Elaborate scratches on negative

[mpirie]

It's good that we have narrowed down the problem.

We just need to find out why it's happening and how to stop it.

Hopefully Harman will be able/willing to chime in with their thoughts.

Mike

PS, i passed this thread on to Harman in a PM, so hopefully they'll investigate.

 

[Patrick Robert James]

I use JOBO reels and I get that if I am lazy and pull the film off the reel. It is emulsion from the edge of the film scraped off by the reels. If you use JOBO reels, take them apart to get the film out and your problem will be solved....

I'm seeing way too many "contact..." when the problem has nothing to do with the manufacturer.

 

[BradS]

I use JOBO reels and I get that if I am lazy and pull the film off the reel. It is emulsion from the edge of the film scraped off by the reels. If you use JOBO reels, take them apart to get the film out and your problem will be solved....

I'm seeing way too many "contact..." when the problem has nothing to do with the manufacturer.

Contact Jobo

 

[Born2Late]

Looks like a fiber to me.

 

[AgX]

If it is a fiber/strand from manufacture, how then comes that is has survived processing?

It must have been pressed into the emulsion most hard to do so.
And if it had, it must have left marks, optical and mechanical.

 

[Tom Kershaw]

If it is a fiber/strand from manufacture, how then comes that is has survived processing?

It must have been pressed into the emulsion most hard to do so.
And if it had, it must have left marks, optical and mechanical.

I haven't suggested directly the strand is from manufacture. I'm willing to accept the Jobo reel may be playing a part here, and there may be some sort of interaction that is contributing to the occurrence.

 

[Tom Kershaw]

I've just checked, and the roll of HP5 Plus I processed earlier has dried completely clean, so I think that gives some timescale for when the 'filament' is making an appearance. I'm keeping an open mind for the time being, but will double check the Jobo processing tomorrow and pull-apart the reel to remove the film rather than pull it out from the intact reel.

 

[AgX]

How could a mis-handling during taking off the film from a Jobo tank or a fault at the tank produce such pattern?

A scratching of the emulsion at this stage would result in minus density at the negative.

A strand from film slicing and most filaments too would cause a minus density at the negative.

 

[Tom Kershaw]

How could a mis-handling during taking off the film from a Jobo tank or a fault at the tank produce such pattern?

A scratching of the emulsion at this stage would result in minus density at the negative.

A strand from film slicing and most filaments too would cause a minus density at the negative.

The filament in the case of what Mike and myself have experienced is stuck to the film once dry, and does show on the negative. I was being rather rash describing the problem as scratching.

 

[mpirie]

In my case, it's definitely a filament because i've been able to remove it while wet.

It's not just Jobo reels that it happens with, i've seen it on Paterson reels too.

Mike

 

[Tom Kershaw]

In my case, it's definitely a filament because i've been able to remove it while wet.

It's not just Jobo reels that it happens with, i've seen it on Paterson reels too.

Mike

This does look to be the same issue as I've had. I'd forgotten that you had reported the problem with Paterson reels as well.

 

[AgX]

How would a tank transfer a filament to the film?
Moreover in a way that it is not washed off during washing and squeezing?

 

[Tom Kershaw]

I've just done another roll and the same thing occurs from the 'April 2022' HP5 Plus batch. The filament comes off easily as mentioned by Mike earlier in the thread.

If there is some kind of manufacturing error, I don't think it is a coating defect but something going wrong slicing the film into '120' format.

 

[Tom Kershaw]

I use JOBO reels and I get that if I am lazy and pull the film off the reel. It is emulsion from the edge of the film scraped off by the reels. If you use JOBO reels, take them apart to get the film out and your problem will be solved....

I'm seeing way too many "contact..." when the problem has nothing to do with the manufacturer.

I can't see how to take the 2500 series reels apart while the film is still on them, at least without risking significant damage to the film. So I gently pulled the film out and through the reel as I have done so with Jobo processors for 10 years.

 

[AgX]

I use the reels from the 1000 series and open the reel, then either turn it and let the film fall out into a container with the latst rinse, or lift the film off as a helocal. To me that is most careful way to get the film of the reel.

 

[Tom Kershaw]

I've just processed a roll by hand with a stainless steel reel and tank. There was a small strand of the "filament" but less than with the Jobo reel. I'm actually happier now as the in-camera exposure seems to be safe, as long as the strands are removed before drying.

 

[Tom Kershaw]

It has been suggested to me by a good source that ILFORD HP5 may be sensitive to stop bath strength, and so I've experimented using a water stop bath (along with one-shot fixer) to investigate further. I'm still seeing the odd bit of "filament" coming off but less than some earlier examples. Recent FP4 Plus and Delta 100 films do not seem prone / as prone to this issue as far as I can tell at the moment.

On stop baths, I intend to return to using one, but at a potentially more dilute level. For reference Tetenal suggests diluting 60% acetic acid 1+49 to make a stop bath solution, whereas ADOX suggests 1+29, which may be one source of confusion.

 

[AgX]

If I understand correctly you assume the filaments to origininate from the film, trickled so to say by the stop bath. Well, at ph-values at the extreme gelatin has its greatest softness. But still I dot not see how the filaments would have come into existence in first place, even with the slicing operation and respective mishaps in mind.

The only explanation then would be a miniscule strip of gelatin regularly cut off at one side and shearing under pressure off at its other side and from the base.

 

[Tom Kershaw]

If I understand correctly you assume the filaments to origininate from the film, trickled so to say by the stop bath. Well, at ph-values at the extreme gelatin has its greatest softness. But still I dot not see how the filaments would have come into existence in first place, even with the slicing operation and respective mishaps in mind.

The only explanazion then would be a minuscule strip of gelatin regularly cut off at one side and shearing under pressure off at its other side and from the base.

I agree. The water stop bath factor may be misleading, and use thereof has not eliminated the 'filament'. All we seem to know is that this 'filament' has made appearances on non-Jobo reels, as reported by Mike, earlier in the thread, using Paterson reels and completely different cameras to myself.

 

[mpirie]

I pointed Harman at this thread a few weeks ago and have received nothing other than an acknowledgement.

Mike

 

[What About Bob]

I will be keeping my eyes on this thread. I am interested in knowing what this is as well as the defect that I was having with Pan F Plus 120. Tomorrow I will be crossing fingers that the last roll of Pan F will have the defect that my work negatives have so that I can send it off to Ilford.

 

[Tom Kershaw]

Update: I had some correspondence with Jobo and I don't think the issue is there. I have just taken out 3 rolls of HP5 from my drying cabinet to cut up and sleeve, and one of the rolls does show the filament issue, over two frame (of 6x7 / 120) - haven't yet had the chance to closely examine all the negatives. These were done with a water stop but I will now revert back to a carefully measured conventional stop bath.

 

[ronwhit]

What is your water source? Could if be something from a filter or measuring device?

 

[Tom Kershaw]

What is your water source? Could if be something from a filter or measuring device?

That is one line of enquiry, however, the filament always originates from the edge of the film, not randomly "attached" in the middle of the frame, same as described by Mike earlier in the thread. My tap water is filtered but developer is made up from steam distilled water. I have some film to process from another completely different camera system and will check for the filament with these films.

 

[mpirie]

I processed three rolls of FP4 at the end of last week, and all three had filaments coming from the edge of the rolls.

I've gotten into a habit now if running my wet thumb and forefinger down each edge, one edge at a time as the roll comes out of the photo-flo.

Mike