Faulty Negative

[Orkhan Abbasov]

I have recently shot two rolls of Rollei Retro 80s on Mazmiya RZ 67 II and run into a problem a have never had in my practice. There is some kind of pattern (that remembers either fungus or a ground glass) on the negatives. I do always develop at home, same chemicals Adox Rodinal, AdoStop, Adofix Plus, Adoflo. Never had this problem with different film stock and with 35mm.

Camera back had some light entering, but the effect doesn't seem to be caused by this.

Any idea what it can be?

On the last photo there is some kind of near perfect circle, where can it possibly come from?

 

[koraks]

Welcome to Photrio, @Orkhan Abbasov !
This is a backing paper offset problem. It's common on this particular type of film. It's usually exacerbated by film being expired (stored for a long time before it's used) and adverse storage conditions; especially heat and moisture.

 

[Orkhan Abbasov]

Welcome to Photrio, @Orkhan Abbasov !
This is a backing paper offset problem. It's common on this particular type of film. It's usually exacerbated by film being expired (stored for a long time before it's used) and adverse storage conditions; especially heat and moisture.

Thank you very much for this tip! When you say this type of film do you mean 120 format, because it uses backing paper (or whatever it is called) or the particular film manufacturer?

 

[Orkhan Abbasov]

How old was the roll of film and how did you store it? I guess fridge, right?

I've bought it from a local film supplier and it was stored at my place for two weeks. Non fridge, room temperature.

 

[koraks]

When you say this type of film do you mean 120 format, because it uses backing paper (or whatever it is called) or the particular film manufacturer?

In this particular case, both.

This is a crop from a roll of Rollei Retro 400s that I shot quite some years ago. Note the similarity of the defect:

I also got one of those neat little circles:

Rollei Retro was repackaged Agfa Aviphot film; the Rollei 80 was Aviphot Pan 80, the Rollei 400s was Aviphot Pan 200. The confectioning was done by the same party (I don't know who this was) and the used backing paper and packaging was especially susceptible to this defect.

Very similar defects tend to pop up on other brands of film, from time to time, but it's always 120 format - indeed, because of the backing paper that's present on this format.

I never re-purchased this particular film afterwards and I don't know if the problem was ultimately solved. I do recall that my film was packaged in a plastic container and there was no sealed foil wrapper to the best of my memory.

 

[Orkhan Abbasov]

In this particular case, both.

This is a crop from a roll of Rollei Retro 400s that I shot quite some years ago. Note the similarity of the defect:
View attachment 362821

I also got one of those neat little circles:
View attachment 362822

Rollei Retro was repackaged Agfa Aviphot film; the Rollei 80 was Aviphot Pan 80, the Rollei 400s was Aviphot Pan 200. The confectioning was done by the same party (I don't know who this was) and the used backing paper and packaging was especially susceptible to this defect.

Very similar defects tend to pop up on other brands of film, from time to time, but it's always 120 format - indeed, because of the backing paper that's present on this format.

I never re-purchased this particular film afterwards and I don't know if the problem was ultimately solved. I do recall that my film was packaged in a plastic container and there was no sealed foil wrapper to the best of my memory.

Interesting indeed. Same artifacts. I wonder if this has to do with the fact that Rollei Retro film base is thinner than many other film stocks? Loved this film stock, but don't know If I want to take the risk again.

My Rollei Retro 80s came inside a paper box wrapped in a proper plastic film wrap (similar to Kodak Portra but much thicker).

 

[koraks]

I wonder if this has to do with the fact that Rollei Retro film base is thinner than many other film stocks?

No, I don't think so. It's really an interaction between the backing paper and the emulsion. The base can be ignored in this case since it's pretty much inert.

My Rollei Retro 80s came inside a paper box wrapped in a proper plastic film wrap (similar to Kodak Portra but much thicker).

It's possible the packaging has changed, I misremembered, or that someone else opened the film I used before I got it. I recall I got it as part of a deal on some stuff I bought from someone.

 

[Rudeofus]

While the circle inside the cat really does look like a backing paper mark, this whole situation does not fit with Mamiya's RZ67. These cameras have apocalypse proof film magazines, it sounds unimaginable to me, that any kind of light could shine through backing paper in such a magazine.

Are you sure, that nothing bad happened to the film during storage?

 

[koraks]

@Rudeofus I agree it's not a light leak; it's a chemical interaction between the backing paper and the emulsion. It's a known issue with this film. See also the additional example I've posted.

 

[Rudeofus]

@Rudeofus I agree it's not a light leak; it's a chemical interaction between the backing paper and the emulsion. It's a known issue with this film. See also the additional example I've posted.

Would a prewash of the film help prevent this? Sort of clean up whatever the backing paper left on the film? Or has the reaction already taken place by the time the film gets in your film tank?

 

[Orkhan Abbasov]

While the circle inside the cat really does look like a backing paper mark, this whole situation does not fit with Mamiya's RZ67. These cameras have apocalypse proof film magazines, it sounds unimaginable to me, that any kind of light could shine through backing paper in such a magazine.

Are you sure, that nothing bad happened to the film during storage?

When I've mentioned light leak I've meant a visible burn on the negative (visible at the lower right side of the first photograph). And I have doubt this was the cause of the "pattern" effect.

Regarding the "bulletproofness" of the Mamiya RZ 67 II backs, I think I have found the leaking portion, absence of the light seal (due to the age of the back), which I plan to reseal and make a test roll.

 

[Orkhan Abbasov]

Would a prewash of the film help prevent this? Sort of clean up whatever the backing paper left on the film? Or has the reaction already taken place by the time the film gets in your film tank?

I did prewash for 10-15 mins before developing. As you can see from the example it didn't help.

Also images I've shared are from two different walls and on the last roll the effect is worse than on the first one.

 

[Rudeofus]

I did prewash for 10-15 mins before developing. As you can see from the example it didn't help.

Also images I've shared are from two different walls and on the last roll the effect is worse than on the first one.

In this case it would be wise to follow @koraks ' advice and chose a different film :-(

Fomapan 100 is cheaper than Rollei and doesn't have this issue.

 

[koraks]

Would a prewash of the film help prevent this? Sort of clean up whatever the backing paper left on the film? Or has the reaction already taken place by the time the film gets in your film tank?

Yes, I'm afraid it's irreversible and can't be helped. @Orkhan Abbasov 's experience is consistent with this.