Diagnose this problem

[Thomas Bertilsson]

PhotoFlo 200 is listed as 200, because you dilute it 1:200. Used as such, it works best. So if you have 500ml of water for final rinse, add 2.5ml of PhotoFlo.

And, to those who think it has to do with a presoak - how in the world can a presoak affect how much drying marks you get when the film dries? That makes absolutely no sense at all.

 

[Vilk]

Vilk, your issues with water spots with very small dilutions of photo flo may be caused by too little concentration of the photo flo. When I have had similar issues, I have solved it with a more photo flo, not less.
I find that about 1/8 to 1/4 of a capful of photo flo to 32 ounces of water (city water) usually works well. Not sure what this dilution would amount to, but it is still very light.

Thanks, Loren! Alas, over the years I have gone from 1+4000 to 4000+1 and back...

 

[cliveh]

cliveh, your post "I would never use a squeegee and can't understand why they were ever suggested for photography."

I use a very soft squeegee with a very light touch on film to remove and clumps of grain that can cause an imperfection on the print similar to a dust spot, learned this in an advanced printing workshop years ago.

I have never heard of this, but each to their own. I would still never use a squeegee.

 

[Leigh B]

Film squeegees have been around forever. I never used one.

I just run the film between two fingers to get the majority of the water off, then hang it up to dry. No problemo.

- Leigh

 

[Leigh B]

Alas, over the years I have gone from 1+4000 to 4000+1 and back...

You should use the dilution stated on the bottle. It's commonly 1:200, but there's a concentrate available for 1:2000 or 1:4000, I don't remember which.

- Leigh

 

[cliveh]

cliveh, your post "I would never use a squeegee and can't understand why they were ever suggested for photography."

I use a very soft squeegee with a very light touch on film to remove and clumps of grain that can cause an imperfection on the print similar to a dust spot, learned this in an advanced printing workshop years ago.

Perhaps I am not up to speed here, but isn't the grain within the suspension of the emulsion?

 

[pbromaghin]

Last week everybody was telling me I was stupid for using Photoflo at 1:200 and should go 1:400, 1:800 or even a few drops to a gallon. Today it's 1:200. wtf?

 

[Vaughn]

Last week everybody was telling me I was stupid for using Photoflo at 1:200 and should go 1:400, 1:800 or even a few drops to a gallon. Today it's 1:200. wtf?

Most people find that using Photoflo at a much weaker solution works as well if not better than the dilution on the bottle. YMMD.

Leigh -- Kodak Photoflo comes in 200, 600 and 2100. I use the 2100 at the university. I mix 7oz to make a gallon -- then use one oz of that to make a gallon of working solution.

Vaughn

 

[smieglitz]

Seems to be a bit of variation in process in the responses. My second suggestion would be to try the suggestions one at a time until you find a procedure that works. Then, if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

FWIW, I've heard WWII reconnaissance aero photographers used to give their films a final soak in alcohol and then light it to dry the film quickly. But, I wouldn't try that at home.

 

[Ian David]

I love these threads about drying marks. Fifty different people will give you fifty different solutions to the problem. And another fifty will tell you they have never had anything but perfect negs all their lives, despite rinsing their films in the old dishwater and wiping dry on the end of their sleeve! (I have since discovered that some of those with perfect negs have just got low standards and/or poor eyesight!)

Anyway, here's my two cents worth...

In my experience, the marks appearing on your shots do look like they are caused by the wetting agent (PhotoFlo or Ilfotol). The sort of marks I used to get which looked like this were effectively in the emulsion, and once dry they were permanent. So cleaning the shiny side of the film does not help. For me, the solution involved mixing minimal wetting agent (much less than 1:200) with distilled water together with a dash of isopropyl alcohol in an open dish (as suggested by Les McLean). It is essential that the wetting agent is very thoroughly mixed in the water. My film is then see-sawed through the mixture a few times and hung to dry in the normal vertical fashion.

Assuming your problem is the same, I think what works for you is likely to depend to some extent also on your local water supply and climate. I suggest experimenting with different amounts of wetting agent, and then watching very closely how well the water runs off the emulsion side of your films when you hang them up. If you can see any rivulets or evidence of viscosity, you may need to make some adjustments.

Ian

 

[Darren Guy]

Thanks for the suggestions everyone. Going forward I will play with the amount of wetting agent used as well as consider getting a squeegee or something similar. Thanks again for the help.

 

[Saganich]

I hang film and spray both sides with distilled water using a squeeze bottle and a tray underneath to catch the runoff. Never have water marks or dust problems since i started. Also got off the photoflo habit, not enough dilution caused similar looking problems IMO.