Another development problem question, railroad tracks?

[Derek Ealy]

Man, it seems I'm having the worst luck. My kids asked me to teach them about film photography and developing. So I broke out all my old gear got some new chemistry and started teaching. Now both of my kids have successfully developed their own films (and made a few mistakes also). Every roll of my own I've messed up in one way or another. This latest error I am perplexed by is these kind of wavy railroad tracks down the middle of the whole roll.

Now this is my first time developing with the Patterson tank with twirling agitation instead of my 15 year old jobo which I was doing inversions with. But I just don't see how the spinning agitation can account for these marks. The Patterson reels did seem easier to load at first but then became more difficult in the last 8-10 frames of the roll of 36.

I've attached a 100% crop of one of the frames. This was TMax 400 developed in D76 for 10:15, followed by normal stop, fix, hypo, wash, photoflo. I used the spinning agitation according the cues from the Massive Dev Chart app. There are 2 or 3 frames near the end of the roll that also have some liquid marks.

 

[Derek Ealy]

Well it looks like my photo was downsized when I uploaded it. But I think you can still see the marks I'm referring to.

 

[koraks]

Drying marks. There's a couple of things you can do:
Wipe them off with a soft cloth or tissue paper; they're on the shiny side of the film, so if you make sure not to scratch it, you'll most likely be able to get rid of them.
Next time you could try distilled water for the final wash.
Or wipe the shiny side of the film immediately after hanging the film up to dry so that there are no droplets on it. Again, a soft, preferably lint-free cloth can work. Don't use a squeegee.

 

[jimjm]

Derek - First thing I'd try is to go back to using inversion agitation with the Paterson tank (if you have the snap lid) and abandon the spindle. I've never done spin agitation, just a couple of gentle full inversions with a half-twist each cycle, every 30 or 60 secs whichever is appropriate.
I think creating a random flow of developer across the film is essential, and this is tough to do if you're just spinning the reel.
It also helps to ensure the reels are clean and dry before loading. If they have been in storage for awhile, I'd take a toothbrush and hot water and give them a good scrub. If they're damp or dirty, 35mm film will tend to drag as you get towards the end of spooling the roll.

 

[jimjm]

If you're mixing your Photoflo with distilled water, you shouldn't be seeing drying marks. I don't wipe or squeegee the film after hanging to dry and have never had any problems.

 

[koraks]

I don't wipe or squeegee the film after hanging to dry and have never had any problems.

Lucky you. I do. At least with 35mm. When using distilled water for the last 1 or 2 washes, they're minimal, but still there, albeit very faint. With tap water, they're generally quite pronounced. Wiping the excess water off the shiny side of the film fixes it. No problems with 120 or sheet film.

 

[kevs]

Hi Derek, welcome to Photrio.

That looks more like muck and debris on the negative rather than a problem with development or poor agitation, which usually manifests itself as bromide drag -- which is dark lines leading from the sprocket holes -- and sharp edges or patches of less-developed or undeveloped areas where the dev didn't go. In your image, the sky and water look evenly developed so I think your agitation technique is fine. Undeveloped areas show up on prints as black patches and on negatives as clear patches.

You can easily clean your negatives in a dish or bowl of lukewarm water with a few drops of wetting agent; just enough to make a few surface bubbles with your fingers but not enough to make a foam. Soak the negs for a few minutes then very gently rub the surfaces with a soft, wet and clean thumb and forefinger to remove the muck and debris. You could also use a soft, clean chamois or other non-fibre-shedding cloth.

When you're finished, hang up the negatives to dry in a dust-free space. Don't use squeegee tongs or draw the negs through your fingers unless you want some lovely scratches to print (bt;dt!).

Also, be careful how much wetting agent you use; it's easy to over-estimate the quantity. As I said above, you need just enough to make a few surface bubbles with your fingers but not enough to make a foam. Excess wetting agent tends to leave greasy marks and smears on your negatives.

Good luck,
kevs

 

[MattKing]

Welcome.
With respect to the spin agitation, the Paterson instructions say to use it only for the first 30 seconds of development, and to use inversion agitation thereafter.

Well it looks like my photo was downsized when I uploaded it. But I think you can still see the marks I'm referring to.

Resize your black and white images down to between 800 and 1200 pixels on the long side. They will then upload to a useful size.

The Patterson reels did seem easier to load at first but then became more difficult in the last 8-10 frames of the roll of 36.

There is just one "t" in Paterson. But that probably isn't your problem. The Paterson reels are difficult to load if there is much moisture around. Are you loading in a dark room, or in a changing bag, with its associated humidity?

 

[Derek Ealy]

I loaded the reels in a changing bag.

The photo Flo solution I used was 5ml to make a 1 lite bottle. I probably used filtered water when I made it not distilled, will try that the next time around. I've always been pretty hesitant to touch my negs after hanging them. And this time I didn't, but had never seen these kinds of marks before. Now that you mention it, the previous roll my son and I developed we did try using a squeegee because I saw some bubbles hanging out while drying. And come to think of it those were the cleanest BW negs I've scanned since we started up again.

Also now that I think about it, this was the last of the photo Flo in the 1 liter bottle, maybe something settled and contributed to the mess on my negs. Is it a bad idea to mix up a batch ahead of time like I was doing? It looks several months to get through that one liter bottle.

Derek

 

[MattKing]

Also now that I think about it, this was the last of the photo Flo in the 1 liter bottle, maybe something settled and contributed to the mess on my negs. Is it a bad idea to mix up a batch ahead of time like I was doing? It looks several months to get through that one liter bottle.

It only took several months to go through a one litre bottle of Photoflo?
How much film are you processing!?
My last 8 ounce bottle lasted for years!
My current 16 ounce bottle should do the same.
I've never seen or used a 1 litre bottle.
You can mix up very small batches at a time, but if you store them, mould will grow in them unless you take steps to prevent it. That may be where your problem comes from.
Here is what I do to permit making up a stock solution ahead of time: https://www.photrio.com/forum/resources/making-and-using-a-kodak-photo-flo-stock-solution.396/

 

[koraks]

I don't see a good reason to keep working stock photoflo around. Just mix in the required amount of concentrate in the amount of final wash water you're going to use immediately.

 

[jimjm]

I rarely will keep a bottle of working solution Photoflo for more than a few weeks, even if it hasn't been used. Scum and other nasties seem to form after awhile, and it's so cheap that there's no reason to take the risk.
I'm just finishing up a small bottle of Photoflo concentrate that's lasted almost 10 years.

 

[Dali]

Derek, is the inside of the camera clean? No decaying seal foam and glue on the film path?

 

[pentaxuser]

Welcome.
With respect to the spin agitation, the Paterson instructions say to use it only for the first 30 seconds of development, and to use inversion agitation thereafter.
[/QUOTE

I don't wish to hijack the thread but can I ask does the spinner work both ways or can you only spin it one way? It's just that it seems to me that if it can be spun both ways then spinning should not be a problem anymore than a Jobo processor is a problem in that it rotates forward and reverse as well

Yes it's Paterson as in Noo Joisy not Patterson as in Floyd

pentaxuser

 

[MattKing]

I don't wish to hijack the thread but can I ask does the spinner work both ways or can you only spin it one way? It's just that it seems to me that if it can be spun both ways then spinning should not be a problem anymore than a Jobo processor is a problem in that it rotates forward and reverse as well

The problem with just using the "spinner" is that it spins the reels through liquid that remains fairly stationary, leading to uneven development and potential localized exhaustion.
When you rotate the tank while on it's side, the fluid inside also tumbles and therefore is much more randomly agitated.

 

[grat]

Not to derail (sorry) the conversation, but I have a question regarding squeegee'ing of film... I've only developed a handful of rolls of 120, and a few 4x5's, but I've lightly run a squeegee across them after removing from the tank without any issues so far. Is it 35mm that's particularly susceptible to scratches? Or is it because I've got a brand new squeegee that I clean thoroughly before each use? Or have I just been lucky so far?

The 4x5 film in particular, is Arista/Foma 400, which I was under the impression would scratch if you glared at it suddenly, so the lack of scratch marks confuses me.

Also, for the OP... When using the Paterson, I put the water-tight lid on, and do a 90 degree rotate to the left or right, while simultaneously rotating the drum about a third of the way. Seems to work well.

 

[pentaxuser]

Thanks Matt and a very good point you make about the two not being the same

pentaxuser

 

[MattKing]

Or have I just been lucky so far?

Yep!
Assuming similar films, the only real difference between the "scratchability" of 35mm and larger formats is that the scratches look a lot bigger on prints from 35mm than they do on prints from larger formats.
Careful work with scrupulously clean squeegees will decrease the incidence of scratches, but squeegees still increase that incidence.

 

[mshchem]

Squeegees for film, that are clean, could be used by a skilled worker. Especially with hardening fixers.

The Paterson style film squeegee is a really effective means of scratching the daylights out of film. Nothing should be dragged across the emulsion side of the film.

A critical cleaning wipe, like a Kimwipe, can be gently wiped down the shiny base side of the film, this is usually when the film comes out of the hanger clip, and your film falls on the floor.

I use fresh pure water and several drops of PhotoFlo. No touching, hang and dry, no heat, no blowers. Just walk away.

Kodak, I think, still has a recommended technique for agitation of roll film tanks that can't be inverted . You slide the tank left and right on a counter top. But the invert and rotate technique is about as good as it gets.

 

[koraks]

Or is it because I've got a brand new squeegee that I clean thoroughly before each use? Or have I just been lucky so far?

These are the likely factors why you got away with it so far - but do not despair, you'll probably get your fair share of scratches
Btw, I never found 120 and 4x5 to be very prone to drying marks, at least less so than 35mm.

And I have used the paterson twizzle stick agitation methods many times with good results - heresy! The rotation of the reel likely causes some nicely turbulent flows in the developer.

 

[Jim70]

Regarding the use of a squeegee on 35mm film.... I used to operate a small commercial lab and we processed several thousand rolls of 35mm film over the years. We always used a squeegee on 35mm film after a Photoflo rinse and never had a complaint about scratches on the film. That said, we cleaned the squeegee after each session and replaced them each month. Keeping a squeegee clean is the secret..