Is this possible this is simply a film defect?
there's another thread with something similar: https://www.photrio.com/forum/threa...fp4-in-120-line-on-the-back-of-a-roll.194551/
I have little defects on pretty much every roll of Ilford film I use, minor stuff mostly, and FP4 seems to be the most troublesome of them all.
I don't see any bands.
Damn, that's frustrating. It's good to see the pic of the negative, which shows that the issue stops at the end of the image area, as opposed to continuing between frames.
So, this same issue happens with different cameras, films, lenses, chemistry and developing technique? The only remaining variable is you!Maybe give the camera to a friend, have the film developed professionally, and see what you get. If the film comes back with the same problem at least we'll know Logan is not the problem.
Thanks for sharing your process.Maybe this might help. The main differences I see are no presoak, rinse instead of stop and a much shorter photoflo time. And wet printed with a condenser enlarger (that usually will make any imperfection stand out), not scanned.
If they are on different films from different cameras then your processing is the problem. Try skipping the PhotoFlo. I never liked that stuff and stopped using it over two decades ago. Always had problems with streaks. Edwal LFN works well and never leaves any residue if you still want to use a wetting agent. I stopped using wetting agents years ago. These days I just hang the film to dry and wipe it with a KimWipe until the non emulsion side is dry. 120 film I just hang up.
Hmm, Photoflo is something that has been mentioned before as a potential problem. Hard to imagine that it could cause two nearly perfectly straight bands right in the middle of only a small subset of frames. But a different wetting agent or none at all is not something I've tried yet. Might as well give it a shot, I don't have any other ideas.
The tank is the problem.
I don't think Photoflo is the problem either considering when it's used in processing, but it's worth skipping that step anyway just to eliminate one unlikely variable. In fact It's a good idea to simplify everything you can until you've solved the problem, so if I were in your shoes I'd limit myself to one camera, one lens, one film, no filter on the lens, and consistent processing technique and chemistry until you see the problem occur again. And keep good notes when the problem returns. You might already be doing all of this, I'm just thinking out loud.
I was about to suggest a lens hood if you're not using one but I note the sun is to the right and behind you on the supplied image, making me think lens flare is unlikely to be the issue. It's weird, this one. But yeah use a lens hood anyway.
Have you tried rewashing any of the problem negatives? I don't think it will make a difference personally, but if there is some weird residue on the negative...
He used different tanks, and rotation as well as inversion. So that can't be it. Otherwise I'd agree and suggest that it's a rotation issue as well, if not for the fact that he already ruled that out.
@logan2z where on the film did this defect occur? Is it at the start, towards the end or someplace in the middle?
Can you make a photo of the affected area of the film, emulsion side, slanted against the light so that any potential unevenness in the emulsion is visible? I hope you know what I mean, but something with a little glare so that any differences in surface texture of the emulsion side become visible.
It's very frustrating indeed. And puzzling, too!
If they are on different films from different cameras then your processing is the problem
Scanner issue maybe?
As I'm reading it, those bands are parallel to the length of the film and don't intrude in the rebate between frames -- which rules out light leaks and makes developing error seem unlikely. If there were exposed in a camera with vertical traveling focal plane shutter, hesitation in the curtains (both together, presuming a fairly narrow slit for a bright outdoor scene) could result in bands like this. Have the previous problems always been with film from this camera?
Not at all, you're starting systematic analysis.(really grasping at the wind here).
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?