Even development success stories?

[adamsalmond]

Hi all,

Been struggling with increased density along the edges of my 35mm black and white frames recently. I've found that it is easy to become overwhelmed by infinite forum pages discussing the issue, where people often have diverse and contradicting opinions on what might be causing it. After all, developing film is a very personal thing, and what might work for some may not for others.

Instead of asking you for solutions to my issue, I thought I might propose that those of who you yield consistent evenly developed negatives share your process. 'Process' could be as simple as your film, developer, and agitation technique; or you may wish to say more than that.

Just share what works for you, and perhaps this thread could become a positive learning experience for some. Consistent even development is absolutely possible! However I have often found posting 'this is my issue, what am I doing wrong' threads become quite conflictive and ultimately not very fun.

All the best and thanks in advance,
Adam

 

[Robert Maxey]

Hard to say without an example. I have never had much of a problem of the type you are experiencing.

My method that remained constant for more than a decade involved deep tanks. I hang the film with a weighted clip at the bottom and in the rinse first. When you are developing 15 rolls at the same time, you must slowly run your fingers between each roll to nothing sticks.

Then develop, another rinse/dunk and finally, fixer and wash.

Never had a problem. not even at home where I essentially followed Kodak's (and most others) process. Describe your exact processing method.

Bob

 

[BrianShaw]

I agree with Bob that it would be better for you to discuss your methods rather than trying to deduce from random stories.

This link is how I develop roll films, with one exception… I don’t do inversion agitation and do “rotation agitation” using Paterson tank. I’ve not experienced that problem either.

https://www.ilfordphoto.com/wp/wp-c...rocessing-your-first-black-and-white-film.pdf

 

[pentaxuser]

Can you show us the negs question? Can I take it that along the edges of every neg there is a visible increase in density along all 4 sides and on all of your films?

Thanks

pentaxuser

 

[adamsalmond]

Can you show us the negs question? Can I take it that along the edges of every neg there is a visible increase in density along all 4 sides and on all of your films?

Thanks

pentaxuser

Hi,

Thanks all for the replies. I appreciate you probably need to know more.

The increased density I am speaking of is always around the edges of the frame, and occurs in bright areas like skies and strong highlights. I have attached an image where I have lowered the exposure and increased contrast to make the issue more apparent.

The issue occurs across several cameras, all of which deliver perfect rolls of colour film when sent to the lab i.e. this is not a light leak issue. Most people have suggested insufficient agitation.

Keen to know anyone's thoughts!
Cheers

 

[MattKing]

May we please see a backlit photo of the negatives themselves, with rebates and space between the negatives visible?

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

For 35 and 120 films, using Patterson tanks, I always put in way more developer than called for. Gentle agitation follows using the figure 8 pattern, for five revolutions every minute.

 

[MattKing]

In general, I do a number of thinks to help prevent uneven negatives:
1) I try to make sure the film is moving easily within the spiral before it goes into the tank;
2) I do use a pre-rinse of 3 minutes - but that is a source of controversy!;
2a) I always make sure that there is air space above the liquid;
3) I aim for moderately long development times. I use replenished X-Tol or, until recently, replenished HC-110;
4) At the beginning of each step of the process the tank is inverted and twisted and then thumped to dislodge any air bubbles;
5) After that, during the first 30 seconds of the development stage the film is continuously agitated on a rotating, reversing agitator;
6) For the balance of the time in the developer, I use hand inversion agitation - the Kodak regime of 5 seconds every 30 seconds, with each agitation cycle involving both inversion and rotation - I make sure I can hear and feel the liquid tumbling and gurgling during the agitation;
7) For all of the rest of the steps - indicator stop, fixer one, fixer two, rinse, HCA - I use the continuously rotating, reversing agitator.
I have in the past used continuous rotating, reversing agitation for the entire development stage, but had trouble when I loaded two 120 rolls on the same AP (Paterson compatible) reel, due to the propensity of the film to move within the channels during the development stage.
Hope this assists.

 

[pentaxuser]

So this is b&w developing? Tell us what you are doing. What developer (stock or diluted 1+1 etc) for how long, which size tanks, how much developer, agitation regime. In other words tell us exactly what you do in detail so we can try to eliminate possible causes. Otherwise we will be reduced to asking have you done X or speculating on possible causes without all the info we need

That is just too wasteful of our time and yours

Thanks

pentaxuser

 

[Nicholas Lindan]

The problem is in the negative scan.

The lighter pixels extend not only at the side but at the top. RGB values for the sky: Left side 175, right side 175, top 140, middle 110.

If this were an agitation problem the left an right sides would not have almost exactly the same degree of lightening and there wouldn't be lightening across the image at the top between the frames.

 

[mshchem]

I don't do much scanning. This is where I would look first. I have followed Kodak's instructions forever, never had a problem. Use the book, make sure you have a couple good thermometers, clean water and equipment.

 

[Bill Burk]

Adjacency effects can raise density on the short edge next to the frame gap where less developer is consumed leaving more to act on the gray sky.

I would suggest the “Kodak” agitation. Small steel tanks. And as MattKing pointed out, relatively long developing time (about 10 minutes or more).

 

[Adrian Bacon]

I always use as much developer as possible. When using Paterson tanks, believe it or not, I'm a stick twiddler. Agitation back and forth for the first 30 seconds, 5 seconds agitation every minute thereafter. Never really have any issues. If machine processing, it's 24C and continuous agitation, again, very few if any issues.

 

[Bill Burk]

Tim Hall dealt with this by developing film by hand. Now it will work, but it’s labor intensive.

 

[Craig75]

I'm with Nicholas. This looks like a scanning issue not a development issue

 

[Foto Ludens]

I'm with Nicholas. This looks like a scanning issue not a development issue

Same here. This looks like artifacts from sharpening.

 

[ic-racer]

Rollfilm:
Jobo reels; plenty of fresh T-max developer; Rotation "P"; avoid times less then 5 min

Sheet film:
Jobo Expert Drum; plenty of fresh T-max developer; Rotation = slow; avoid times less then 5 min


Popular social-media-approved paths to poor negatives: expired film, under exposure, over-diluted developer, developer not fresh, improper agitation.

 

[pentaxuser]

The problem is in the negative scan.

.

Remind me that these days that another important question is: Is the problem clearly visible on the negative or not

pentaxuser

 

[Nicholas Lindan]

I would guess the problem is reflection off the edges of the negative holder. Similar problems used to crop up with Omega enlargers with clear anodized negative holders - the solution was a can of flat black spray paint; I used to mask off the inner surfaces of the holder so the paint couldn't rub off on the negative and only painted the inside of the aperture and the outside surfaces.

 

[BrianShaw]

When using Paterson tanks, believe it or not, I'm a stick twiddler. Agitation back and forth for the first 30 seconds, 5 seconds agitation every minute thereafter. Never really have any issues.

Whew… I feel better about myself now!

 

[Loren Sattler]

Years ago I had similar issues, especially with Plus-x film, excessive edge density where the film contacts the spool. I changed my agitation methods (from mild agitation to vigorous agitation with full inversions) and the problems largely disappeared.
1) Tri-x and Tmax, 35mm and 120 films on stainless steel spools in small two and four roll stainless steel tanks.
2) Film is overexposed 1 stop
3) Presoak film in 68 degree water prior to development
4) D76 1:1 single use developer. Normal contrast negatives are processed at 85% of Kodaks recommendations (Tri-x 8:15 minutes)
5) Agitation per Kodak's recommendation: 6 vigorous inversions initially then repeating at 30 second intervals

 

[Nicholas Lindan]

Whew… I feel better about myself now!

It is always comforting to find a partner in sin.

In the days of usenet, a collection of internet forums from the days before the www, It was held that the answer to the question "Am I the only one who...?" is always "No." No matter the kink.

Usenet was far more fun. A photography forum would find itself rubbing elbows with a forum dedicated to transvestite peony gardening - they would cross post for advice on taking pictures of their peonies and one's concept of the human universe expanded.

The narrow, and ever narrowing, focus of www forums contracts one's view. You need the random off-the-wall intrusion in your life.

 

[pentaxuser]

Usenet was far more fun. A photography forum would find itself rubbing elbows with a forum dedicated to transvestite peony gardening - they would cross post for advice on taking pictures of their peonies and one's concept of the human universe expanded.

The narrow, and ever narrowing, focus of www forums contracts one's view. You need the random off-the-wall intrusion in your life.

I was trying to imagine what would happen on Photrio if this were the situation but stopped for my mental health's state as my mind started to "boggle" after about 10 seconds

pentaxuser

 

[foc]

As has been already requested, can the OP please supply an image of the neg strip, something like this.

 

[MattKing]

I need to make and keep at hand one of those examples of a negative strip for just this purpose!
I think I'll make one for 120, so we have variety!