Negative diagnosys

The first two do kind of look like the tanks was under filled, or the reel rode up, but the second two don’t seem like it. What would cause the far right edge develop the same as a majority of the film, and there only be a band of under developed negative? I agree that the OP should run another roll with extra chemicals, and a rubber band to prevent the reel from riding up, but I’m trying to imagine what would cause the two Tri-X shots?

I'm at my school and I looked at all the Paterson tanks that we have... tall ones and short ones. Even in the taller tanks (hold two 35mm reels), I cannot see how a reel can ride up. I can see it happening...maybe... with a single 35mm reel in a tall tank. So, the "not enough solution" diagnosis is about all that we have to go on.

Andrew O'Neill said:

I'm at my school and I looked at all the Paterson tanks that we have... tall ones and short ones. Even in the taller tanks (hold two 35mm reels), I cannot see how a reel can ride up. I can see it happening...maybe... with a single 35mm reel in a tall tank. So, the "not enough solution" diagnosis is about all that we have to go on.

Click to expand...

In Paterson System 4 (both types) and similar tanks, make sure to *always* attach the white, circular plastic clip to the tank's central core and push it down to the top of the spiral, otherwise the spiral can ride up the core during processing, most likely when inverting the tank. Using excess chemicals can mitigate this problem to an extent.

I've had this problem myself and spoilt some otherwise good negs. I was rather annoyed at the time.

The first two are air bells that got stuck there. You need to really rap the tank on a surface so you dislodge them. If you invert when you agitate, then finish by whacking the tank. Edwal LFN can prevent these, but try it first. The last bottle I got wasn't so great and actually caused the problems it was supposed to solve.

The second two are insufficient developer. The edges were developed because developer can get trapped between the spiral and the film with surface tension so they continued to develop. You can clearly see the varied level of developer on the film when the spiral probably moved several times.

So you had two different problems...

Happens to everyone at some point. Live and learn.

Sorry for taking so long to write back. I didn't have much time until this evening and I wanted to write more than a couple of lines.

In answer to some of the replies I got:
I did run some other films through the camera since then and they were flawless.
Reels and tank were dry for sure when I developped.
You have a good eye Mick! It is Hverfjall volcano. Windy indeed!
I do rap the tank after each agitation cycle but of course it's possible that I forgot once and given that I used minimal agitation (10 sec each 3 minutes) I guess that it's less forgiving if bubbles are stuck on the film.
I use the "Paterson Super System 4" but I don't have any of those spiral stops / spring collars.
I use 500ml of chemistry with one reel of 120 film. It fully covers the reel, but only by a couple milimeter.
Never happened before but I can't be sure the reel didn't ride up the column. I just did a test and when I agitate like crazy with the intent of having the reel move on the column it does happen. When I agitate with more energy than usual but within reason, it doesn't happen. Then again, it's a 2 minutes test with water.

I tend to agree and conclude that I had a different problem on each of those two rolls. Bubbles for the T-Max and not fully submersed film for the Tri-X. Maybe a bit more liquid than usual leaked from the tank when agitating (I do use the tank inversion method). Maybe the reel moved. Maybe both. I will change two things to try prevent this from happening again. I will use 550ml (instead of 500ml) for each roll of 120 and will get large rubber o-rings to use as stoppers on the columns. I assume that having the liquid level a bit higher could also help with the bubble problem.

Thanks to everyone for the assistance! This forum is always such a great ressource full of helpfull people. It's cool to be able to get so many replies so quickly!
Dominique

Hverfjall volcano...

Forgot to mention that I switched from stainless steel tanks and reels to the Paterson system a few months ago because I had badly loaded films on two occasions. I found loading film with SS was very inconvenient. However the problem we discusses in this thread was of course a non issue with these. Different systems, different problems. Still I don't regret adopting the plastic reels.

^^^ I always found stainless steel reels easier to load.

The originator of the thread stated he assumed it was a light leak. It is very definitely not a light leak otherwise the negative light band would be dark or even black. Apart from the majority pof suggestions about insufficient developer in the tank, the cause may be that the film was incorrectly loaded or part of the film was buckled and a reduced amount of developer reached the film

Yep, that is Hverfjall alright. Last year, June the seventh to be precise, we walked the 3.2km path around the top, light snow was happening and the wind was so bad that when I changed film (Nikon body) my wife literally had to hold onto me to stop me being blown off my feet. It was one of the hardest film chamges I have ever done; fun though.

Spent a couple of months in Iceland, one of the best places in the world for landscape photography.

That is a very good shot.

Glad you seemed to have figured out your problem(s).

Mick.

Thanks for getting back... I think you could make a spacer, possibly by cutting a plastic film can, that would absolutely prevent the reel from sliding up when it’s set for a single 120 roll. I wouldn’t trust O rings (I had one of the original clips and it didn’t prevent slide-up).

If you do that then your idea of a little more developer would probably work. I don’t think forgetting to rap a few times would lead to bubble marks... Unless you forget to rap the first few agitations when the film is still dry.

I agree the o-ring won't be as bullet proof as the plastic spacer but it's also not as convenient. There are quite a few possible combinations in the different tank sizes with different numbers of 135 and 120 films with length of spacer having to vary with each of these combinations. I just did a test. Three times without the o-ring I agitated like crazy with water and each time the reel moved. Did the same three times with the o-ring and the reel didn't move (in fact it did move by 1mm because there is a play but that's of no consequence). Will continue with the o-ring and if this situation happens again then I will switch to the spacers.

If your Patterson has space for two reels, a second unloaded reel above the one with film will prevent the lower reel from riding up.

voceumana said:

If your Patterson has space for two reels, a second unloaded reel above the one with film will prevent the lower reel from riding up.

Click to expand...

That’s the issue with 120, in the smaller Paterson, only one fits. It can slide up. And the retainer clip can slide up with it.