Ilford film problem - marks all over the strip

[yanboechat]

I´ve beenusing Ilford films for a while, and they were the synonimoun of quality for me. But this is changing now. For the second time in less than a year i´ve had problems with ilford films. In both cases the film, after developed, came with marks, like water marks, all over the strip. the first time it happened to a Ilford Pan F+ 50. Tow rolls of 120 came with the same problem. I thought i was doing something wrong. Then I developed another Ilford Pan F+ 50, but in the 35mm format, along with the 120 roll. The MF film came with the marks and the 35mm clean as it can be. In total it happened with 4 rolls that I took to South Africa to cover the World Cup. A pitty. Now, in a trip to Portugal, the same happened. This time with a Ilford FP4+ 125. So far, just one roll came with the marks. I´d like to know if you heard similar things from other buyers and understand what is going on. I don´t want to give up on Ilford, but if it keeps happenig, I´ll have to do it.



Here are some scanned negs with the problem.

With the Ilford Pan F+ 50

And here with the Ilford FP4+ 125

Dead Link Removed

Dead Link Removed


Thanks a lot for your attention

Yan

 

[Mike Wilde]

You don't happen to use your photo flow/wetting agent while the film is still in its reels in the developing tank do you? I ask because sometimes there is carry over if the wetting agent mix is a bit strong, or the water is of certain pH. It can lead to foaming when the developer is poured in the next time the tank is used. Then all sorts of wierd development artifacts can be found.

Wash the tank and reels in household automatic dishwasher detergent is you have used wetting agent in the tank. It is non foaming, and will get the wetting agent resides washed out. Rinse well in distilled water if you want to be sure.

You are agitatiing in some form while developing? Some of the artifacts look like they could be caused by bromide streaking if developer agent by products like bromide, a developer restrainer builds up and is not uniformly disbursed in the developing solution by agitating regularly.

You may also want to try developing with distilled (or reverse osmosis filters at a minimum) water used to mix the developer, to rule out the possibility that some mineral in your tap water is the possible case of your weird development results.

I have never had an in date Ilford film let me down.

I, on the other hand have screwed up with all sorts of different vendor's films over the years with processing errors of my own fault of one sort or other.

 

[jeffreyg]

Mike,

I too use and have used Ilford films both MF and LF and have never had a problem. Since I'm not into the chemistry details, I would add to your recommendations that he mix fresh chemicals with distilled water, expose a roll of film of a plain subject such as a gray card and follow the mfg's directions as to time temperature and agitation. The scans seem to show the defects in the blank areas which I doubt has any meaning but since he wants to correct the problem I think controlling the whole process without injecting variables would be the way to go. I the defects don't show up then he would know that it was something to do with his handling of the process or perhaps something damaged the film prior to processing. Then again there's Murphy's Law.

http://www.jeffreyglasser.com/

 

[Bob-D659]

Possibly the emulsion sticking to the paper backing due to humidity problems? How did you store/transport the film while flying?

 

[monodave]

You're seeing the same problem on different films in different formats. It would suggest that it's a processing or storage problem not film or film type. Have someone else do your processing to check it out. Buy a film, use it straight away and have someone else process it to eliminate storage. Try some different things before you blame the film.

 

[Worker 11811]

Micro-reticulation in the grain??

A) How are your temperature controls holding up during processing? Are you certain that you are holding the temperature to within 1 deg. C. from the time you pour in the first water till the time you hang it up to dry?

B) How are you storing the film from before the time it is exposed until it is finished processing? Can you be sure that the film is stored in stable temperature conditions from the time it is exposed until it is finally processed?

Not an authoritative answer but that's my guess...

 

[yanboechat]

Guys, thanks for all replies. I though all the same thoughts that you had. First time it happened I thought it was my mistake. And I do make some mistakes here and there. But, once again, I developed same kind of film - FP4+ 125 - in the same tank. Both rolls were used in the same ocasion. Same water, same temperature control, same developer, same everything. But, one came as clean as it could be and the other came with all the marks. The same thing happened some month ago, with the PAN F+. Would you think that it could be any kind of fungus?

Really don´t know whats is going on. But, if it was a mistake, same problem should happen to both rolls in the tank, don´t you agree?

 

[Simon R Galley]

Dear Yan,

Firstly, I am sorry you have experienced an issue with any ILFORD Photo product.

Within our QC regime any film faults are incredibly rare and at present we have no QC issue on any film product whatsoever. Similar faults across different products FP4+ and PAN F + are even rarer so this would normally indicate a processing issue of some type.

But we do not know in this case, so we can check it for you, our technical service can examine the film and ensure that no fault exists with the film, and if it does we will tell you :

We have 3 verdicts Justified complaint / Not justified and cause not certain and you will be told which one it is. It is almost impossible to tell from scans, you need to examine the films usually using an electron microscope.

You will need to send the film to us in England.

HARMAN technology Limited,
Ilford Way,
Mobberley,
Knutsford,
CHESHIRE.
WA16 7JL
UNITED KINGDOM. Mark it for the attention of TECHNICAL SERVICE.

Please make sure you put your full contact details in with the films.


It will help if you tell us where and when you bought the film, the circumstances of the exposure where and when, and most importantly your processing regime, we do not need the Batch numbers as they can be identified from the actual films.

From every single batch of film we make we hold back and store unprocessed examples so as if we get a complaint within 5 years of manufacture we can process or expose and process our own samples to see if we can replicate any customer issue.

Thank you for using and valuing ILFORD Photo products.

Simon ILFORD Photo / HARMAN technology Limited :

 

[Mike Wilde]

Simon, you certainly make it easy to see why I work on buying your product.

 

[yanboechat]

Simon, thanks for your attention. I´ll send both negs. Let´s see what you guys find out. I really hope the problem is with me

 

[Simon R Galley]

Dear Yan.

Don not worry we will find out...

Simon.

 

[sandholm]

Simon, you certainly make it easy to see why I work on buying your product.

Same here, I am almost 100% ilford user now, better costumer support (and products) do not exist. please post on the forum when you know what has gone wrong, so we all can learn.

 

[Steve Roberts]

Yan,
Your problem looks to me to an issue with your final wash/rinse. As you say that its occurred on different formats and different sizes in Ilford's range, I can't see the materials being at fault. Apart from all else, I suspect that a lot of other people with film from those batches would be hopping up and down as well! I occasionally used to suffer from marks on negatives. I live in a very soft water area and concluded that I was overdoing the wetting agent in the final rinse. I now use literally only one drop of wetting agent in a full tank of water, then tip that away and have a "final final" rinse in just plain water. No problems since I started doing that.
Simon's kind offer of advice and investigation is typical of the service we enjoy from Ilford (other firms, not just photographic, should take note!) but somehow I think you're wasting your hard-earned money posting your negs to England!
Hope you get to the bottom of the problem, whatever it is!
Steve

 

[yanboechat]

Steve, thanks for your attention. When it happened in the first time I though the same. So i washed it again and again. Nothing, the marks were still there. I do think the problem can be with something that I´m doing. But whar really amazes me is that just one roll in the same tank came out with the marks. When I developed FP4+ I put 2 rolls in the same tank. One came with the marks, and the other not. Both rolls got the same soup, same water, same final rinse. So why one has the marks so consistent and the other is so clean? If there were some problems with the water, the final rinse or anything shouldn´t both rolls come with the marks. Here are some shots from the roll that I developed with the one with the marks.

Dead Link Removed

Dead Link Removed

As you can see, they´re clean. No marks at all.

Once again, thanks a lot for your attention with my problem. I appreciate.

 

[Q.G.]

Steve, thanks for your attention. When it happened in the first time I though the same. So i washed it again and again. Nothing, the marks were still there. I do think the problem can be with something that I´m doing. But whar really amazes me is that just one roll in the same tank came out with the marks. When I developed FP4+ I put 2 rolls in the same tank. One came with the marks, and the other not. Both rolls got the same soup, same water, same final rinse. So why one has the marks so consistent and the other is so clean?

Because one was on top, where all the bubbles of the frothing 'soup' are, the other below, fully submerged.

Put more liquid in the tank, and use less photoflo (and rinse the tank and spools thoroughly before using them again).

 

[Steve Smith]

As you can see, they´re clean. No marks at all.

I spent what felt like a long time looking at those two images to spot the problem before I scrolled down and saw that line!


Steve.

 

[yanboechat]

Because one was on top, where all the bubbles of the frothing 'soup' are, the other below, fully submerged.

Put more liquid in the tank, and use less photoflo (and rinse the tank and spools thoroughly before using them again).

It does make sense

 

[Steve Roberts]

When I developed FP4+ I put 2 rolls in the same tank. One came with the marks, and the other not. Both rolls got the same soup, same water, same final rinse.

Did the two FP4 rolls come from the same bulk roll, or were they bought at the same time from the same place? If the former, they're definitely from the same batch and if the latter then it's highly likely. Either way points to a processing issue rather than material. I don't know how the batch number is displayed on the film (probably bar codes these days) but if you could find something that looks like a batch identifier and they are both the same, perhaps you could go some way to ruling out the material.
Steve

 

[Q.G.]

I'm sure it's a processing error.
Bubbles, leaving their mark... nothing else does that.

 

[monodave]

Ilford film batch code for 120 is a 4 digit number on the edge that has the Ilford name, eg. Ilford FP4 Plus 3997.
It's repeated every 3 inches or so. No idea about 35mm but suspect similar.

 

[yanboechat]

I'm sure it's a processing error.
Bubbles, leaving their mark... nothing else does that.

As I said QG, what amazes me is why one roll has no marks whatsoever and the other one has plenty of them. But I agree with that one in the top of another can be the problem. I ussually use 2ml of photo flo for each liter. But, again, it can pe a processor error. Well, I´ll send them to Ilford anyway. Just to be sure what is going on.

 

[Q.G.]

As I said QG, what amazes me is why one roll has no marks whatsoever and the other one has plenty of them. But I agree with that one in the top of another can be the problem.

It's not a problem, but (together with too little fluid and too much photoflo in the tank) the explanation.

The top edge of the film on top will not have been submerged, but sitting in among the froth produced by the 'agitated' photoflo.

I ussually use 2ml of photo flo for each liter. But, again, it can pe a processor error. Well, I´ll send them to Ilford anyway. Just to be sure what is going on.

That's a lot...

 

[jeffreyg]

A suggestion for using PhotoFlo : don't use it in the developing tank , mix it in a separate container and holding the film leader dunk the roll into the solution and remove. It's not necessary to soak for any length of time.

http://www.jeffreyglasser.com/

 

[yanboechat]

A suggestion for using PhotoFlo : don't use it in the developing tank , mix it in a separate container and holding the film leader dunk the roll into the solution and remove. It's not necessary to soak for any length of time.

http://www.jeffreyglasser.com/

That´s exactly what I do. But I let it there for 30 seconds. Is it too much?

 

[jeffreyg]

I never bothered to time it. I use MF and 4x5 and just as long as it takes to submerge. It has never been a problem so maybe something else caused the problem.