At my wit's end: high density bands on my negatives again

[Donald Qualls]

Note: not that this looks like very typical x-ray damage. It's too localized and too neatly aligned with the edges of the film to my taste.

Not to mention it doesn't have the density level I've seen in past posted examples of X-ray damage, nor does the fogging cross the rebate. I'm pretty convinced this is (somehow) happening in camera, but I don't have an explanation how it can happen in multiple cameras with different shutter travel direction.

 

[logan2z]

I'm pretty convinced this is (somehow) happening in camera, but I don't have an explanation how it can happen in multiple cameras with different shutter travel direction.

I'm becoming more and more convinced of this too although, like you, I struggle to understand how this could happen with different cameras. To my eyes, the defect just looks too 'perfect' and symmetrical to be a chemical or processing issue.

I think I need to start taking detailed notes when I'm out shooting to see if I can find any patterns that might give me some clues.

 

[jtk]

Might have to do with the way you load the reels...

 

[logan2z]

I recall your previous thread, logan2z, where none of us was able to identify the source of the problem but it would seem from the way you reintroduced us to this recurrence that the problem had disappeared for a while so it might be helpful if you were to remind us of what you did that eventually appeared to solve the problem and then say what, if anything, has changed in what you are now doing. By anything I mean anything at all you can think of, however inconsequential it may be

Otherwise I fear that all we will do again is give you a long list of what it might be as we are doing already. There has to be a means of eliminating some of the causes and even if not completely doing so at least stop the thread wandering into those more unlikely areas

I personally blame living in the SF Bay area but I was hoping to keep that in reserve until we have exhausted all other possibilities

pentaxuser

The problem seems intermittent so I'm not sure it ever really went away, it just didn't show up for a while.

As I mentioned, I recently switched to constant rotary agitation instead of inversion agitation. That's probably the biggest change I've made since last posting about this problem. That seemed to help in some ways, including solving a minor air bell problem I seemed to have from time to time. Other than that, I haven't really changed anything from a processing perspective. I have started shooting FP4+ and developing it in Rodinal but, as you can see from this thread, that hasn't corrected this issue.

The Bay Area may well be to blame. Anyone else from the Bay Area having this problem? Must be something in the water...

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Does it only happen with FP4? I'm wondering if this is down to outside influences, rather than you. It's a band of increased density running along the length on the negative. The only time I had a band similar to that on film, was from xray machine, but the lines ran the width, not length.

 

[logan2z]

Does it only happen with FP4? I'm wondering if this is down to outside influences, rather than you. It's a band of increased density running along the length on the negative. The only time I had a band similar to that on film, was from xray machine, but the lines ran the width, not length.

No, it's happened with Tri-X as well. I've only just started shooting FP4 recently. This problem pre-dates that.

I haven't traveled anywhere by plane since the Covid pandemic hit, so none of this film has been through an X-ray machine. At least not since I purchased it.

 

[BradS]

.....

The Bay Area may well be to blame. Anyone else from the Bay Area having this problem? Must be something in the water...

Yup. That's why I moved. The water is better up here.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

No, it's happened with Tri-X as well. I've only just started shooting FP4 recently. This problem pre-dates that.

I haven't traveled anywhere by plane since the Covid pandemic hit, so none of this film has been through an X-ray machine. At least not since I purchased it.

I bought film from a private seller in the US. It got zapped to death at Canada Customs. Lots of bands.

 

[BradS]

...but on a serious and only tangentially related note,
Some parts of the SF Bay Area get water from the delta and some from Hetch-hetchy. Before leaving the bay area, I lived in Pleasanton, we got water from the delta and it is very hard, crappy tasting, gravel infested water. Water from the Hetch-Hetchy is wonderful. Even in Pleasanton, I found that Kodak commercially packaged D-76, Indicator stop bath and photoflo 200 could be mixed with tap water and used with success (follow mfgr's instructions). Kodak has some powerful magic additives in their commerically packaged chemistry! When I mixed home brew stuff, I'd use store bought (Safeway) one gallon bottles of "distilled" water.

Up here in the Sierra, I use boiled, unfiltered tap water. It's that good.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Looks like the issue is at your end, then... It would drive me nuts!

 

[destroya]

I live in the bay area. the water in my town, unfortunately is not hetch hetchy, but ground/well water and it is real hard. so for any photo flo step as well as mixing up stock developer is done with distilled water. many years ago I had the same issues with streaks on my film like you , but for some reason only with rodinal. when I used beutler, xtol and then setteled on pyro-m all my issues went away. I dont want to blame the developer, but it might be worth a try to use a different developer for a roll. shoot one, cut it in half then develop in 2 different developers. the more things you can rule out, the better (and the more frustrated you will become!)

john

 

[koraks]

Not to mention it doesn't have the density level I've seen in past posted examples of X-ray damage, nor does the fogging cross the rebate.

I agree. I do see a slight theoretical chance that it's added density that results from a below-threshold dose of xray fog, and hence will only show up in areas of high density where it acts as an increased bit of exposure on top of the main exposure. But I admit it's a pretty far-fetched hypothesis.

 

[Sirius Glass]

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.

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?

Different films and different processing points to a camera problem.

 

[BradS]

Different films and different processing points to a camera problem.

...but he used different cameras too.

 

[koraks]

If anything, this thread is a hell of a good reading comprehension test!

 

[Sirius Glass]

We

If anything, this thread is a hell of a good reading comprehension test!

Well are shooting at ghosts at this point. I had seen that he used multiple cameras but recently he was only using one. Some of us are actually taking time to help while others wish to take cheap shots.

 

[pentaxuser]

I was only kidding about the Bay area being the problem even though it did seem to lead to the state of the water in that area

The problem with water as the cause is that it would have to vary quite a bit from day to day, week to week or maybe only month to month for the problem to be intermittent

Is there any such evidence? If so then it might mean using water of a know quality such as distilled for a while to see if the streaks then disappear

It seem to be boiling down to elimination of one thing at a time

pentaxuser

 

[Doremus Scudder]

Might have to do with the way you load the reels...

After all the things that have been eliminated, I'm leaning this way too. Crimping or bending the film can cause exposed areas to react differently to developer resulting in areas of higher density.

Try loading your film on the reels starting with the other end a time or two and see if you get density stripes on frames 1, 2, 3...

Best,

Doremus

 

[logan2z]

After all the things that have been eliminated, I'm leaning this way too. Crimping or bending the film can cause exposed areas to react differently to developer resulting in areas of higher density.

Try loading your film on the reels starting with the other end a time or two and see if you get density stripes on frames 1, 2, 3...

Best,

Doremus

Crimping actually crossed my mind at some point too, but I didn't see any physical signs of it on the film.

But I'll take another close look at this latest roll to see if there are any signs of it.

 

[MattKing]

You don't happen to wear a shirt with a luminescent zipper closure do you?
To go with your flip flops, of course.

 

[logan2z]

You don't happen to wear a shirt with a luminescent zipper closure do you?
To go with your flip flops, of course.

Nope, no luminous zippers - or flip-flops. I guess I'm not very 'California'

 

[MattKing]

Nope, no luminous zippers - or flip-flops. I guess I'm not very 'California'

I forgot - San Francisco. Which means that through at least 3/4 of the year, you would need windbreakers for any flip-flops you might have.

 

[logan2z]

I forgot - San Francisco. Which means that through at least 3/4 of the year, you would need windbreakers for any flip-flops you might have.

I'm actually an hour south of San Francisco. It's a completely different world weather-wise here, definitely flip-flop weather much of the time. I still opt for fully-enclosed footwear...

 

[eli griggs]

Try ditching the pre-soak and machine agitations, use a forceful three tappings of the tank to dislodge any bubbles every time you agitate and, use a forceful drop and rise when agitate turning/rotating the tank bottom about a 1/3 to 1/2 at the end of each lowering of the tank during agitation.

If done consistently, I suspect your bands will disappear, as I've used this method for class se to fifty years and can no recall ever having an issue with bands, that was no the direct result of light leaking.

Watching YouTube darkroom film developing, I feel none of the folks I've seen, give good, solid agitations to roll films.

Shoot a series of short rolls, using cutoff tongue and back cuts so you do no waste good film stock on your reloaded cassettes, say about six frames and, try my method of developing to see if the banding shows back up

 

[logan2z]

Try ditching the pre-soak and machine agitations, use a forceful three tappings of the tank to dislodge any bubbles every time you agitate and, use a forceful drop and rise when agitate turning/rotating the tank bottom about a 1/3 to 1/2 at the end of each lowering of the tank during agitation.

Thanks, but before moving to constant rotary agitation with the Jobo roller and a pre-soak, this is exactly the development method I used. I went another way to try and eliminate the streaking.