Neg anomalies help please!

[Andrew Moxom]

I managed to get some time in the darkroom last night to do some printing. I was jazzed about this neg at first, then I saw some anomalies.... This is a scan of the print..... Seems I fix one problem with my 120 film, now I have problems with sheet film!!! Look at the top left corner. There are what looks to be tiny black specks surrounded by little halos. I saw this once before on the same batch in pyrocat and thought maybe the P/Cat was going bad?? This was souped in HC-110 in a uni-roller tank! Something else is amiss somewhere. I checked the neg, and it's definitely on there, not the paper. Fresh chemistry, clean tanks, not sure what this is.. It's Arista Edu Ultra Film (FOMA) and I know thy have had some consistency problems in the past, but being they are ISO 9001 certified, you would think they had their crap together. I'm at a loss... Time to reshoot I feel!

 

[ricksplace]

I had a very similar result with Arista edu ultra (Foma) 100 in 120. It was an emulsion fault. Freestyle replaced the entire 20 rolls of the same lot #. This was about three years ago. I use a lot of Foma 100 film in 120 and have had no further problems.
Rick.

 

[Andrew Moxom]

The really wierd thing is that often only one neg will exhibit the problems, while the rest of the negs in teh same tank do not.... Even of thesame subject. Will take this up with Arista/Freestyle.

 

[Bob Carnie]

Could this not be dust in the specific holder?

 

[Andrew Moxom]

Could be I suppose Bob, but I am skeptical of that as one neg out of 4 has it, the others in the same tank don't...

 

[Nicholas Lindan]

Looks like emulsion defects. With Foma some should be expected.

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

I've never used Foma films other than under the Arista.EDU Ultra OEM brand. Often times with roll films I see anomalies that don't show up with Ilford, Kodak, and Fuji emulsions. I wonder if the OEM stuff is exactly the same as what Foma puts out under their own brand. How else do they get to the price they get to? The stuff is so cheap it's ridiculous.
I hear of less defects with Foma branded films than Arista branded ones.

I don't know if that helps. It's such a pain in the rear when this sort of thing happens. A films that could be made to look real similar to the Arista is probably Ilford FP4+. May I suggest using some of that? It's awesome film, albeit expensive. Same speed, roughly.

I'm so sorry you're running into yet more emulsion defects. It's a real pity. I still think the print looks awesome. I actually don't mind the defects. Personally I would probably print it pretty grainy with a lith developer. Fomabrom comes to mind...

- Thomas

 

[wildbill]

Andrew, the good news is that it'll only happen on your keepers

 

[Kirk Keyes]

It's Arista Edu Ultra Film (FOMA) and I know thy have had some consistency problems in the past, but being they are ISO 9001 certified, you would think they had their crap together. I'm at a loss... Time to reshoot I feel!

Time to use a film from a top of the line manufacturer I feel...

ISO 9000 certifications doesn't mean they produce perfect product. It means they have a system of procedures in place that describes the way they do their business.

Some of the requirements in ISO 9001 include:

• Having a written set of procedures that cover all key processes in the business;
  
• They monitoring processes to ensure they are effective;
  
• They keeping adequate records;
  
• THey are checking output for defects, with appropriate and corrective action when defects are found;
  
• They regularly review individual processes and their quality system for effectiveness; and
  
• They try to facilitate continual improvement

At least, that's the basics of ISO 9000.

Still doesn't mean that if your level of technology or manufacturing capability precludes you from making top of the line quality that you will get top of the line quality...

 

[Kirk Keyes]

It's awesome film, albeit expensive.

FP4+ is an awesome film. And it's not expensive when you have to scrap your good photos because the cheap film had a defect. Where's the value in that?

 

[Jon Shiu]

Hi, just a tip: you can use a diffusion material in printing, like crinkled cellophane, to clear up unsightly specks.

Jon

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

You're right, of course. It's more of an initial cost thing, where people like me, on a shoestring budget - $10 or $20 more for a pack of 4x5 film makes a big difference. That's (today anyway) a week's worth of gas, or four gallons of milk.
Assuming a healthy bank account, though, you're absolutely right. The Ilford is better value.

- Thomas

FP4+ is an awesome film. And it's not expensive when you have to scrap your good photos because the cheap film had a defect. Where's the value in that?

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

That's really good advice! Since that area of the print is out of focus anyway... I use parchment paper and keep it moving during the exposure so the texture of the paper doesn't get onto the print.

- Thomas

Hi, just a tip: you can use a diffusion material in printing, like crinkled cellophane, to clear up unsightly specks.

Jon

 

[ishutteratthethought]

Andrew, i had this same problem with a recent development of 4 x 5 negs in tanks. i wondered if it is in the water but then why was it not on every sheet? I developed 6 sheets in one tank. Delta 100, new stock with D-76 mixed with non filtered water. 2 of them had this problem. i concur with your frustration. the only similarities is that we both live in minnesota......hmm
steve

 

[Photo Engineer]

Andrew;

I don't want to be an engineer you can argue with. I really don't know what the spots are, but they are dark on the print with white halos barely at the resolution I can see. That means they are clear on the film and surrounded with darker halos.

If it were the reverse, I would say that it was pepper grain, a common emulsion defect, but the way it appears it looks like something caused by foam in the developer. The developer is held back from an area, but concentrates at the edges of the foam causing dark rings with lighter centers on the negative.

But, without inspecting them closely it is hard to tell.

PE

 

[menelajas]

I have similar problems with cheap Era sheet film (4x5), which I bough for tests. But when I was using Foma creative 200 (as 125 ISO) every was ok (Foma branded film).

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

Is it paranoid to think that whatever film Foma rejected for their Foma branded film gets labeled as Arista.EDU Ultra? I can not remember a single instance where I heard of problems with Foma branded Foma films, only OEM versions. If they have the processes necessary to be ISO9001 certified, it's likely they have quality control that at least somewhat reflects earning that certificate.
The Arista.EDU Ultra films are, after all, geared towards students - perhaps they think they are not as critical of "small" film anomalies such as these? Who knows?!
I think I'm paranoid, but I can't shake that thought.
- Thomas

 

[Andrew Moxom]

I wonder if the film under the FOMA brand has had all the checks and scrutiny before it's packaged,a nd the 'seconds' are rebadged for use as Arista or other brand names? Could be... Has anyone had these issues with regular FOMA branded films or is it just their re-labeled stuff? While I am not cheap by nature, I try to keep my costs down with materials where I can. I like the ARista film very much if it were not for this dang issue. Price point wise, it is the best value, and has given me some good images. That said, I pay the price in the end by having to reshoot, and more importantly spend more of my time. I may try diffusion material next time I try to print it... Thanks for all the suggestions...

 

[MrMushroomMan]

I've never had trouble with either foma or arista.edu films, the only problems were from user error.

 

[msdemanche]

I agree with both thomas and kirk, when my students start complaining about anomalies I remind them you get what you pay for. I do not know how much you are out shooting, but i really always think in terms of my time and creative investments first, and i find using reliable stuff means that i have made good investments. For the printing, i have used both parchment and wax paper for diffusion.
michel

 

[Nicholas Lindan]

Cynically, one can say that with ISO9000 a company has the procedures in place to consistently produce bad product.

 

[PVia]

Andrew, please post again to let us know what Freestyle says...

 

[Photo Engineer]

I've been thinking about my post (#15) and what has been bothering me is the size of the specks. They are awfully small for being bubbles or foam. I finally thought of a rather different explanation.

During coating, if you have fine bubbles in the emulsion, I mean really fine, or if the surfactant is incorrect, then the emulsion pulls apart in circular dots with raised edges. This results in a low density center and a higher density ring on the negative and is the result of a coating defect.

Just another possible explanation that I thought of after the fact and thinking about it through lunch.

PE

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

Nicholas, that's hilarious!

That's good. Happy Thanksgiving.

- Thomas

Cynically, one can say that with ISO9000 a company has the procedures in place to consistently produce bad product.

 

[wogster]

I had a very similar result with Arista edu ultra (Foma) 100 in 120. It was an emulsion fault. Freestyle replaced the entire 20 rolls of the same lot #. This was about three years ago. I use a lot of Foma 100 film in 120 and have had no further problems.
Rick.

Where do you get Foma in Canada, Henrys doesn't have it and I would like to try a couple of rollls?