Is this a fault with my developer....

[Graham Hansford]

I have just developed two films in my usual manner - but can't explain the result. Unfortunately the photos were very important and probably unrepeatable.

Two Ilford HP5 films developed in the same tank with Ilford LC29 at 1 + 19 at 20 degrees. Normal 10 second agitation (inverting) every minute. Incidentally the developer was a brand new bottle opened just before using.

Result: Most of the frames on BOTH reels are showing low contrast lines where the sprocket holes are, running across the images. If it was only one reel I would instantly point the finger at me - under filled, agitation etc - but it is very apparent on both.

I have processed many films and cannot think of anything that I have done differently. The only grey area is the Brand new bottle of developer, or the film (I have got to admit that I trust the film more than the developer - and to happen on two films!)

I will be trying a contact print later today so may be able to reflect more on what the damage is.

Can anybody tell me what I have done wrong.

 

[Soeren]

Just a guess: 10sec agitation every 10sec is to much. The Ilford recomended dev time is 6:30min. You don't state yours but I suspect its shorter. Could all this lead to uneven development ?
just my 2c
Regards Søren

 

[Graham Hansford]

Sorry - mis type - agitate for 10 seconds every minute. Development was for 6 minutes and 30 seconds (by the book).

 

[Soeren]

Hmm, fresh out of ideas. Personally I never develop more than one film at a time for the same reason.
I believe what you see is streakin (somebody correct me if I'm wrong) But the reason ?
Do you often develop two films at a time.
How about tank and wolume ?
Could Ilford have change the developer ?
Regards Søren

 

[Graham Hansford]

I agree and thought tank and volume - but it does not explain how the bottom reel is more or less identical to the top one - it should be immersed in developer most of the time (it would have to be well underfilled and the top reel would look very different to the bottom one).

Yes I have often developed 2 films together - for consistency reasons - never had a problem before.

 

[Soeren]

How about monotonous agitation ?
I also remember having read something about the sprocketholes causing whirls which could be the reason for the lines.
Describe the lines. Actual origin, width and distribution acros the films.
regards
Søren

 

[Graham Hansford]

Dark lines, the width of the gap between the sprocket holes, running through the gap from the rebate into the image (or lightened lines running from directly below the sprocket holes across the image). Seems marginally more defined from one edge than the other- but covers all of the image. Same on both films.

 

[Soeren]

To me, it sounds like your agitation is causing the problem.
how do you agitate/invert ? 180 degrees ? Do you twist/turn the tank before (or after) each inversion.
I can't think of anything else than this and I don't think there's something wrong with your developer.
Are 100% sure you didn't do anything different
I think we need some of the experts here.
Regards Søren

 

[Graham Hansford]

To me, it sounds like your agitation is causing the problem.
how do you agitate/invert ? 180 degrees ? Do you twist/turn the tank before (or after) each inversion.

Invert 180 degrees and twist - about 7 cycles in the 10 seconds, every minute

 

[Bob F.]

Always worth re-fixing. Exhausted fixer can show as apparent fog/density depending on the anti-halation layer etc. Not sure why it would follow the perforations tho...


Bob.

 

[Soeren]

Never would have though of that :rolleyes:
Cheers Søren

 

[Ed Sukach]

That sounds a great deal like the result of "too vigorous agitation". There is a "proper term" for the effect, which escapes this caffeine-deficient brain at the moment. Think of the "cavitation" caused by a mis-matched, incorrectly aligned propeller on a boat ... the propulsion system will lose efficiency due to the strange flow of water over the topography of the propeller. The chemical action is not the same with too energetic agitation, and that difference will appear at the areas most affected by "cavitation" ... between the sprocket holes in the film.

 

[Soeren]

Ed thats pretty much what I was thinking. I couldn't explain it though.
Well put, and thanks.
Cheers Søren

 

[Graham Hansford]

I am wondering about the Fixer idea (it was not a freshly made batch of fixer). Could a fault with the fixer be the root of my problem. I would have thought that the symptoms would be a bit more uniform across the film - not straight lines.

Graham

 

[Donald Qualls]

Nearly exhausted fixer could produce streaks by way of the sprocket holes creating turbulence and increasing fixing in the turbulent regions compared to the underfixed condition of the rest of the film -- this would print as darker areas in line with the sprockets, but would look like milkiness that is clearer in line with the sprocket holes.

Solution, as suggested, is to refix -- and you will do no harm by refixing, within reason (don't just soak the film for an hour in rapid fixer, but another five minutes in fresh fixer won't hurt anything). If the film is already cut in strips, it's probably simplest to refix the strips in a tray, only enough at once that you can hang each strip individually after fixing and fully washing.

Meanwhile, keep the negatives out of light as much as possible; the unfixed halide can print out (produce silver without developer) and leave streaks you'll never get rid of, if exposed to excessive amounts of light.

 

[Soeren]

Hmm Learnt something new today. So the day ain't waisted after all
Søren

 

[Maine-iac]

Result: Most of the frames on BOTH reels are showing low contrast lines where the sprocket holes are, running across the images. If it was only one reel I would instantly point the finger at me - under filled, agitation etc - but it is very apparent on both.

I'm guessing that it might also be light leaks in the film cartridges. Did you load these yourself from a bulk roll? Or is it possible there's a small leak around the edges of your camera back?

Another tack: how old is the stock solution of your developer? I'm not familiar with that particular developer so don't know what its makeup is. But that should produce a uniform result rather than a sprocket-hold streak effect. Hmm.

Larry

 

[gainer]

That sounds a great deal like the result of "too vigorous agitation". There is a "proper term" for the effect, which escapes this caffeine-deficient brain at the moment. Think of the "cavitation" caused by a mis-matched, incorrectly aligned propeller on a boat ... the propulsion system will lose efficiency due to the strange flow of water over the topography of the propeller. The chemical action is not the same with too energetic agitation, and that difference will appear at the areas most affected by "cavitation" ... between the sprocket holes in the film.

Have you ever run into the problem of too much agitation? I never have in 65 years of what you call excessive agitation. The only time I ran into the problem we have here is from stand development. I have done everything that should cause such problems, including dancing a fine jig with the tank as partner. Turbulent flow is not going to cause this problem. It might be caused by laminar flow, but the pattern described would be hard to get if you tried. It would be interesting to find a way to test these theories of too much and too little agitation. A glass or clear plastic container big enough to hold a reel or two, some water and some food coloring might do the job. With the water still, add a few drops of coloring and see how lond it takes to diffuse. Start over and see how long it takes to spread to uniformity with each of several agitation schemes.

 

[Lee Shively]

Check the fixer. It could be exhausted.

 

[Ed Sukach]

I have seen that effect on my own film, but never worried much about it, the area between sprocket holes not holding much interest for me. I have seen written accounts of it ... I'll give you references if need be ... but have mercy - I'm working with grey card problems at the moment.

Could you have agitated the squat out of film, without adverse effects? Most probably. There is NO direct one-on-one inevitable reaction. Put the developing tank in a blender if that tickles your fancy ....

I HAVE seen these cavitation densities in violently agitated film, with ME doing the agitation.

.... !!! Wait ... 65? Sixty-five years?

 

[Will S]

It seems to me from the description that the problem is bromide drag from insufficient agitation, but it is hard to know without seeing it. If you get streaks from areas of dense highlights in addition to the surging through the sprocket holes, then I would think it likely to be bromide drag and not a problem with the fixer.

Normal agitation (I have always read) is 30 seconds up front then 5 every minute thereafter. But that initial 30 seconds seems to be very important to prevent bromide drag. I mostly do semi-stand and even then I do 60 seconds up front or sometimes 90 depending on the developer/film.

Let us know if re-fixing it works. Hopefully it will, but I bet it was an agitation issue.

Good luck,

Will

 

[psvensson]

I'm with maine-iac: sounds more like a light leak than agitation effects. BTW, it's a good idea to agitate the first 30 seconds of development.

 

[gainer]

Yeah, man, my 78th birthday will be celebrated by all the French people this year, though they will think it is Bastille Day.

 

[Tom Hoskinson]

Does that mean you didn't begin agitating until you were 13?

 

[gainer]

Does that mean you didn't begin agitating until you were 13?

It was about that time. Before that I was getting into trouble with the screwdriver my father gave me. I was a lot better at taking things apart than at putting them back together. I think it was the fact that I took his box camera apart that got me the stuff to start dunking film. My Dad believed in attacking both ends of a problem. He left no stern untoned, as the saying goes. Isaac Stern used to say he left no tone unsterned. But I ramble.