Grainy and foggy images - ilfotec hc?

[Marcin Kolanowski]

Hello everyone,

I'm a new member of this forum as I've just started my film photography journey.

I bought a medium format Bronica SQ-A with a 80mm f2.8 lens and few rolls of film. I then bought developing chemicals and all the necessary accessories. The results are quite bad and I need help with eliminating potential causes..

Here's what I've done so far:

Dev - Ilfotec HC
Ilfostop
Rapid Fixer

Delta 100 @ 1+31 / 6.5 min / 20C agitating for 10 sec every minute - scanned with DSLR and Negative lab pro

HP5+ @ 1+15 / 3.5 min /20C agitating for 10 sec every minute - scanned with DSLR and Negative lab pro

HP5+ @ 1+31 / 6.5 min / 20C agitating for 10 sec every minute - Epson V550

Fomapan @ 1+31 / 7 min / 20C agitating for 10 sec every minute - Epson V550 - ignore black spots it was rain drops coming out of the window when drying

Why are these images so grainy? there are some significant staines on the side of the negative too. Overall images seem to have a very low contrast too.

I don't trust the thermometer I'm using so I just bought a new one and should be delivered next week.
I didn't use distilled water but not everyone seems to be using it.
I used dev times from Ilford website and massive dev chart.
I've also shot 3 rolls of portra 400 and sent it to lab but still waiting for the negatives to come back - hoping this will eliminate camera failure.

please help

Marcin

 

[pentaxuser]

I think it will help us to help you if you can take digital photos of the negatives. An enlarger exposed negative printed on silver gelatin darkroom paper can tell us a lot and that plus a photo of the negative tells us even more but a scan of a negative turned into a positive introduces problems of its own so the next best thing is a digital photo of the negative. Unless there is something seriously wrong with both films or the Ilfotec and or temperature I cannot work out how the developer did this per se

pentaxuser

 

[Marcin Kolanowski]

Hey Pentaxuser, thanks for helping!

I'll take some photos of the negatives tomorrow and post them here. The negatives are really dark - you can barely see the images.. pretty much only if put a strong light behind them. The borders are also black.

 

[Marcin Kolanowski]

I've just realised I have some digital images of the negs

 

[ic-racer]

Looks like a number of things to work on. Try these changes and report back:
1) Use more solution in your tank
2) Consider a more concentrated solution and/or longer development time; the negatives are severely under developed and have the look of either exhausted developer or too short a time for even development.
3) Dry the negatives in a dust free area. Consider PhotoFlo 200 rinse before hang drying.
4) Film looks expired. If these were supposed to be fresh rolls, try a different manufacturer.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Backing paper problem. There are several threads on this problem. Contact Ilford for replacement film.

 

[jimjm]

Nothing you've shown here seems to be a camera problem, most likely it's just processing issues.
I agree you need to use more solution in the tank. Especially with the HP5 shots it appears there is insufficient developer to cover the film, hence the frothy bubbles appearing along the edges.
Try not to develop for times shorter than 5 mins. Better to use a more dilute developer and lengthen your development time.
Also, check your fixer strength and times. These look under-fixed since the areas outside of the frames should be clear. Ilford Rapid fixer should be used at 1+4 for film (100ml concentrate plus 400ml water to make 500ml working solution).
I know Ilford calls for 2-5 mins fixing time, but I would err on the long side. Try at least 5 mins fixing time using a fresh working batch. As you re-use the same batch of fixer you will need to extend fixing times.
You can re-fix these films and may end up with better results. Just drop them back in a tank of fixer for a few more minutes, then wash and hang to dry.
The quality of your tap water would determine if you need to use Ilford Washaid or Kodak Photoflo. If you have drying spots on the film, use either of these mixed with distilled water as a final rinse after your regular wash in running water.
It's also important not to handle or disturb the film while it's drying in a dust and draft-free area for at least a few hours. Any dust that gets on the wet emulsion will be difficult to remove without re-washing the film.

 

[pentaxuser]

Well the grain is apparent in all the Ilford and Foma films so that doesn't rule out a backing paper problem but it seems strange that it should look this bad over all the films. I haven't checked all the development times but the two I did check have been done at the llford times so those at least have not been underdeveloped if there were shot at box speed. So it suggests either fairly severe under exposure and /or an exhausted developer.

As far as the camera is concerned try setting an ISO speed of say 100 and if there is a patch of bright sunshine tomorrow try pointing the lens at grass in the sunshine at f16 between say 11am and 3:00 pm and see if the shutter speed is close to 1/100th as it should be under the sunny 16 rule, This will help establish if the meter in the camera is giving you the right exposure. If it is then it suggests that as your development time is right , there is a problem with your developer

Can you give is the information on the films. Were they purchased new and if so when? What was the expiry date on the boxes? How old is the Ilfotec HC?

If the Delta 100 and HP5+ are in date then it might be worth telling Ilford about the problem and if required, sending the negatives to them for their opinion.

In the meantime do you have any 35mm cameras and film you can expose in your lfotec HC as a means of eliminating or otherwise backing paper as the issue of the mottling. If the mottling disappears but the greyness persists in the negatives that helps establish that as only 120 film has backing paper this is part of or maybe all of the problem with mottling.. It doesn't of course explain what appears to be undervelopment or under exposure but the meter test I have described will help to establish whether the meter or an exhausted developer is the cause of the greyness in the negatives.

pentaxuser

 

[wyofilm]

The film looks terribly degraded to me.

 

[jimjm]

Is this fresh film, or do you even know how old it is?
Expired film is usually still fine, but if it's been stored in hot or humid conditions that can cause all types of problems, including what you have here.

 

[wyofilm]

Another idea is condensation? I'm not sure I've had problems with film condensation and therefore know not what it looks like. Was the film brought out of deep freeze in humid conditions and used right away?

 

[koraks]

Looks like a number of things to work on. Try these changes and report back:
1) Use more solution in your tank
2) Consider a more concentrated solution and/or longer development time; the negatives are severely under developed and have the look of either exhausted developer or too short a time for even development.
3) Dry the negatives in a dust free area. Consider PhotoFlo 200 rinse before hang drying.
4) Film looks expired. If these were supposed to be fresh rolls, try a different manufacturer.

Yes, I agree. It's an assortment of problems. Backing paper issues, insufficient development als possibly also exposure, insufficient developer volume and badly fogged (probably outdated and poorly stored) film.

So in terms of solving the issue, give it a go with fresh, properly stored film, given adequate exposure and development.

 

[Marcin Kolanowski]

Hey guys, thanks for all your help!

The film is fresh and I bought it directly from Ilford and other reputable company in UK.

Here's what I'm going to try now:

- I'm going to extend fixing time from 3 to 5 mins and use distilled water for all processes except rinsing at the end.
- I'm going to use 2 thermometers
- I didn't leave film to soak in water for 10 mins at the end of the process - I will do it now
- Also ... quite embarrassing but I used safelight for loading negatives into the tank. I've read yesterday that it HAS to be complete darkness and no safelights are allowed - hence where the fog is from?!

M

 

[koraks]

I used safelight for loading negatives into the tank

Ah, that explains a lot. You're not the only one; this problem pops up from time to time.
Good luck on your next try; it'll surely be better.

 

[pentaxuser]

Ah, that explains a lot. You're not the only one; this problem pops up from time to time.
Good luck on your next try; it'll surely be better.

Yes but would it explain the grain that is as bad as anything I''ve seen and this puzzles me greatly especially as the OP has explained as I thought was going to be the case, that the film is fresh.

pentaxuser

 

[NB23]

Light leaks, fog...

Did you roll the film tightly after raking it out of the camera? Or was it loose?

edit: ok, you loaded your reel with safelight on. No wonder...

 

[Patrick Robert James]

Just write off the roll and start from scratch, without the safelight. You need complete darkness.

The bubbles are the only thing that wouldn't be caused by the safelight. It is possible you didn't have quite enough developer in the tank. With plastic reels sometimes bubbles can get trapped. It is important to whack the tank on the countertop after every agitation to dislodge the bubbles, and agitate for the first minute if you already aren't.

You are just starting out, so mistakes are inevitable. That is how we all learned. Your next roll will probably look pretty good.

 

[koraks]

Yes but would it explain the grain that is as bad as anything I''ve seen and this puzzles me greatly especially as the OP has explained as I thought was going to be the case, that the film is fresh.

pentaxuser

Yes, it does, combined with the insufficient development. It results in a very low contrast image that is boosted in digital post processing, emphasing the grain. It's entirely plausible.

 

[pentaxuser]

Yes, it does, combined with the insufficient development. It results in a very low contrast image that is boosted in digital post processing, emphasing the grain. It's entirely plausible.

Thanks. So the grain is increased digitally by scanning and some of this grain would not appear under a grain focuser or on a print of darkroom paper exposed under an enlarger and processed in the normal developer, stop and fix process?

Marcin, can you tell us what developing tank you have and how much developer you put into the tank. There should be some instructions given with the tank or put on the outside of the tank about what amounts to use for a 120 film?

I don't think you gave us any information on this.

Thanks

pentaxuser

 

[koraks]

Thanks. So the grain is increased digitally by scanning and some of this grain would not appear under a grain focuser or on a print of darkroom paper exposed under an enlarger and processed in the normal developer, stop and fix process?

Indeed. But the print would either be extremely flat, or you'd have to use grade 5 and end up with the same emphasized grain as in the digital version. Look at it as a matter of signal-noise ratio. Whether you proceed working digitally on the image or in the darkroom, the s/n ratio of the negative still remains the same.

 

[Marcin Kolanowski]

Hey guys, thanks for all your help!

The film is fresh and I bought it directly from Ilford and other reputable company in UK.

Here's what I'm going to try now:

- I'm going to extend fixing time from 3 to 5 mins and use distilled water for all processes except rinsing at the end.
- I'm going to use 2 thermometers
- I didn't leave film to soak in water for 10 mins at the end of the process - I will do it now
- Also ... quite embarrassing but I used safelight for loading negatives into the tank. I've read yesterday that it HAS to be complete darkness and no safelights are allowed - hence where the fog is from?!

M

Hey guys,

So I've done the above plus I used de-ionised water for mixing with the chemicals and for the last wash. Results are amazing - at least for me haha
I'm pretty sure it was the red-light I used in the darkroom I can't believe I thought it was a good idea!

Thanks a million!
M

 

[sterioma]

There are actually a few films that you can handle with a redlight: those are called orthochromatic films (such as Ilford Ortho Plus which has been released not long ago). They are not responsive to red light so they can be loaded (and even inspected during development) under a red safe light.

 

[pentaxuser]

Marcin, I am glad it was just the red light that was the cause and no problems with backing paper or any of the other potential causes. It just goes to show why it is important to literally describe everything that is "there " when you experience a problem. Few posters do this and it always takes longer to get to the bottom of the problem literally bit by bit despite a full description being thought of as unnecessary

The pictures look very good

pentaxuser

 

[NB23]

Guys, of course the grain is bigger: it got overexposed and overdeveloped. What else is to be expected?

 

[pentaxuser]

Guys, of course the grain is bigger: it got overexposed and overdeveloped. What else is to be expected?

I am confused. Which film are you referring to? The first set of negs that was exposed to a red light or the positive scans the OP has given us when he switched off the red light?

Thanks

pentaxuser