Development question

[longwaytocoffee]

Hallo,
I developed two rolls but the 120 (shoot with a Holga120Pan, Fomapan 400) looks foggy. Is this just underexposure or what's going on? The 35mm roll (HR50) from a different camera looks fine.
Thanks in advance for helping!

In best regards
Leo

 

[KitosLAB]

Factory inscriptions along the edge of the film indicate that the film has been developed correctly. This is an exposure issue.

 

[longwaytocoffee]

Factory inscriptions along the edge of the film indicate that the film has been developed correctly. This is an exposure issue.

Thank you for replying!
But if it's an exposure issue shouldn't the film borders be clear? Light leaks look different. The entire roll is fogged evenly.

 

[KitosLAB]

I can't see what's on the tape. The only thing I see is that the film is developed correctly. There is no film backlight. There is a problem with insufficient exposure and possibly with rewinding the frame, I can’t say more precisely because I don’t see

 

[Craig]

There is some base fog, is it an in-date film? Could it have been through an airport and have X Ray fog? Otherwise, it looks grossly underexposed. The 35mm beside it looks good, so I don't think your developing technique is bad.

 

[longwaytocoffee]

There is some base fog, is it an in-date film? Could it have been through an airport and have X Ray fog? Otherwise, it looks grossly underexposed. The 35mm beside it looks good, so I don't think your developing technique is bad.

Yes it's in date, I bought it today. And it didn't go through an X-ray.
On the picture is the best frame of the roll, maybe that helps.

 

[Sirius Glass]

As posted by others, the film is under exposed.

 

[longwaytocoffee]

I will try another roll in the Holger Pan tomorrow. Should I push Fomapan 400 to 800 or stand develop for 1.5h?
I already tried stand developing for 1h with same results. So I thought traditional developing would fix it but you can see the results XD

 

[Craig]

The edge print looks good, so I think the developing is fine; it's underexposed.

 

[KitosLAB]

I will try another roll in the Holger Pan tomorrow. Should I push Fomapan 400 to 800 or stand develop for 1.5h?
I already tried stand developing for 1h with same results. So I thought traditional developing would fix it but you can see the results XD

I will say differently. Shoot Holga with fresh film in good street lighting. It will be better this way

 

[MattKing]

Welcome to Photrio.
I would say that it needs more in-camera exposure. The high level of fog makes me wonder whether there has been some light leak - possibly at the reel loading and/or development stage.

 

[longwaytocoffee]

Welcome to Photrio.
I would say that it needs more in-camera exposure. The high level of fog makes me wonder whether there has been some light leak - possibly at the reel loading and/or development stage.

I could unload the Holga in a changing bag. One possibility is that the camera doesn't roll the 120 rolls tightly enough.
But I wouldn't know how to fix that, so I'm praying its underexposure.

 

[MattKing]

I could unload the Holga in a changing bag. One possibility is that the camera doesn't roll the 120 rolls tightly enough.
But I wouldn't know how to fix that, so I'm praying its underexposure.

There is a couple of things you can do:
1) only unload the camera in an area that is at least deeply shaded; and
2) tighten the film and backing paper on the spool before you take it out of the camera - hold the end of the paper with one hand and rotate the spool to tighten with the other.

 

[rcphoto]

I have shot 3 rolls of foma branded film and all came out looking fogged just as you have indicated in your test rolls, not sure why it's like this. I also believe foma drastically over rates their films. I would try shooting it like its iso 100 or less and see if that helps overcome the "fog". I opted to throw my remaining rolls out.

 

[Donald Qualls]

Fat rolls (insufficient tension inside the camera) generally have leaks near the end of the roll, consisting of light coming in from both edges intermittently. Stand development itself can sometimes increase fog (especially since Rodinal varients, often used for this, aren't particularly low fog developers). I have done things like cut a 120 roll down to 127 in full room light, and after respooling in the dark, found only a tiny line of fogging along the cut -- confirming my experience that light doesn't penetrate much even in a fat roll as long as the paper is fully inside the spool flanges.

Giving the film more exposure (commonly recommended for Fomapan 400 anyway) won't help the fogged rebates, but will allow developing less, which will make the fog less dense (to be clear, its reducing development that helps here, not directly the increased exposure).

Given other reports here, it's possible Foma produced a batch of 120 that had a little higher than normal base + fog density. Developing cold (for Rodinal, you can go at least as low as 15 C, compensating time for the lower temperature by adding 7% for each degree C below 20) can help, more so if you can add a little benzotriazole to the working solution.

I opted to throw my remaining rolls out.

I would suggest, for the future, that if you have film you don't want (even if you consider it defective) post in the Classifieds here (with clear disclosure of what you believe is wrong with it) so someone else can offer to pay shipping and a little for your packaging time to receive it. I like Fomapan a lot, both the 100 and 400 in 35 mm, 120, and 4x5, and would happily pay the USPS rate to have it to shoot and process vs. going to the landfill.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Welcome to APUG Photrio!!​

 

[rcphoto]

I would suggest, for the future, that if you have film you don't want (even if you consider it defective) post in the Classifieds here (with clear disclosure of what you believe is wrong with it) so someone else can offer to pay shipping and a little for your packaging time to receive it. I like Fomapan a lot, both the 100 and 400 in 35 mm, 120, and 4x5, and would happily pay the USPS rate to have it to shoot and process vs. going to the landfill.

I'm glad you have found it worth while to shoot.

 

[longwaytocoffee]

Giving the film more exposure (commonly recommended for Fomapan 400 anyway) won't help the fogged rebates, but will allow developing less, which will make the fog less dense (to be clear, its reducing development that helps here, not directly the increased exposure).

I Used Rodinal 1+50 for 11min for that Roll. 11min isn't a particular long dev time. But with the 1:25 solution I could reduce deve time which might reduce the fog. (MDC say's 6 min I think)

Kinda annoying that Fomapan 400 needs more light then other 400 speed stocks. But for the cheap price it might be worth the hassle...

 

[KitosLAB]

Fat rolls (insufficient tension inside the camera) generally have leaks near the end of the roll, consisting of light coming in from both edges intermittently. Stand development itself can sometimes increase fog (especially since Rodinal varients, often used for this, aren't particularly low fog developers). I have done things like cut a 120 roll down to 127 in full room light, and after respooling in the dark, found only a tiny line of fogging along the cut -- confirming my experience that light doesn't penetrate much even in a fat roll as long as the paper is fully inside the spool flanges.

I'm very interested. For the first time I got my hands on a 127 camera, the film is too expensive for it. Now I loaded the usual 135 into it. But I have the first question for you. I think I can buy it for about 15 dollars. Do you think it's worth it and what can be done about it?
T-Max

 

[KitosLAB]

I Used Rodinal 1+50 for 11min for that Roll. 11min isn't a particular long dev time. But with the 1:25 solution I could reduce deve time which might reduce the fog. (MDC say's 6 min I think)

Kinda annoying that Fomapan 400 needs more light then other 400 speed stocks. But for the cheap price it might be worth the hassle...

I can only say what I would have done. I would take two identical rolls of film and two different cameras. There are many good and inexpensive cameras in Germany. I like the simple Agfa Isola, but I don't really trust Holga. With two different cameras, I would take the same pictures that I would compare after development. I would start with this and only then would I move on to development issues

 

[Donald Qualls]

But I have the first question for you. I think I can buy it for about 15 dollars. Do you think it's worth it and what can be done about it?
T-Max

You could cut a 46 mm strip out of that and eliminate the sprocket holes on both edges, but then you're using long expired film. What I've done is cut 46 mm of a 120 roll, preserving the 6x4.5 framing track; the resulting strip, with ends trimmed to center the tabs and respooled onto 127 spool, works without further adjustment in a 4x4 camera (you'll get a couple millimeters of frame overlap in 4x6.4 and 4x3 cameras, which will use the 6x6 framing track). I've done this with just a snap-blade utility knife rolled on the 120 roll on a table top until it cuts into the core, then into a dark bag or darkroom to respool -- though there are more sophisticated tools available. The cutting can be done in room light; the cut is so narrow that only a mm or so at the cut line gets fogged, and as a bonus, the "waste" strip is close enough to 16 mm to provide two reloads for a Minolta 16.

 

[MattKing]

I'm very interested. For the first time I got my hands on a 127 camera, the film is too expensive for it. Now I loaded the usual 135 into it. But I have the first question for you. I think I can buy it for about 15 dollars. Do you think it's worth it and what can be done about it?
T-Max

I'd be wary of 30 meters of T-Max 3200 that has a develop before date of 2012. The higher speed films often don't age that well!

 

[longwaytocoffee]

2. roll looks very good! Base is clear.

Things I tried:
1. All pictures were taken on a very bright day. Probably overexposed by +1 or +2 stops
2. I tried to tighten the roll in camera.
3. I used Rodinal 1+25 with a development time of 5,5 min instead of 1+50 and 11min.

 

[KitosLAB]

Congratulations! This is true. Your camera loves a lot of light. I will show an example of Diana Baby's camera. She is funny, very small and interesting, but she can really shoot. I took a photo of my daughter, I held Diana in one hand, and in the second I gave a flash of the usual Point and Shoot