DISASTER + why im the biggest idiot here

[RalphLambrecht]

no frame numbers or anything!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! i think you're right!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! it was a mistake with the fix and developer....i used one instead of the other!!!!!!!!!!!!! IM AN IDIOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! THAT wont happen again.....i will learn from this mistake!!!!!!!!!!!!

I've done it once.

 

[Donald Qualls]

As far as I can recall, I haven't crossed up my chemical order yet (still time, I'm not dead). As someone noted, stop and (acid) fixer smell different, and developers commonly have a distinctive scent of their own -- unless your nose is clogged up.

I have made some fairly stupid errors of other kinds. Took me four tries to get my first roll of home processed color film from my Minolta 16 format cameras -- I'd load up a strip in the cassette (obtained by cutting 120 down to 127 and keeping the leftover in a black film can), shoot the roll (30+ frames on a full 120 length strip in one of the Soviet Minolta copies), advance three frames or so, and pull out the cassette. Then, intending to push the rest of the film tail into the take-up chamber, I'd grab the film still in the gate and pull -- the exposed film out of the takeup, instead of the remaining tail out of the supply.

Not just once, but three times over the course of a couple weeks. I don't recall what I was thinking at the time, just the astonishment of seeing a 70+ cm strip of film come out when I was expecting 10-15 cm of the tail of the strip.

I've just gotten a 127 film cutter (no need to set up my lathe to cut down film rolls, hurrah!), perhaps I should load up a strip in my Kiev 30 and see if I've gotten any smarter in the past fifteen years...

 

[MattKing]

Ok, here’s a new one...

I was developing a roll of D100 in a Paterson tank today, all going really well processing in ID-11 1+1, until it came time to dump the developer and pour in the water stop bath.

....I peel the seal off the top of the tank to pour out the developer, dump the tank on it’s side to pour out the developer, and not only does the developer dump really quickly, but the inner lid slides out together with the film reel and film, which proceed to all dump into the sink. (Yup, the inner lid obviously wasn’t fully snapped closed, and yup, film is really weird & milky looking before fixing).

Thinking that I might be able to save it, I quickly slammed the reel back into the tank (upside down, it turned out), reattached the lid, firmly snapped it closed, pour in the water stop bath, and agitate the heck out of it before dumping the water stop and fixing the film normally.

I did get images that were actually pretty evenly developed, but with some slightly brown fog along one side of the film that lessens across the width of the images, presumably due to re-exposed halides at the end of development being somewhat reduced by developer that was still present in the emulsion. In retrospect it would likely have been better to skip the water stop bath and go directly to fixing the film, but I was slightly amazed that I got anything useful.

Anyway, new lesson learned - always check that the centre tank lid is securely fixed and snapped in position before starting any step of the process...especially before dumping developer!

Stop bath is your friend in this circumstance!
If your tank is a Paterson Super System 4, make sure that the glue used to hold the red ring is intact. Mine failed, and led to the same sort of incident. Stop bath saved part of the roll, and an application of new glue repaired the tank.

 

[David R Williams]

Stop bath is your friend in this circumstance!
If your tank is a Paterson Super System 4, make sure that the glue used to hold the red ring is intact. Mine failed, and led to the same sort of incident. Stop bath saved part of the roll, and an application of new glue repaired the tank.

Yup - the glue is fine and the red ring is firmly secured - it was purely a matter of inattention/distraction/carelessness, but based upon your experience, I’ll watch to ensure the\ red ring remains fully secure over time.

Thanks Matt.

 

[mshchem]

I try to anticipate my ineptitude. I use plastic instead of glass. Honk my horn when I'm backing my car, etc.

I do fairly well. Probably 20 years back, I was developing some Ektachrome in my trusty Paterson tank, had my water bath (with a nice German made $15 aquarium heater) my bottles were floating around. I can't remember exactly, but I grabbed the pre-bleach instead of the something else. Poured it in did a couple inversions, went oh crap, poured it back in the bottle put the correct solution in. It came out fine, couldn't believe it. This was in the days of the fabulous Eastman Kodak 5L E6 kits. If I had grabbed the bleach or fixer it would have been a different outcome.

I get up every morning and once I realize I made it another day, I tell myself, don't do anything REALLY stupid.

 

[Dismayed]

MORAL OF THE STORY.....pay more attention to what you're doing as i simply fixed before i developed!!!!!!! I'm gutted and sick to the stomach cos i KNOW i had better shots than on the DSLR.....I was seeing better pictures.....

I hereby claim the award for the dumbest person in the forum....can anyone top this???? c'mon...make me feel better!

No, you can't claim dumbest unless you repeat the mistake on your next shoot.

 

[GRHazelton]

Yup - the glue is fine and the red ring is firmly secured - it was purely a matter of inattention/distraction/carelessness, but based upon your experience, I’ll watch to ensure the\ red ring remains fully secure over time.

Thanks Matt.

Since I have a Paterson tank and may face your problem, what glue did you use?

 

[MattKing]

Since I have a Paterson tank and may face your problem, what glue did you use?

A generic version of "Crazy Glue".
The ring itself doesn't supply any of the light trap, it just gives some place for the light trap to click into, so the precision required isn't high.
I actually had another tank split and form a crack for an inch or so down the side. I used the same glue to fix that by applying it liberally on the inside of the crack and then using air pressure to drive the glue into the crack. Some clear packing tape on the outside then held the crack closed while the glue set.
Both tanks - which I bought used and had clearly been used extensively before me - have been trouble free for years since then.

 

[GRHazelton]

A generic version of "Crazy Glue".
The ring itself doesn't supply any of the light trap, it just gives some place for the light trap to click into, so the precision required isn't high.
I actually had another tank split and form a crack for an inch or so down the side. I used the same glue to fix that by applying it liberally on the inside of the crack and then using air pressure to drive the glue into the crack. Some clear packing tape on the outside then held the crack closed while the glue set.
Both tanks - which I bought used and had clearly been used extensively before me - have been trouble free for years since then.

Thanks! I assume that cleaning and proper prep is essential??

 

[MattKing]

Thanks! I assume that cleaning and proper prep is essential??

Cleaning certainly, but there wasn't a lot of preparation required. Cyanoacrylate glues work really well with the materials that modern Paterson tanks are constructed of.
Trivia fact - cyanoacrylate glues were re-discovered in the labs of Eastman Kodak, and originally sold under the name Eastman #910.

 

[Donald Qualls]

Trivia fact - cyanoacrylate glues were re-discovered in the labs of Eastman Kodak, and originally sold under the name Eastman #910.

"Re-discovered"? Cyanoacrylate was discovered more or less by accident in the 1960s, and developed as a field suture for the Vietnam conflict. It was only after that that it was marketed (as Eastman 910) as a general purpose adhesive, along with closely related methacrylates found in thread lockers.

 

[MattKing]

"Re-discovered"? Cyanoacrylate was discovered more or less by accident in the 1960s, and developed as a field suture for the Vietnam conflict. It was only after that that it was marketed (as Eastman 910) as a general purpose adhesive, along with closely related methacrylates found in thread lockers.

Eastman #910 was first marketed in 1958.
The original patent was registered in 1942 by B.F. Goodrich. It came from work being done by a team there that included Harry Coover Jr., who were unsuccessfully attempting to develop clear gun sights for use in WWII.
By 1958, Mr. Coover was working for Eastman Kodak.

 

[Donald Qualls]

Okay, apparently version I'd heard had been, um, edited a little...

 

[MattKing]

Okay, apparently version I'd heard had been, um, edited a little...

Maybe, but it clearly "stuck" with you.
I expect that part of that story is correct - the use of cyanoacrylate glues as field sutures probably was discovered by accident, and may have greatly expanded their use and visibility.

 

[Donald Qualls]

Yep, "bonds skin instantly" still shows as a warning on the more "responsible" brands (maybe all of them, but the print might be too fine to see). Weird thing is, I used to spread the stuff (the water-thin genuinely instant variety) on balsa sheet with my fingertips (to harden wing skins on a model airplane), never once glued my fingers to the airplane.