Is this foam?

[RattyMouse]

Yesterday I developed a roll of Neopan 400 in HC-110. Scanning this film this morning I see some very strange marks on most of the images on this roll. Many, many white dots, almost exclusively along the edges of the film. I dont know what to think of these as I've never seen this before. Below is an example.

The only guess I can make about what caused this is that it might be foam bubbles sticking to the film. I processed as normal and hit the developing tank several times on sink after each inversion as well as giving a few palm slaps too. There was a lot of foam in the tank during the development cycle. Nothing new there, I almost always have heavy foam when developing, but I never have seen marks like this before.

Anyone want to speculate what caused this?

*

• RattyMouse
• Apr 5, 2016

 

[Ian Grant]

That's not foam. It looks like some type of contamination.

Ian

 

[RattyMouse]

That's not foam. It looks like some type of contamination.

Ian

Oh god... I dont know what is going on with my film developing these days.

 

[Ian Grant]

There's a streak from each dot, trying to guess what's causing them is near impossible. It's very strange as the dots are almost consistently spaced although the line's not straight. Give your tank and reels a good wash in warm water.

Ian

 

[RattyMouse]

There's a streak from each dot, trying to guess what's causing them is near impossible. It's very strange as the dots are almost consistently spaced although the line's not straight. Give your tank and reels a good wash in warm water.

Ian

I'll use a different reel next time. That's the oldest part of yesterday's equipment and if there is a problem, I bet it's that.

I should have known that these marks are not foam. I always have huge amounts of foam in my tank and never have seen this before.

 

[jvo]

only on one roll? you alluded to "other development" problems... are they related?

jvo

 

[Jim Jones]

I've seen somewhat similar marks due to static electricity when advancing or rewinding film in very low humidity.

 

[RattyMouse]

only on one roll? you alluded to "other development" problems... are they related?

jvo

They might be related. I dont know.

 

[Sal Santamaura]

Two points:

• Unless you're intentionally keeping non-subscribers from seeing your images, posting them in the regular gallery instead of attaching them directly in technical threads limits those who might evaluate your problems. Opening the thread results in a "The following error occurred:You do not have permission to view this page or perform this action. This area is restricted to subscribers." message.
  
• Kodak and Ilford may have suffered problems with 120 backing paper, but all your other post-developing negative defects lately seem to have been associated with Fuji film. Is it possible that Fuji isn't perfect either?

 

[RattyMouse]

Two points:

• Unless you're intentionally keeping non-subscribers from seeing your images, posting them in the regular gallery instead of attaching them directly in technical threads limits those who might evaluate your problems. Opening the thread results in a "The following error occurred:You do not have permission to view this page or perform this action. This area is restricted to subscribers." message.
  
• Kodak and Ilford may have suffered problems with 120 backing paper, but all your other post-developing negative defects lately seem to have been associated with Fuji film. Is it possible that Fuji isn't perfect either?

Point 1- Yeah, using the gallery had the unintended effect of non subscribers not seeing my sample image.
Point 2- Irrelevant.

 

[Sal Santamaura]

...Point 2- Irrelevant.

How do you know?

 

[RattyMouse]

How do you know?

I'm playing the odds. It's far more likely that I'm doing something to cause this problem.

 

[Kirks518]

What it looks like to me, as I have had similar, are bubbles from photoflo (or similar wetting agent) that were left behind after squeegeeing (with a squeegee or fingers). Should come off pretty easy.

 

[RattyMouse]

What it looks like to me, as I have had similar, are bubbles from photoflo (or similar wetting agent) that were left behind after squeegeeing (with a squeegee or fingers). Should come off pretty easy.

Thanks for your reply. I dont squeegee my film after hanging it to try, but I do use photo flo.

I'll see if it comes off next time i sit down with my scanner.

 

[Nige]

looking at the negative should reveal if it's scum on the surface (I'm doubtful about that) which can be cleaned off or you've got a light leak somewhere (dots will be black on negs). I've had 'bubbly developer' marks along the edges of 120 film and it don't look like that.

 

[ColColt]

Take a little film cleaner on a cotton ball and see if it comes off.

 

[jvo]

although they are not in a straight line, i keep feeling like it's some sort of "mechanical" malfunction. it seems to symmetrical in size and to numerous to be chemical, unless some substance, chemical, glue, etc. ran across it.

I guess (knock on wood), i've been LUCKY enough not to have to many errors so i'm guessing here - hopefully you find out what happened, or it never happens again!

jvo