Hellish Green/fogged/dense "orange mask" C-41 Tetenal

[ludwighagelstein]

[Update]
I added this visual representation of the whole mess

Facts first:

I´m not new to developing C-41 in Tetenal 3bath kits.
I do process control -> A 10cm strip of unexposed, fresh Kodak Gold in every Tank
Temperature was 38.1 to 37.8° C -> I checked a few times
Prerinse had a usual greenish color (I think that comes from the Kodak Gold)
Chemistry was fresh. It was the first film that had run through the chemistry.
Agitation was continuous and motorized

Ok, I should state here that the film I developed was about 20y old Ferrania FIlm (with 20y old latent images) my mom had found in a drawer (I already did a development of such old film with latent images successfully). As it turns out the film behaved completely different than I am used to.

The negatives are underdeveloped/ faint ->edge markings as well as the images itself
The negatives have no orange mask, but instead a very dense green/brown fog -> Is it fog? It´s definitely no error from too short blixing -> this was my first guess, so I blixed a second time for another 4 mins -> absolutely no change

Do you have any Idea what might have happened with the film ?

I´ll add photos of the negatives later when they´re dry enough to put them on a lighttable.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Welcome to APUG Photrio



There may be several problems: the age of the film and-or the film may not have been C-41 compatible. Photo Engineer [PE] may be able to help you.

 

[ludwighagelstein]

It was a C41 FIlm. Canister said so and I checked the emulsion on dexter -> It´s Imation Color HP100 manufactured by Ferrania and rebrandet to who knows what not.

 

[pentaxuser]

The only thing wrong I can think of is the use of 20 yrs old Ferrania film with 20 yr old latent images. My only nagging doubt is that I must admit that I always thought that the edge markings were impervious to the effects of ageing so no matter how old the film was, the edge markings remain a test of how fresh the chemicals are and you seem to have covered the chemical aspect well enough to rule them out.

Try fresh film. If that's OK then it has to be the film, doesn't it?

pentaxuser

 

[ludwighagelstein]

The only thing wrong I can think of is the use of 20 yrs old Ferrania film with 20 yr old latent images. My only nagging doubt is that I must admit that I always thought that the edge markings were impervious to the effects of ageing so no matter how old the film was, the edge markings remain a test of how fresh the chemicals are and you seem to have covered the chemical aspect well enough to rule them out.

Try fresh film. If that's OK then it has to be the film, doesn't it?

pentaxuser

I know that it has to be a problem with the film, I´m just curious what might have happened because I have developed compareable rolls with success. The Kodak Gold control strip is properly processed and the edge markings are properly developed.

 

[AgX]

The only thing wrong I can think of is the use of 20 yrs old Ferrania film with 20 yr old latent images. My only nagging doubt is that I must admit that I always thought that the edge markings were impervious to the effects of ageing so no matter how old the film was, the edge markings remain a test of how fresh the chemicals are and you seem to have covered the chemical aspect well enough to rule them out.

The edge signing is a latent image before processing as well. Even older than the latent image of the image.

 

[AgX]

The film may not have been C-41 compatible. Photo Engineer [PE] may be able to help you.

In the Western World last non-C-41 negative films had been cancelled about 40 years ago.

 

[Sirius Glass]

In the Western World last non-C-41 negative films had been cancelled about 40 years ago.

What about the Eastern world or the rest of the Universe? <<wink, wink>>

thanks though.

 

[ludwighagelstein]

Here´s the negative and a graphic summary of the whole mess

 

[railwayman3]

Your "control strip" confirms that the processing was correct, and the canister says C-41 (which is correct for Ferrania/3m Imation film). I have also processed 20 y.o. film with quite usable results.
My own guess would therefore be poor storage (in a drawer....heat or dampness? ) and/or some kind of light fogging ? Radiation damage seems unlikely, although could a luminous clock dial affect film ? Or has the film been near X-rays at some time in its life ?

 

[ludwighagelstein]

Your "control strip" confirms that the processing was correct, and the canister says C-41 (which is correct for Ferrania/3m Imation film). I have also processed 20 y.o. film with quite usable results.
My own guess would therefore be poor storage (in a drawer....heat or dampness? ) and/or some kind of light fogging ? Radiation damage seems unlikely, although could a luminous clock dial affect film ? Or has the film been near X-rays at some time in its life ?

Light fogging seems reasonable, but must have happened in camera Back then. But one thing speaks against the fogging theory: the orange part of the negative that looks quite normal is NOT normal. Its Not developed at all, since there should also be edge markings visible, but there's nothing...

 

[AgX]

Here´s the negative and a graphic summary of the whole mess

Exposure likely through the back of film. Allover except for upper rebate, with a near straight step-wise intensity fall at upper height.

 

[mnemosyne]

Ludwig,
the results you see are typical of old expired C41 material in the sense that the outcome is always unpredictable. It is likely that the film is simply age fogged (accelerated by heat, moisture) or was chemically fogged by contact with formaldehyde or something else in your mom's drawer. I wouldn't worry too much about it, your process is most likely okay.

 

[Arbitrarium]

You say you've developed comparable film, but have you developed this exact batch before? Expired film can be all kinds of ruined if it's been left somewhere hot for example. I've developed many expired rolls that came out green, but my scanner generally handles it well enough.

 

[ludwighagelstein]

Not the same batch. The colorcast is not the biggest Problem, its the apparent underdevelopment i dont understand...

 

[halfaman]

Latent image in color negative films is not permanent. I develop a roll of Kodak Gold after 9 years of being exposed and the images where severly faded, the photos I took to finish this same roll the day after taking it to the lab came perfectly.

 

[AgX]

Those ideas of latent image degradation do not explain at all this artefact, as

-) the artefact is not homogeneous but got two edges

-) it affects areas that never got a latent image, as the lower rebate and the spaces between the images

 

[removed account4]

hi OP
sorry to not be much help with my answer to you but ...
sometimes stuff just happens because it just happens ..
there really is no rhyme or reason .. some film, even the same batch
exposed the same way stored the same way ... works out OK
and its sister/brother is cooked...
thankfully in this modern time/in 2018 we have photoshop so you might be able to salvage images
that might ( or might not ) be important ...
im guessing as others have suggested -- fresh film might not exhibit the same issues..
have fun!
john

 

[AgX]

Well, if I leave the issue of the latent image, but turn auto-fogging, how then is to explain the edge formings?

 

[ludwighagelstein]

hi OP
sorry to not be much help with my answer to you but ...
sometimes stuff just happens because it just happens ..
there really is no rhyme or reason .. some film, even the same batch
exposed the same way stored the same way ... works out OK
and its sister/brother is cooked...
thankfully in this modern time/in 2018 we have photoshop so you might be able to salvage images
that might ( or might not ) be important ...
im guessing as others have suggested -- fresh film might not exhibit the same issues..
have fun!
john

I know, i know... fresh film... It just annoys the hell out of me that the images on this 20+ year old film are apparently one of the first photographs I took as a child, maybe 4-5 years old. If a lab had processed it I could at least (in thought) not in any material way blame them, but know I struggle with the thought of maybe having destroyed the first images I produced. Maybe the Noritsu is able to get something out of it.

 

[ludwighagelstein]

Well, if I leave the issue of the latent image, but turn auto-fogging, how then is to explain the edge formings?

Apparently there was not development whatsoever in the orange part of the negative. the rips and tears in the emulsion were caused when I spooled the wet film back into the tank for another round of Blix.

 

[removed account4]

maybe ? do you have a scanner ? scanners can pick up stuff on the negative
and you can figure it out in PS .. and save your image to make a print.
green tint can be removed, streaks can be fixed contrast and color can be fixed
might be worth looking into

 

[AgX]

Well, two faults... fogging and stepwise non-/under-development.
Makes sense.

BUT how can be explained that the test-strip was completely developed?

 

[ludwighagelstein]

Well, two faults... fogging and stepwise non-/under-development.
Makes sense.

BUT how can be explained that the test-strip was completely developed?

that´s the issue! The chemicals were fresh, the process was ok, but yet the film did not develop properly. The test strip was developed properly because my process is ok. The problem must have been the film, and thats why i´m curious.

 

[AgX]

If the test strip was on the same reel, I rather fall back to my first explanation:

partial light fogging through the back

That would not explain why there is no signing at the true orange part of the rebate, but it could be that there was no signing exposed at that part or at that rebate at all.