Extra edge density on rollfilm developed with inversion agitation

[dlin]

Recently, while printing a negative using a high contrast filter (5.0), I encountered a problem of extra density along the two edges of the frame closest to where the rollfilm contacts the developing reel. I haven’t encountered this problem previously, since I rarely print at such high contrast, but it may be there in my other films, nonetheless. I’m guessing that this may have something to do with increased turbulence created during agitation. Assuming this is the source of the problem, are there agitation methods that avoid build up of extra density along the edges closest to the reel?

Some details:
Ilford Delta 100, 120 rollfilm developed in Pyrocat HD
Stainless steel reels developed in a stainless steel tank (2 reel capacity, approx. 1 liter volume)
Reduced gentle inversion/twist agitation (30 sec initial, 5 inversions at 1/3, and 2/3 total development time).
Printing with a cold light head, and enlarging lens with more than sufficient coverage for the film size.
Ilford MGWT FB paper, Ilford multigrade filters.

Any hints or thoughts are greatly appreciated.

Daniel

 

[Thomassauerwein]

Hey Daniel,
I've found 2 things with D100 and immersion processing. The first I went to 3 1/2 gal tanks putting the reels into wire racks. This seems to even out chemical displacement during aggitation. Ironically with 35mm it is just the opposite. Don't understand why but the closer confines of the tanks seem to work better for 35mm.?
Also the emmersion method had to be slowed down and aggitation a bit less frequent. I start out every 30 seconds but go to every 2 minutes about 25% into processing time. To offset this I increased processing temp 3 degrees and increased processing time 15%. The problem still exists, slightly, but is more than acceptable.

 

[Bob Carnie]

Hi Daniel

Sounds like you are doing things ok.

When agitating the film , Imagine that your hands are on the steering wheel of the car, top hand at 12position and bottom hand at 6position.
Now turn the car wheel with the hands changing positions. You will see immediately a funny twist in the agitation. This always helped me when hand processing.
As well you may be needing a pre- soak , so that the emulsion opens up evenly so that when the chemicals are added they rapidly disperse to all areas of the film..
since there is more turbulence near the edges * more development*you need to be very careful with your agitation technique.

 

[Jim Noel]

It sounds like a problem we encounterd about 15 years ago..

Have you been putting the reels in Photo-Flo? This has a tendency to adhere to the reels. After it builds up sufficiently it begins to act as a catalyst thus increasing development along the edges.

Try washing and scrubbing your reels well and see if that stops the problem. If so either don't put the reels in Photo Flo or change to LFN or another wetting agent.

 

[dlin]

Hi,
Thanks for your responses. I do use a 5 minute presoak, and transfer the reels between tanks (instead of pouring out/in solutions). I don't use photo-flo- just a final rinse with distilled water. The reels and tanks are washed out thoroughly between development sessions. I will pay greater attention to my agitation mechanics. One suggestion is to immobilize the reels more by inserting an empty 35mm reel, which I'll try. Since this is the first time I've been aware of any unevenness, I might as well establish best practices to avoid future problems with photographs that require high contrast printing.

Daniel

 

[George Collier]

I have had a lot of problems with edge "surge" recently with 120 film and both Rodinal and Pyrocat HD. I had some discussion with Don Cardwell, and tried some variations on my technique, per his advice. I have scanned some contact sheets and hope to post a new thread with info, as soon as I get the time.

 

[dmax]

Daniel,
The increased density in your 120 film is likely due to to the reel(s) surging up and down the developing tank during inversion, in effect replicating a piston action. This would cause a buildup of density along the film edges. I would suggest inserting a spacer of sorts to hold the reel(s) firmly in place. Depending on the exact dimensions of your tanks and the type of lid they have (vinyl or stainless steel), plastic caps from large beverage containers, a ring cut out from a PVC tube, or any other conveniently-dimensioned item should work provided the spacer can be centered and not be so wide that it covers a large area of the top of the reel. I myself use PVC spacers for all my tanks, 135s and 120s. I filed four notches on both ends. The notches seat the spacer on the cross-pieces of the reel (as viewed from the top) and help center the spacer correctly.

 

[Tonglen]

Hi Daniel,

A technique you may want to try with your style of tank inversion and twist: with small tank agitation I hold the tank in my left hand and only invert the tank to the left. After each 5 sec on 30 sec inversion, I then rotate the tank 90 degrees to the side, advancing the tank in a counter-clockwise fashion. This might help zero out the effect you are seeing.
Best,

Brian

 

[Tonglen]

Daniel,

Also, in regard to Photo Flo, I would suggest using only the barest minimum
to get the wetting effect-two to four drops per 500 ml, for instance.
I also spray the reels with Lysol tub and tile cleaner immediately after
the end of the processing session, rinsing with very hot water.
That may help reduce build-up.

Brian

 

[dlin]

Thanks again for your suggestions. I believe the suggestion of immobilizing the reels will go a long way to minimizing the surge problems I encountered. The inversion/twist agitation motions you've described are very close to what I've practised in the past. I've chosen to stay away from using photoflo for my film processing, since a final rinse with filtered RO/DI water has given me spot-free negatives.

Daniel

 

[MMfoto]

since a final rinse with filtered RO/DI water has given me spot-free negatives.

Daniel

What's the RO stand for?? I assume the DI means distilled. Maybe I'm thick!

 

[Tom Hoskinson]

Maybe RO= Reverse Osmosis?

If DI was DIW, then DIW = Deionized Water

 

[dlin]

Maybe RO= Reverse Osmosis?

If DI was DIW, then DIW = Deionized Water

Sorry about that. Yes, RO= Reverse Osmosis; DI= Deionized.

Daniel

 

[unregistered]

Jim's response was dead on if you use photo-flo. Another agitation cycle you can add is roll the tank on its side for the 5 second duration (or whatever amount you use). That way, the dev. won't build up so much turbulance going over the reel/film contact. I alternate between the twist motion and the rolling. I've been doing that since forever to eliminate any chance of surge from 35mm sprocket holes.

 

[Dan Henderson]

Daniel: I process film very much like you, although I use DiXactol as semi stand. Having had surge problems from agitation with these Hewes SS reels in the past, I do my torus agitations v-e-r-y s-l-o-w-l-y, and don't have that problem any more. I would also second your thought of putting an empty 35 mm reel on top of the 120 reels. I do that and it holds them nice and tight. I also drop an empty 120 spool on top of the reel in a single reel tank to hold it in place also.

Oh yeah, the episode of jamming the extension ring on my old 500 body was a convenient excuse to pick up a nice 501 body from KEH.

Best wishes,
Dan