does it. Not sure what the point of having the upload facility if it can't be used!

Does this forum accept dropbox links?? If it does, then here is the film I developed yesterday on dropbox. Some frames came out quite well - Fuji Acros 100 film - No sign of the issues I've been having.

Link:

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/55ia6k28b...DeEvxjqMa?dl=0
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 23rd April 2015, 09:03 AM
Xpres's Avatar
Xpres Xpres is offline
Friend
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Stansted
Posts: 975
Default

Sorry guys, missed the earlier attachment. Not sure why it needed approval though.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 25th April 2015, 05:13 PM
photomi7ch's Avatar
photomi7ch photomi7ch is offline
Friend
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: East Midlands
Posts: 2,516
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tedward View Post
Interesting! Those two links look remarkably like the problems I've been having with mine Mitch....

Looks like my pix are not going to be 'approved' does it. Not sure what the point of having the upload facility if it can't be used!

Does this forum accept dropbox links?? If it does, then here is the film I developed yesterday on dropbox. Some frames came out quite well - Fuji Acros 100 film - No sign of the issues I've been having.

Link:

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/55ia6k28b...DeEvxjqMa?dl=0

If an image is not approved it just means that the file size is to big. re-size it to 600 pixels on the longest side it should then up load.

As far as I am concerned it is wetting agent contamination.
__________________
Mitch

http://photomi7ch.blogspot.com/

If you eliminate the impossible whatever remains no matter how improbable must be the truth.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 25th April 2015, 08:05 PM
Mike O'Pray Mike O'Pray is offline
Friend
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Daventry, Northants
Posts: 8,968
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tedward View Post
Some frames came out quite well - Fuji Acros 100 film - No sign of the issues I've been having.

Link:

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/55ia6k28b...DeEvxjqMa?dl=0
The link takes me to a series of portrait shots so I take it that these are the ones you developed. Maybe I am easier pleased but I'd say that all frames came out well with absolutely no signs of any problem

If you can be sure there were no changes to the process and the only difference was Fuji Acros then it looks as if the FP4+ might have been the issue

My record is stuck in the same groove now but I'd send the negs to Ilford and insist on a reply. Ilford takes its QC seriously and if there is any chance that the FP4+ was defective in any way I am sure Ilford would want to know about it

Mike
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 26th April 2015, 06:45 AM
Richard Gould Richard Gould is offline
Friend
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Jersey Channel Islands
Posts: 5,433
Default

I agree with Mike, send the FP4 to Ilford quality control, they take it very seriously indeed, and that is the only way you canget a definative answer, I also took a look at the dropbox liknk and if the portraits are the correct photos then to my eyes they are fine, and in my personal experiance I cannot see wetting agent contamation causing this problem, if it does then I feel sure that with my regime I would get the problem all the time, and I have never seen this on any negative I have developed, I use wetting agent in my final rinse, I use it in my developing tank with the film in the reel, I empty the tank, take out the film, shake it and hang it up to dry, turn the tank upside down, put the empty reel on the top of the tank to dry, I don't wash it, put it in the washing up machine scrub it or anything else, just leave it to dry until I next develop a film, and my Negative's never have that problem, they are clean and nice, so forgive me if I am sceptical about wetting agent contamation being the cause of problems of any sort, either loading films or negative problems, for me the problem must lie elsewhere
Richard
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 27th May 2015, 04:46 PM
Tedward Tedward is offline
Friend
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Portsmouth
Posts: 12
Default

In case anyone is still interested, I finally solved the puzzle... It was me after all

Quite a long tale so I will try to shorten it.

I've been processing my own films my 'own way' for decades, but after a few recent issues with a couple of films with slightly uneven processing, someone suggested that I tried the official Ilford way of inverting the tank etc. to see if this solved the problem of the uneven processing. It made things better, so I started using the 'Ilford' method as-per the Ilford PDF instructions for developing film in a tank.

As I didn't like the idea of belting the bottom of the tank down on the work surface after each set of inversions, I tapped it on the sides a couple of times instead. An action that appears to have been the issue.

When someone talked about possible differences between the Fuji and Ilford film backing on this forum, this is what lead me to suddenly think of the waves you see in a bath of water with different frequencies causes sets of ripples with certain patterns. (we're talking ordinary school-level physics here). Thus I started to wonder whether my tapping the sides of the tank were developing sets of identical regular ripples in the developer in the tank? I mused that if the ripples from the type and weight / thickness of the Ilford film was different to that of the Fuji - then the effect might be completely different with maybe patterns that were not so strong / regular in the solution.

Conclusion. Tried a roll of FP4 from same batch with single hard tap of the bottom after each set of inversions instead of side tapping. Results? Perfect. Problem seemingly solved. Thank for all the ideas!
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 27th May 2015, 07:07 PM
Mike O'Pray Mike O'Pray is offline
Friend
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Daventry, Northants
Posts: 8,968
Default

Ted, I go as far as to give my tank a couple of taps on the bottom against a surface that is a kitchen worktop and have yet to see any damage to the tank.

I think that you'd have to really hammer the tank down onto a hard surface to risk any damage.

Glad you've solved the problem

Mike
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
film developing issue, problems
Support our Sponsors, they keep FADU free:   AG Photographic   The Imaging Warehouse   Process Supplies   RH Designs   Second-hand Darkroom Supplies  

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Introduction to Film and Darkroom User Jeff Sheff Introductions 13 15th September 2013 05:53 AM
Black and White Film User- Australia. BarrieB Introductions 13 15th July 2012 03:07 PM
35mm film user wannabe enlargement query andyedward Darkroom 8 26th July 2011 06:12 PM
Film and Darkroom User Postcard Exchange 01 Brian Print Exchanges 51 25th July 2011 09:21 PM
film user spotted jonsparkes Photography in general 5 20th August 2010 08:55 PM


All times are GMT. The time now is 05:01 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.