Adox Scala 50 / HR-50 blotches in skies

[thicktheo]

So, I got some Adox Scala 50 with the intention of developing it as reversal. Then I read that this is actually a HR-50 film, so I could develop it as negative.

I shot it at 50 ASA through a Contax G2. Τhen I rushed it through development: used a rotary machine, with HC-110 (B) for 4:30 mins.

The results are great, contrasty and everything, they scan great and they give the feeling my client wanted. But... I have huge blotches in all the frames with skies.

These frames are from the first film I shot:


This frame is from the second film, which didn't have a lot of skies (I underexposed it during scanning so as to show the "blotch" effect better):


...and the third film seems to have fared better, example frame:


All the films were kept in the fridge for a couple of months, then shot in a space of three days, in the same conditions. They were all developed in the same batch.

Question is, where is the problem?
--- the developer?
--- the rotary machine?
--- bad batch of films?


Any thoughts?

 

[koraks]

the third film seems to have fared better

I doubt that; the unevenness just doesn't stand out as much in the cloudy skies.

Sorry, I have no clue what might cause this. The blobs are too undefined to be foam bubbles you sometimes see, but would be unlikely given how this film was processed.

I think it's going to be a classic elimination game. I'd start by changing all parameters and see what you get; i.e. shoot a roll (or half a roll) in a different camera (no filters on the lens), develop with manual inversions in a different tank and with a different developer, then see if the problem is still there. If not, start eliminating variables one by one. If the problem still shows up despite changing every aspect of your workflow, contact Adox.

 

[250swb]

None of the blotches seem to overlap and most if not all seem to be more or less equidistant, so could it be a pattern imprinted at some point? Has anything come into contact with the film as it's drying, you've not blotted or wiped them down with kitchen roll or microfibre cloth for example? I've been using HR-50 just lately and not seen anything similar and HC110 would be a sensible choice for the developer (although I use FX-39).

 

[Sal Santamaura]

I suggest inversion agitation strictly in accordance with the ADOX instructions for this film. And plunging the reel into developer in total darkness, then quickly capping the tank and turning on room lights to continue. At the end of development, again turn off room lights and plunge the reel into another tank with stop bath. Cap the second tank and complete processing in room light, draining/filling through the cap's light trap.

I recently exposed an entire 36-exposure roll of SCALA 50 / HR-50 with each frame on Zone VI, optimum for evaluating how uniform the processing is. After developing in HR-50 Developer, fixing, washing, bathing in Photo-Flo and drying, I examined every frame on a light box. It was impossible to find any without perfectly even density.

 

[250swb]

I suggest inversion agitation strictly in accordance with the ADOX instructions for this film.

Adox do not recommend inversion for HR-50, they say to 'tilt' which I take to mean a gentle swirl every minute. This is the same as Adox recommend for other copy films when making them have a full tonal range, such as CMS-20.

 

[Sal Santamaura]

Adox do not recommend inversion for HR-50, they say to 'tilt' which I take to mean a gentle swirl every minute. This is the same as Adox recommend for other copy films when making them have a full tonal range, such as CMS-20.

"Inversion" is the procedure, completely different than how the OP processed their film using continuous agitation in a rotary machine. Whether vigorously multiple times each cycle as other films require, or two slow tilts, it's inversion. Note that I wrote:

I suggest inversion agitation strictly in accordance with the ADOX instructions for this film...

Which is exactly the gentle approach ADOX directs.

 

[mshchem]

So, I got some Adox Scala 50 with the intention of developing it as reversal. Then I read that this is actually a HR-50 film, so I could develop it as negative.

I shot it at 50 ASA through a Contax G2. Τhen I rushed it through development: used a rotary machine, with HC-110 (B) for 4:30 mins.

The results are great, contrasty and everything, they scan great and they give the feeling my client wanted. But... I have huge blotches in all the frames with skies.

These frames are from the first film I shot:
View attachment 366001 View attachment 366002

This frame is from the second film, which didn't have a lot of skies (I underexposed it during scanning so as to show the "blotch" effect better):
View attachment 366003

...and the third film seems to have fared better, example frame:
View attachment 366004

All the films were kept in the fridge for a couple of months, then shot in a space of three days, in the same conditions. They were all developed in the same batch.

Question is, where is the problem?
--- the developer?
--- the rotary machine?
--- bad batch of films?


Any thoughts?

Scanning

 

[250swb]

"Inversion" is the procedure, completely different than how the OP processed their film using continuous agitation in a rotary machine. Whether vigorously multiple times each cycle as other films require, or two slow tilts, it's inversion. Note that I wrote:



Which is exactly the gentle approach ADOX directs.

From the HR-50 datasheet published by Adox

"Carefully agitate the tank for the first 30 seconds and then tilt twice within the first 10 seconds of every full minute (slowly)!"

https://www.fotoimpex.com/shop/images/products/media/63360_5_PDF-Datasheet.pdf

If something is 'tilted' in the English language it is not the same as being turned upside down or 'inverted'. The Leaning Tower of Pisa is tilted, it is not inverted.

 

[koraks]

If something is 'tilted' in the English language

But it's English written by a non-native speaker. You don't know whether they meant 'tilted' or 'tipped', in reality. You'd have to ask them.
One hint of the intended agitation method would be Lina Bessanova's videos where she develops film at the Adox Werke, assuming she's properly indoctrinated by Adox. I think Lina does in fact tilt & swirl.

Anyway, let's see if OP comes back with some more experiments. If he managed to try a manual inversion process, regardless if he tilted, tipped or threw the tank against the wall, if there's a difference with his previous rolls, we know at least a little better in which direction to look.

 

[250swb]

But it's English written by a non-native speaker. You don't know whether they meant 'tilted' or 'tipped', in reality. You'd have to ask them.
One hint of the intended agitation method would be Lina Bessanova's videos where she develops film at the Adox Werke, assuming she's properly indoctrinated by Adox. I think Lina does in fact tilt & swirl.

Anyway, let's see if OP comes back with some more experiments. If he managed to try a manual inversion process, regardless if he tilted, tipped or threw the tank against the wall, if there's a difference with his previous rolls, we know at least a little better in which direction to look.

See my post #5 which in no way disagrees with Adox. Adox make it a warning not to invert or vigorously agitate HR-50 or CMS20, as such it's worth getting the language accurate, the OP needs to start from a correct datum point to track down the problem. Perhaps rotary mchines can damage the emulsion just as can over fixing thin copy films.

As for being written by a non-English speaker I know the Americans can't spell words like 'tyre' or 'colour' but as the 'speaker' is from California they may have an advantage in English even over Adox, who can translate accurately the difference between 'tilt' (swirl) and 'inversion'.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Τhen I rushed it through development: used a rotary machine, with HC-110 (B) for 4:30 mins.

Don't rush this film through development. Gentle agitation is the key. Looks like issue was caused by bubbles. Also, 4:30 is way too short. If you must use HC-110, then try a higher dilution, for a longer time. Don't rush.

 

[thicktheo]

Scanning

Scanning was done on a Noritsu, along with 15 other films (Ilford and Kentmere, medium format and 35mm). None of the other films exhibited this problem.


I will shoot some more of this film and try it again on HC-110 1:63 for 9 mins. I will try developing two films at the same time, one on the rotary machine and one by inversion agitation.

It is a nice film and I like its contrasty look, but I much prefer developing on machines that agitating by hand. I will try to find a way to accommodate its needs in my process.

 

[koraks]

I will try developing two films at the same time, one on the rotary machine

I'd skip that one and start with the manual agitation film. Why repeat something that went wrong earlier?

 

[retina_restoration]

Scanning was done on a Noritsu, along with 15 other films (Ilford and Kentmere, medium format and 35mm). None of the other films exhibited this problem.


I will shoot some more of this film and try it again on HC-110 1:63 for 9 mins. I will try developing two films at the same time, one on the rotary machine and one by inversion agitation.

It is a nice film and I like its contrasty look, but I much prefer developing on machines that agitating by hand. I will try to find a way to accommodate its needs in my process.

I think that you'll find the problem persists if you do this. The film is NOT intended to be used with a rotary processor. The agitation technique is most important.

 

[miha]

ADOX in their German datasheet use word "Kippen". Kippen is, for example, also used in the German version of Kodak D-76 manual when describing agitation scheme ... as others have said, do not over agitate this film.

 

[Sal Santamaura]

...If something is 'tilted' in the English language it is not the same as being turned upside down or 'inverted'. The Leaning Tower of Pisa is tilted, it is not inverted.

Tilting (a verb) 180 degrees is inverting. Indeed, one cannot invert a tank without tilting it. "Gently" refers to how vigorously one inverts/tilts the tank. Methinks thou dost protest too much. The key is that continuous rotary agitation schemes are incompatible with document films like HR-50 / SCALA 50.

 

[pentaxuser]

ADOX in their German datasheet use word "Kippen". Kippen is, for example, also used in the German version of Kodak D-76 manual when describing agitation scheme ... as others have said, do not over agitate this film.

Interestíng. So if my assumption is correct and there is the need not to invert or turn the tank upside down this film, it would seem that the word Kippen is too vague. Given Adox's strong recommendation not to invert you'd imagine that there is some word or phrase that can be added to ensure that there is no confusion for German speakers and readers either

pentaxuser

 

[brbo]

Scanning

Scanning was done on a Noritsu, along with 15 other films (Ilford and Kentmere, medium format and 35mm). None of the other films exhibited this problem.

Noritsu LS-600 and LS-1100 have a problem scanning high contrast negative films with clear base (like Adox CMS 20, Rollei Retro 80 and the likes). I believe Adox HR-50 would also fall into this group. But the problem does not look like yours:

Still, it's good to verify that you can spot the problem on the negative itself.

 

[Mark J]

This is all very well, but what's on the pictures doesn't like like any agitation issues I've had.

 

[thicktheo]

I'd skip that one and start with the manual agitation film. Why repeat something that went wrong earlier?

I think that you'll find the problem persists if you do this. The film is NOT intended to be used with a rotary processor. The agitation technique is most important.

Well yes, but isn't it a sort of a challenge to get this film working in a different process?

I really don't mind burning through a couple of rolls just to see how I can achieve this.

Noritsu LS-600 and LS-1100 have a problem scanning high contrast negative films with clear base (like Adox CMS 20, Rollei Retro 80 and the likes). I believe Adox HR-50 would also fall into this group. But the problem does not look like yours:

Indeed I don't think it' a scanning issue. I've scanned high contrast films before (both in 35mm and 120 - I have the HS-1800 version), as well as totally overexposed frames and I've never encountered such a problem. But I will try and shoot some of the Adox/Rollei stuff just to see if I can match the problem you mention.



Back to the main point: I just don't see how this is an agitation issue - we are discussing huge blotches, in a rotary machine. I just don't see how rotary agitation can create circular blotches. I could understand it if there were horizontal stains, but circular? And air bubbles, in a constantly moving environment?

I have enough rolls from the same batch to try different development techniques, so there will be some answers soon enough.

 

[koraks]

isn't it a sort of a challenge to get this film working in a different process?

Sure, but I'd be inclined to first determine the failure mode and then try to solve it. Otherwise it'll be a buckshot approach and that tends to get frustrating (and expensive).

I just don't see how this is an agitation issue

Me neither. And the definition of the blotches is too vague for air bubbles, too. I think it's something else.
The problem though with the "it can't be agitation" argument is that something has to have caused this, and we don't know what it is. On that basis, you can't exclude something related to agitation.

 

[thicktheo]

Me neither. And the definition of the blotches is too vague for air bubbles, too. I think it's something else.
The problem though with the "it can't be agitation" argument is that something has to have caused this, and we don't know what it is. On that basis, you can't exclude something related to agitation.

A big question mark, though, goes to "could it be something with this particular batch of Adox stock?"

Or maybe the storage process? I bought 10 rolls a couple of months ago. Then they spent a couple of weeks outside the fridge, in cool weather (15-20 celsius), without any direct sunlight. And maybe a couple of days in a car boot, last weekend, when I shot these particular three rolls.

I don't usually run into such problems with b/w film but, AFAIK, this is the first time I am trying Adox stock and I have no experience with its tolerances.

 

[koraks]

A big question mark, though, goes to "could it be something with this particular batch of Adox stock?"

That's why I suggested changing all parameters in your process and evaluating the result. If it's the same, the only common denominator would be the film and you could take that observation to Adox.

Or maybe the storage process?

Sounds unlikely.

Adox stock and I have no experience with its tolerances.

Adox is a top-notch manufacturer. If this is a manufacturing problem, it's way beyond the tolerances of even the most abysmal film manufacturer in the past century or so, so it would evidently be a pretty dramatic failure.

Btw, in cases like these I like to split a roll into two halves or even four quarts and test with those. It's a little quicker & cheaper than testing an entire 36 exp roll at a time.

So, try a different camera, controlled/studio conditions for exposure, develop in a different tank with manual (gentle) agitation in a different developer.

 

[250swb]

Tilting (a verb) 180 degrees is inverting. Indeed, one cannot invert a tank without tilting it. "Gently" refers to how vigorously one inverts/tilts the tank. Methinks thou dost protest too much. The key is that continuous rotary agitation schemes are incompatible with document films like HR-50 / SCALA 50.

But they use the same word 'tilt' except with more explanation for CMS-20

"Agitation: First half minute ongoing, then once every minute 1 tilt. Tilt the tank gently and try to imitate a rotation with your hand sideways."

Try doing that at 180 degrees. 'Tilt' refers to a very slow action similar to whisking an egg where the wrist is rotated to swirl the developer, not the imitation of a double jointed contortionist.

 

[retina_restoration]

Well yes, but isn't it a sort of a challenge to get this film working in a different process?

A challenge much like trying to persuade your gas-powered vehicle to run on Apple juice, sure!