What he said, also the black line can be from a squeegee blade and you may have some precipitation forming in your fix which causes silver crystals to adhere to the film and is well nigh impossible to remove. Is it fresh or do you share chems with anyone else ?Hi DJ, I think there are three sources of the spots:
1. Tiny bubbles on the film during development. Try thumping the film can on the counter to dislodge bubble when you start the pre-wash and the developer phases. These may be the perfectly round and white spots.
2. Flecks of dirt or crud in your water. Use fresh distilled water for all chemicals. These may be the irregular flecks.
3. Dust that settles on the wet film when drying. More irregular flecks. Use a clean bag or drying cabinet. Most homes are full of lint, dust, crud, hair, pollen, dandruff, and more.
The dark line: were these examples all vertical format compositions from a focal plane camera (as opposed to leaf shutter)? If so, then the line may be from the focal plane curtains not sealing properly before after exposure.
Good luck. We all go through this type of stuff occasionally.
Hi DJ, I think there are three sources of the spots:
1. Tiny bubbles on the film during development. Try thumping the film can on the counter to dislodge bubble when you start the pre-wash and the developer phases. These may be the perfectly round and white spots.
2. Flecks of dirt or crud in your water. Use fresh distilled water for all chemicals. These may be the irregular flecks.
3. Dust that settles on the wet film when drying. More irregular flecks. Use a clean bag or drying cabinet. Most homes are full of lint, dust, crud, hair, pollen, dandruff, and more.
The dark line: were these examples all vertical format compositions from a focal plane camera (as opposed to leaf shutter)? If so, then the line may be from the focal plane curtains not sealing properly before after exposure.
Good luck. We all go through this type of stuff occasionally.
What he said, also the black line can be from a squeegee blade and you may have some precipitation forming in your fix which causes silver crystals to adhere to the film and is well nigh impossible to remove. Is it fresh or do you share chems with anyone else ?
White spots/specks: dust/crud on your film. Usual causes (I repeat some of the tings already said above):
* Dust settling onto film as it dries
* Dirt in wash water
* Specks of metallic silver in fixer becoming embedded into emulsion (filter fixer before re-use or mix fresh)
* Dust on film or scanner platen during digitization
Dark band:
* Usually associated with a scanner issue; e.g. on a flatbed scanner, contamination of the calibration area, or on the strip light source or sensor.
* Fluid dynamics during rotary processing; i.e. laminar flow instead of turbulent flow. Change rotation speed, tap tank to dislodge air bubbles.
* Film manufacturing defect (rare, but it happens)
It's not a squeegee band; those generally show up as sharp lines, somewhat wavy, and white instead of black on the positive.
Check the film itself to see if it is in fact an area of reduced density. If it's not visible on the film itself, it's a scanning artefact.
BTW: your film looks underexposed and possibly also underdeveloped judging by these scans.
Sounds like you found the culprit then. Ditch the exhausted fixer and replace with fresh in a pristine bottle. Just finish off with a final rinse in Photoflow after washing, NO SQUEEGEE, and vigorously shake the drips off before removing from the reel to hang up in a dust free environment (I use a shower cubicle). FWIW, look into using the Ilford washing method. Quick and very effective. Good luck.Yeah i do use a squeege before i hang my negatives.
i bought the fixer 1 month ago and i just open the bottle. i just noticed that the liquid inside is not very clean and theres also stuff on the botom. the bottle expires in one month.
The negative looks rather thin, mostly due to underexposure. Then again, exposure is also a bit of a matter of taste, but personally, I like a bit (much) more shadow detail. Development looks OK.
Do you use a jobo/rotation processor? I've had a similar dark/low density band show up on some films as well when using one. It went away when I (1) developed the old-fashioned manual way using a paterson tank and (2) when I used a different developer (I got the problem with Pyrocat but it didn't manifest itself with XTOL for some odd reason). It's an elusive issue and I thought it was a film manufacturing defect until I had the same problem emerge with an entirely different film stock. Oddly the dark band was always in exactly the same place, suggesting it's associated with the fluid dynamics and the shape of the development reels.
Edit: BTW, I reported this thread with the question to move it to the B&W forum as this is not really about color. Don't freak out if your thread disappears in the color forum!
Another moderator moved the thread to the B&W forum, and I removed the word "scan" from the title, since this is a film processing issue, not a scanning issue, which would have put it into the hybrid scanning forum.
Thin negatives can point towards insufficient exposure or insufficient development, or both. Going by the photograph in post #7, I would say that development is OK, but the images are underexposed.No i do it with the patterson tank by hand. so when the negative looks thin i should develop it for longer?
The messy problems with B&W combined with the very messy/sulfured-out fixer concentrate implies that it's worthwhile trying some fresh fixer first.I have the Problem with the Stripe with color and black and white. the really messy picture just with black and white.
Thin negatives can point towards insufficient exposure or insufficient development, or both. Going by the photograph in post #7, I would say that development is OK, but the images are underexposed.
This, of course, is not related to the problem with the dark band.
The messy problems with B&W combined with the very messy/sulfured-out fixer concentrate implies that it's worthwhile trying some fresh fixer first.
The dark band is a challenging problem. It doesn't look like squeegee damage to me; as I said before, squeegees tend to leave sharply defined scratches on the film that show up as white lines, usually not perfectly straight, on scans and prints. This is a softer, perfectly straight band that shows up as dark on the positive.
Sounds good. BTW, nothing indicates to me that your camera needs a CLA. If images come out underexposed, it's in 99.9% of the cases a problem with actually using the light meter/camera, and not a defective piece of equipment. The meter in the M6 is of a quasi-spot type (Canon calls this 'partial' metering) and in the kind of shots you have posted here, would easily be thrown off by reflections on shiny objects or light/white parts of the scene. It's not a fault of the camera; it's a matter of using it with an understanding of how it works and what its limitations are.I just ordered new Fixer and will try it with that again.
Also i just sent my camera to Leica for a CLA.
Sounds good. BTW, nothing indicates to me that your camera needs a CLA. If images come out underexposed, it's in 99.9% of the cases a problem with actually using the light meter/camera, and not a defective piece of equipment. The meter in the M6 is of a quasi-spot type (Canon calls this 'partial' metering) and in the kind of shots you have posted here, would easily be thrown off by reflections on shiny objects or light/white parts of the scene. It's not a fault of the camera; it's a matter of using it with an understanding of how it works and what its limitations are.
Yeah, either of those approaches, whichever would work in a particular given situation:different readings and then somewhere in the middle? or metering the ground?
Yeah, either of those approaches, whichever would work in a particular given situation:
* Meter some extremes and then average them, placing emphasis on the important shadows (when using negative film)
* Meter an important/crucial shadow area and base the exposure entirely on it, e.g. by underexposing that area -1/2 or -1.
* Choose a surface that seems to represent 'average'/'18% grey' and meter that. Out of the 3 options, this one is my least favorite as I find I tend to choose too light areas as 'grey'. It's a subjective thing/failure on my part.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?