I agree completely. I've never had problems with vigorous agitation, but I have had uneven development and bubble spots when I tried more gentle agitation to reduce foaming. From what I can tell, foaming is never problem as long as you have enough solution below the foam to cover the film. Just don't agitate so aggressively that you dislodge the film from the slots in the reel (probably not even possible with 35mm).Gently is your enemy. Try four energetic inversions combined with a bit of rotating motion, like Matt suggested. I try to rotate the tank around its axis 45° after each inversion, to get 180° total turn. If you have cash to burn, Heiland TAS is absolutely amazing.
FWIW, I've had good results when using the OP's tank and reels. .
It does seem to disappear after the frame where the cat appears to be the look-out. Try including the cat in every roll at frame one
Hi... a little while back I experienced something akin to your issue it turned out to be the fact the film chamber seals needed to be repaired. The reason why the initial few frames are affected is the result of time taken between loading the film; starting to take pictures then advancing to the next frame. The longer the frames are out of the canister the more time light has to enter the back exposing the sprockets and to wash further down into the negative of those negatives exposed for the longest period. This causes the variable degree of fogging per negative... I don't think your issue is development related.
I never DON'T invert the tank. Are you using one of those lil twirly sticks to agitate
I would suggest the opposite is true: fast, energetic inversions (think making a Martini) gives subpar negatives IME. Perhaps turbulent flow results in areas on the negative (eg those closer to the sprocket holes) being affected by differential development.
Paterson tanks actually come with instructions that recommend using it continuously for the first 30 seconds (IIRC) of the development, but not thereafter.I was actually meaning to ask if anyone used the swizzle stick for anything.
Please describe subpar?
I think the "gentle" agitation is just a placebo style effect. But placebo is not wrong; if you *feel* your photos become "better" (and you cannot describe it) then it is really good for you.
I was actually meaning to ask if anyone used the swizzle stick for anything.
.......
I invert EXTREMELY slowly and have never seen the effect shown in OP's message.
I would suggest the opposite is true: fast, energetic inversions (think making a Martini) gives subpar negatives IME. Perhaps turbulent flow results in areas on the negative (eg those closer to the sprocket holes) being affected by differential development.
I quote this for emphasis.leave a small amount of air space which is important for agitation
I think the "gentle" agitation is just a placebo style effect.
Under rigorous test conditions, the detectable differences between a small amount of inversion agitation (essentially, just enough more than absolutely nil to get even development) and continuous inversion, when contrast etc is controlled for, are essentially negligible. A lot of what people think are agitation effects may in fact be developer 'coverage' effects.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?