Negatives with flow marks? Actual cause unknown.

[DannL]

Here is an example of a 120 frame that was developed by hand in a JOBO 1520 Unitank, Ilford Delta 100, D-76, 8 minutes, Kodak Rapid fixer. The first 4 frames to go onto the reel (the inside most frames) all have these marks to some degree. These marks are not present between frames and all the other frames on the same roll turned out perfectly fine. After many years of developing I always fine new and interesting ways to cause myself grief. Your thoughts on the cause of this problem would be appreciated. Dann

Less noticable but present are the same marks in the sky area.

 

[CBG]

Those look like some sort of lightstruck areas to me, but I'm not sure. I'd first look at any possible issue in the camera since they are confined to the frames.

C

 

[Jim Noel]

Are they tension marks from too much tension in the film transport of the camera?

 

[DannL]

Those look like some sort of lightstruck areas to me, but I'm not sure. I'd first look at any possible issue in the camera since they are confined to the frames.

C

That also was a first thought, but I have never seen a light leak take a path other than a straight line.

Are they tension marks from too much tension in the film transport of the camera?

This is from a Salyut (Salut) Hasselblad copy. I have run quite a few rolls through this unit. The transport pulls the film from the bottom spool to the top spool (vertically). I finished another roll today (same camera, same 120 back and insert, same film batch). I held the camera in full sun for an extended period, while rolling it over and over (every exposure) with the intent of forcing a light leak should one exist. After development, all 12 (13) frames on this roll showed no defects as mentioned above. I wonder if this was just an anomoly in the previous roll only.

 

[Poohblah]

This is from a Salyut (Salut) Hasselblad copy. I have run quite a few rolls through this unit. The transport pulls the film from the bottom spool to the top spool (vertically). I finished another roll today (same camera, same 120 back and insert, same film batch). I held the camera in full sun for an extended period, while rolling it over and over (every exposure) with the intent of forcing a light leak should one exist. After develoment all 12 (13) frames on this roll showed no defects as mentioned above. I wonder if this was just an anomoly in the previous roll only.

my thought is that you inserted the leader into the take-up spool crookedly causing the first few frames to have tension marks, but that is just a wild guess, and it doesn't really make too much sense since this is 120 film and not 35mm. perhaps there was an issue with how the film was taped to the paper backing?

 

[gr82bart]

One more ... (there was a url link here which no longer exists)

Regards, Art.

 

[Kevin Kehler]

I would agree with Art, although it is possible to be static discharge but not usually on multiple locations without you feeling it as you loaded the reel.

 

[DannL]

I never considered the possibility that aliens would disguise themselves as ducks. I supposed they were transmitting a high power sinusoidal radio frequency wave to their mother ship and the film pick up the transmission. It's the only thing that makes sense. That's scary.

 

[Poohblah]

I never considered the possibility that aliens would disguise themselves as ducks. I supposed they were transmitting a high power sinusoidal radio frequency wave to their mother ship and the film pick up the transmission. It's the only thing that makes sense. That's scary.

what else would aliens disguise themselves as? we kill all the whales and tigers, butterflies are too small to house transmission equipment, and monkeys live only in certain parts of the world. after all, the Far Side can't be that far from the truth!