Another 'what happened to these negatives?' thread

Vania · May 24, 2022

Wallendo said:
If there were a chemical problem with HC-110, it would uniformly affect all the negative, it would not produce streaks. If the problem is developer related, it is probably a mixing issue. I suspect that continuous agitation for 30-60 seconds would solve your problem.

I routinely use metal reels. When inverting the tank, the reels move through the liquid helping agitation. If using Paterson style tanks, make sure the tank isn't too full, so that the fluid moves around in the tank.

Kodak's development suggestion probably works well IF you premix your developer into an intermediate dilution per their recommendations. This would assure adequate mixing. If used "one shot", more agitation is probably desirable.

Although I am far from an expert, my impression is that film developing in 90% chemistry and 10% alchemy.

I am having the same issue in spite of agitating for the 1st minute and every 30s after that and premixing the developer at 1+31 for further use at either this dilution or 1+47 or 1+62. No effect on the streaking. ID11 was the only way to solved the problem for me (as I am sure any other developer except Ilfotech HC) but a lab down my street develop in HC110 1+47 with no issues whatsoever... and he does not even use any chicken blood or snake venom...

Vania · May 24, 2022

Wallendo said:
If there were a chemical problem with HC-110, it would uniformly affect all the negative, it would not produce streaks. If the problem is developer related, it is probably a mixing issue. I suspect that continuous agitation for 30-60 seconds would solve your problem.

I routinely use metal reels. When inverting the tank, the reels move through the liquid helping agitation. If using Paterson style tanks, make sure the tank isn't too full, so that the fluid moves around in the tank.

Kodak's development suggestion probably works well IF you premix your developer into an intermediate dilution per their recommendations. This would assure adequate mixing. If used "one shot", more agitation is probably desirable.

Although I am far from an expert, my impression is that film developing in 90% chemistry and 10% alchemy.

Hummm... this actually brings a new line of thought. Maybe too much dilution at 1st for some strange cosmic voodoo reason prevent adequate mixing, leaving some syrupy trace, and an initial 1+31 premix is useless. Seems far fetch but unless the op has tested it I might try the 1+3 premix after all.

Vania · May 25, 2022

Vania said:
Hummm... this actually brings a new line of thought. Maybe too much dilution at 1st for some strange cosmic voodoo reason prevent adequate mixing, leaving some syrupy trace, and an initial 1+31 premix is useless. Seems far fetch but unless the op has tested it I might try the 1+3 premix after all.

Last test with a water bath stop as well as premix of 1+3 24h before mixing it like a possessed zealot to dil B. Streaks are stil there. I am out of ideas.

logan2z · May 25, 2022

Vania said:
Last test with a water bath stop as well as premix of 1+3 24h before mixing it like a possessed zealot to dil B. Streaks are stil there. I am out of ideas.

That's terrible to hear.

I just developed my second roll using DD-X last night and will scan tonight. If that roll comes out ok then I'll be convinced that my use of HC-110 is indeed the culprit. Not sure if it's mixing, agitation, or some combination thereof that is causing the streaks in my case, but I might torture myself and try another roll with HC-110 - either from the bottle I currently have or a new bottle of the less syrupy stuff - and up my initial agitation. And maybe try an even higher dilution like H.

We both seem to be gluttons for punishment

MattKing · May 25, 2022

logan2z said:
We both seem to be gluttons for punishment

You and Vania need to exchange your films, to see if that magically cures the problems.

logan2z · May 26, 2022

MattKing said:
You and Vania need to exchange your films, to see if that magically cures the problems.

I believe Vania is in Europe, so that might be awkward.

MattKing · May 26, 2022

Sorry, missed adding the emoticon.

logan2z · May 26, 2022

Well, just when I thought things were looking up by switching to DD-X, my last roll has some of the same old - or at least similar - issues.

The very first frame has a higher density band nearly right down the middle, and a few subsequent frames have higher-density streaks in the sky in a pattern I've seen on other rolls. There's also some uneven density in those areas. I've included a few scans for your viewing pleasure (ignore the content, not terribly interesting stuff ).

I thought maybe the streaks in the sky in the previous photo(s) might have been clouds/vapor trails from a plane (wishful thinking!), but then I remembered a very similar pattern from a previous roll, where the streak forked into two lines just like it does in the above frame:

Utterly frustrating. At this point I've changed reels, tanks, the environment in which I load the film onto the reel, developer, agitation frequency (based on developer manufacturer's instructions), water (tap and distilled), mixing duration, concentration of Photoflo, even drying clips! The one thing I haven't tried is increasing the time of initial agitation from the manufacturer's recommendation (5-7 inversions in the first 5 seconds from Kodak and 4 inversions in the first 10 seconds from Ilford) to continuous agitation for the first 30 seconds, which has been recommended by several other people (*). Could that really cure this problem? I guess there's only one way to find out...

(*) I also haven't tried rotary processing, but I'm not sure I want to throw that into the mix at this point.

logan2z · May 26, 2022

MattKing said:
Sorry, missed adding the emoticon.

There have been stranger suggestions, so I wasn't sure you were joking

logan2z · May 26, 2022

Just for completeness, I should point out that not all frames of my latest roll developed with DD-X showed these issues. There were several that looked fine, like these:

And of course this sort of thing could easily mask these problems:

So the roll was not a total loss, but still frustrating.

logan2z · May 29, 2022

On the off chance that anyone is still paying attention to this..

I developed a roll of Tri-X using HC-110 Dilution H. Development time was 9 minutes. I agitated continuously for the first 30 seconds and then performed 4 inversions in the first 5 seconds of every 30 seconds thereafter.

I just finished scanning the roll and I don't see any streaks!

I shot another test roll today and will develop it tomorrow. Hopefully that goes well too, in which case I may have found a formula that works for me.

I can't say for sure, but perhaps the longer development time and the longer initial agitation period is what has helped.

I'll post back after the next roll is done.

foc · May 29, 2022

logan2z said:
On the off chance that anyone is still paying attention to this..

Yes, I am following and paying attention this thread with keen interest, so please keep us updated.

logan2z · May 29, 2022

foc said:
Yes, I am following and paying attention this thread with keen interest, so please keep us updated.

Will do.

Craig · May 29, 2022

I had thought a longer developing time might improve things, which was why I suggested something other than HC110.

logan2z · May 29, 2022

Craig said:
I had thought a longer developing time might improve things, which was why I suggested something other than HC110.

Yeah, the longer development time may have helped. Unfortunately, the time recommended by Ilford for Tri-X at EI 200 in DD-X was exactly the same time I was using with HC-110 so that experiment may not have been useful.

pentaxuser · May 29, 2022

logan2z said:
I developed a roll of Tri-X using HC-110 Dilution H. Development time was 9 minutes. I agitated continuously for the first 30 seconds and then performed 4 inversions in the first 5 seconds of every 30 seconds thereafter.

I just finished scanning the roll and I don't see any streaks!

I can't say for sure, but perhaps the longer development time and the longer initial agitation period is what has helped.

I'll post back after the next roll is done.

Well while one swallow doth not a summer make you may have found a regime that does work and if you have then stick with it.

A lot of people seem to think that the Kodak regime involves an initial 30 second continuous agitation but it would seem that this is not the case when you stated what, I think, is the Kodak agitation regime in an earlier post. The 30 secs continuous agitation at the start seems to have become "received wisdom" John Finch for instance uses it.

I wonder what this does to the Kodak or Ilford contrast target? Quite a lot, I'd have thought, in say a 5 minute development time but maybe very little in say a 10-12 minute development time.

I still cannot get rid of a nagging doubt that slight variations in agitation or even in time over the longer development times are crucial, anymore than a slight alteration in development temperature such as half a degree is crucial.

Here's hoping that your new regime works on the second film as well

pentaxuser

logan2z · May 29, 2022

pentaxuser said:
Well while one swallow doth not a summer make

True, I'm currently cautiously optimistic. If the second roll turns out well I'll feel more confident.

pentaxuser said:
A lot of people seem to think that the Kodak regime involves an initial 30 second continuous agitation but it would seem that this is not the case when you stated what, I think, is the Kodak agitation regime in an earlier post. The 30 secs continuous agitation at the start seems to have become "received wisdom" John Finch for instance uses it.

I've read the developing instructions in Kodak's Tri-X data sheet several times and I've never seen any reference to an initial 30 second agitation. It does seem to have become conventional wisdom, however, and John Finch's videos on agitation suggest this.

pentaxuser said:
I wonder what this does to the Kodak or Ilford contrast target? Quite a lot, I'd have thought, in say a 5 minute development time but maybe very little in say a 10-12 minute development time.

I only have a sample size of one, but this latest roll doesn't seem to have an appreciable difference in contrast compared to the other rolls I've developed with HC-110 and a different agitation scheme.

pentaxuser said:
Here's hoping that your new regime works on the second film as well

Thanks, I'm hoping this new regime is the ticket.

Jay Schrotenboer · May 29, 2022

pentaxuser said:
Well while one swallow doth not a summer make you may have found a regime that does work and if you have then stick with it.

A lot of people seem to think that the Kodak regime involves an initial 30 second continuous agitation but it would seem that this is not the case when you stated what, I think, is the Kodak agitation regime in an earlier post. The 30 secs continuous agitation at the start seems to have become "received wisdom" John Finch for instance uses it.

I wonder what this does to the Kodak or Ilford contrast target? Quite a lot, I'd have thought, in say a 5 minute development time but maybe very little in say a 10-12 minute development time.

I still cannot get rid of a nagging doubt that slight variations in agitation or even in time over the longer development times are crucial, anymore than a slight alteration in development temperature such as half a degree is crucial.

Here's hoping that your new regime works on the second film as well

pentaxuser

When I switched from a 10 second initial agitation to a 60 second agitation I did not notice any difference in the density of my negatives. I am not sophisticated enough to use anything other than my eyes to evaluate though, so that is not anything other than anecdotal but I would expect the difference to be somewhat small.

pentaxuser · May 30, 2022

Thanks logan and Jay. It all seems to support my theory that provided an agitation regime mimics that of the Ilford and Kodak regimes and is not one of cocktail shaking or so intermittent as to be a possible cause of not circulating developer hardly at all then we should not obsess over variations in agitation regimes being the difference between triumph and disaster

pentaxuser

Vania · May 31, 2022

logan2z said:
I can't say for sure, but perhaps the longer development time and the longer initial agitation period is what has helped.

I too have come to the conclusion that longer initial agitation improves things somewhat as stated in the darkroom cookbook, way beyond monochrome and a few others. I was initially agitating for the first 30s (again for many years without issues) and then tried, when the streaking started, 1 minute initial agitation instead, as recommended in those books. It noticeably lessen the streaking but did not get rid of it as some streaks would still be apparent in some frames. This is why I suspect only continuous agitation with a Jobo system can get rid of the streaking (as it did for another user whose thread I quoted in my own).

Very disappointed by your DDX failure as I just bought a bottle. I guess ID11 is the way to go from now on. )-:

Vania · May 31, 2022

The idea behind an initial 1 minute agitation is that most artefacts happen at the beginning of development and a full minute initial agitation will even these out. In my opinion this is the case here and the initial agitation will only correct to some extent the existing issue, not get rid of it. For all I know it may even be the cause of it... running in circle...

pentaxuser · May 31, 2022

Vania said:
The idea behind an initial 1 minute agitation is that most artefacts happen at the beginning of development and a full minute initial agitation will even these out. In my opinion this is the case here and the initial agitation will only correct to some extent the existing issue, not get rid of it. For all I know it may even be the cause of it... running in circle...

Well there is a thread by Alfredo Dorrichi quite close this one in which he uses HC110 on a kind of minimalist semi-stand process. Most if not all semi-stand faithfully use the one minute continuous agitation at the start and it seems to produce good results

So it may be worth trying this regime. Have a look at his pictures if you haven't done so already

pentaxuser

logan2z · Jun 1, 2022

Vania said:
I too have come to the conclusion that longer initial agitation improves things somewhat as stated in the darkroom cookbook, way beyond monochrome and a few others. I was initially agitating for the first 30s (again for many years without issues) and then tried, when the streaking started, 1 minute initial agitation instead, as recommended in those books. It noticeably lessen the streaking but did not get rid of it as some streaks would still be apparent in some frames. This is why I suspect only continuous agitation with a Jobo system can get rid of the streaking (as it did for another user whose thread I quoted in my own).

Very disappointed by your DDX failure as I just bought a bottle. I guess ID11 is the way to go from now on. )-:

The problem may not be with DD-X, but perhaps with the shorter development time and the limited initial agitation time - at least in my case. But if you're having luck with ID11 then maybe it's best to just stick with it.

logan2z · Jun 1, 2022

I thought I'd post another follow-up now that I've scanned my latest set of negatives.

I'm happy to report that I don't see any streaking on any of the 38 frames I managed to squeeze out of my latest roll of Tri-X.

I followed the same dilution of HC-110 (H), development time (9 minutes) and initial agitation (continuous for the first 30 seconds, 4 inversions in 5 seconds at the start of each subsequent 30 seconds) that I followed on my last successful roll. It looks like this might just be a successful formula for me.

I've got another test roll that I shot a few weeks ago that I'll develop next and, if that goes well, then I'll start to work my way through my backlog, which also includes a bunch of 120 film that I've yet to try developing. Hoping that things continue to go well.

Thanks to those who have been following this thread closely and have offered up their expertise. The amount of knowledge and experience on this forum is mind-boggling and newcomers to home development like myself are lucky that you're all willing to share it.

I'll post back with another update once I get a few more rolls under my belt.

pentaxuser · Jun 1, 2022

Good news, logan2z. Maybe its time to tell Kodak to amend its agitation instructions to 30 secs continuous for the first minute

My quick straw poll seemed to suggest that an initial 30 secs made no adverse difference to the negs for other people so if it solves the odd problem such as your and vania's then its win/win for users and Kodakers

Oh and in the case of vania, Ilford as well as he had the same trouble with Ilfotec HC

pentaxuser

Another 'what happened to these negatives?' thread

Vania

Vania

Vania

logan2z

MattKing

Moderator

logan2z

MattKing

Moderator

logan2z

logan2z

logan2z

logan2z

foc

logan2z

Craig

logan2z

pentaxuser

logan2z

Jay Schrotenboer

pentaxuser

Vania

Vania

pentaxuser

logan2z

logan2z

pentaxuser

Another 'what happened to these negatives?' thread

Moderator

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency