new to forum, could please use some help

[redyellowgreen]

hello apug community. i shoot 35mm b&w and develop my film in my kitchen. ive recently begun experiencing some issues with my process. i understand that certain results may be attributed to things i need to fix, but am not sure what each result indicates. here is a negative (trix 400, d76 at 68 degrees, 1 min presoak, 10min dev, 1 minute wash, 1 minute stop, 5 minute fix, 15 minute wash) that has it all...all my woes; spotting (fixer?) underdeveloped blacks (agitation? or film touching in reel?), and my largest nemesis currently aka fogging(?) around sprocket holes (light leak from changing tent or tank?). the fogging isn't specific to film shot with one camera.

i could use more experienced eyes with this. my fixer is relatively fresh. i have about 32 ounces of fixer (my tank takes 22 at a time) and I've developed about 8 rolls with it so far. any advice, questions, thoughts, are appreciated.

thank you!

 

[frank]

I see 2 problems in the pic you posted above: under exposure by the camera resulting in those dull detail-less shadows, and developing surge marks around the sprocket holes, maybe due to insufficient agitation in the developer.

 

[Hatchetman]

I agree with frank. Underexposed and improper agitation. Maybe a couple of "air bells" in there too. I assume this is fresh film?

 

[Xmas]

Refix and rewash if the 'surge marks' magically dissappear...

 

[Sirius Glass]

I see 2 problems in the pic you posted above: under exposure by the camera resulting in those dull detail-less shadows, and developing surge marks around the sprocket holes, maybe due to insufficient agitation in the developer.

I agree with frank. Underexposed and improper agitation. Maybe a couple of "air bells" in there too. I assume this is fresh film?

What they said.

 

[redyellowgreen]

thank you all so much. the film is fresh. a couple of weeks old at most, kept in a very cool closet.

the exposure issue is my fault, naturally, and thats a great thing! meaning, at least i know what or in this case who the problem is. and if agitation is the issue, then again, i am the problem and that is great!

if i may ask, so that i understand the chemical process clearly, what we are seeing around the sprocket holes is an indication that fresh developer is not reaching those darker portions of the film during agitation?

also, are air bells an indication that i didn't tap my tank well enough after agitating to release any air bubbles?

and, if my shadows are dull but i underexposed the shot, would i have a full black in the shadow if i were agitating correctly?

 

[jimjm]

Agree with all of the above. What's your agitation technique? In the past I've seen surge marks from over-agitation. You want to gently invert and rotate the tank at the same time. For TriX in D76 1:1, I agitate for the first 30 sec, then 2 inversions every 30 sec thereafter. Make sure to firmly tap the tank on the counter after agitation to loosen any air bubbles. You fixing time also sounds a bit short. For fresh Kodak fixer 5 mins is the minimum recommended time. I usually add about 10% to my fixing time for each roll I develop per batch of fixer. You can test your fixer to see how long it takes a scrap of undeveloped film to clear, then double that to get your proper fixing time. Don't worry about over-fixing your film, it's have to be in the fixer for a ridiculous time (30 min or more) to do any damage. You may also want to consider using hypo-clearing agent after fixing as this will reduce your washing time. Also, Photo-flo or some other wetting agent is highly advisable just before you hang the film to dry.

 

[Xmas]

Refix and rewash if the 'surge marks' magically dissappear...

http://www.ilfordphoto.com/aboutus/page.asp?n=31
If you tap your tank on the counter and it leaks...

 

[cliveh]

http://www.ilfordphoto.com/aboutus/page.asp?n=31
If you tap your tank on the counter and it leaks...

So here we have Ilford recommending water jackets to control temperature (there is a much easier MO). But what is far worse, the use of a squeegee!

 

[Xmas]

I always use a film squeegee if you clean it before each use it does not scratch.

Web rumours are frequently echoes...

 

[Sirius Glass]

I always use a film squeegee if you clean it before each use it does not scratch.

Web rumours are frequently echoes...

One can get even fewer scratches by not using a squeegee not using fingers. I do not use either and I do not have scratches nor streaks.

 

[RobC]

using a prewet requires you to use extended devlopment time from what is recommended unless the recommendation says to use that dev time if you use a prewet. Around 15% extra time. Personally I wouldn't use a pre-soak.

I would use stop imediately after dev. You should not need a wash between dev and fix assuming your fix is acid fix.

The sprocket hole surge marks are usually caused by tipping the tank over too slowly when you invert to agitate or by filling tank with the tank slanting. Put it on flat surface when you fill it.

The wash you gave between dev and fix will slow down fix so don't use that wash.

The scan looks very grainy. Not sure why. Could just be a poor scan so we can't really tell from it. Its better to put neg on light box or hold it up to a window and photograph it so we can see the neg and not the positive.

 

[redyellowgreen]

again, thank you all for the responses and advice.

jimjim, my agitation process seems a big issue here. when my plastic tank was new i experienced 0 leakage when turning the tank upside down during agitation. however, over the last few months i found a few drops of dev leak out during agitation. this prompted me to switch to a figure 8, out of worry i would leak too much dev over the course of full dev time, or more and more leak as my tank aged (?).

i was on my way to the store to buy a new tank when a friend suggested i fill the tank i have with a bit more dev instead, and turn upsidedown while agitating. ill begin doing that tomorrow.

robc, ill go to a stop right after dev and skip the rinse in between, thank you. and i do fill my tank with dev on a slight slant (i hold it over my sink) as i was taught to seek a smooth as possible submersion of the film when first adding dev. thinking on it now, this doesnt make sense as im agitating after filling anyway. duh!

i dont yet own a film sponge, squeegee, or cloth for wiping down my film after final rinse. ive seen someones film get nicely scratched using a squeegee. i think that scared me away from using anything. does anyone have a brand or product they recommend?

 

[Sirius Glass]

Oh yes, welcome to APUG

 

[jimjm]

again, thank you all for the responses and advice.

jimjim, my agitation process seems a big issue here. when my plastic tank was new i experienced 0 leakage when turning the tank upside down during agitation. however, over the last few months i found a few drops of dev leak out during agitation. this prompted me to switch to a figure 8, out of worry i would leak too much dev over the course of full dev time, or more and more leak as my tank aged (?).

i was on my way to the store to buy a new tank when a friend suggested i fill the tank i have with a bit more dev instead, and turn upsidedown while agitating. ill begin doing that tomorrow.

robc, ill go to a stop right after dev and skip the rinse in between, thank you. and i do fill my tank with dev on a slight slant (i hold it over my sink) as i was taught to seek a smooth as possible submersion of the film when first adding dev. thinking on it now, this doesnt make sense as im agitating after filling anyway. duh!

i dont yet own a film sponge, squeegee, or cloth for wiping down my film after final rinse. ive seen someones film get nicely scratched using a squeegee. i think that scared me away from using anything. does anyone have a brand or product they recommend?

If you have a tiny bit of leakage it's not a big deal. I use Paterson tanks and they've always seeped a little bit. Addiing a bit extra developer sounds like a good idea. Just make sure to rinse off your hands, especially before handling the film after the final rinse.

I stopped using a squeegee after the first time I scratched my film. After your final rinse, just fill the open tank with Photo-flo or other wetting agent and submerge the film for 30 sec. Don't shake or agitate, but just tap the tank on the counter to eliminate any air bubbles. It's important to use distilled water to mix your Photo-flo, so that any sediments from your regular tap water wash are removed and don't dry on your film (think water spots on a drinking glass.) Just hang the film in a dust-free area and don't disturb it for a few hours. It's tempting to look at your negatives when they're wet, but any dust raised by your movements or clothing will home in like cruise missles onto your film.

 

[Kevin Caulfield]

You need to "burp" a Paterson tank to stop leakage. It's a bit tricky to explain but essentially with the lid almost completely closed you press down on the centre of the lid with one hand whilst sealing the lid closed with the other hand.

Sent from my D6653 using Tapatalk

 

[frank]

I've never used a stop bath with film, just a half minute water wash.

 

[RobC]

I've never used a stop bath with film, just a half minute water wash.

I don't suppose you will change your ways but for the benefit of everyone...

Stop Bath
Compared to a water rinse, a dilute acidic stop bath will stop development very rapidly (15 sec) due to the pH change and rapid tunneling of protons compared, to a water bath where developer diffusion takes minutes (the basis of water bath development).
The acid stop minimizes developer oxidation in fixers with dissolved silver, which prevents soluble silver reduction and the formation of dichroic fog. Likewise, the pH change retards aerial oxidation of the developer and oxidation of fixer in the emulsion by radicals generated from the developer, which degrades fixer complexes to partially oxidized insoluble products which stain films and papers, and eventually cause fading and sulfiding. Also, acid helps to maintain the pH of the fixer in a region where it's stable, and where the hardeners are effective and don't precipitate.
In addition, the use of a stop bath rather than water reduces the osmotic shock and resultant swelling of the emulsion which is seen when emulsions with high solute concentrations are placed into water, and thereby may reduce grain clumping.
Michael Gudzinowicz

 

[cliveh]

I would use a stop bath if only to prolong the life of your fixer.

Rob (quote) - and rapid tunneling of protons compared, to a water bath

Is this not in the realm of quantum physics?

 

[bdial]

If you are using a 2 reel tank and processing 1 roll, are you also using an empty reel to keep the film's reel from sliding up and down?
If not, that sliding can be a cause of surge marks.

 

[redyellowgreen]

thanks sirius!

bdial, yes. when i dev one roll, always two reels in the tank.

kevin, i will most definitely try burping my tank thank you!

jimjim, ill take photoflo into consideration. i dont have much of a problem at all with water spots, and with care am able to remove any spots on negs with a soft cloth and not scratch them.

 

[RobC]

I would use a stop bath if only to prolong the life of your fixer.

Rob (quote) - and rapid tunneling of protons compared, to a water bath

Is this not in the realm of quantum physics?

All chemistry being bound to the laws of Physics, works at the quantum level. So what's your point.

 

[cliveh]

All chemistry being bound to the laws of Physics, works at the quantum level. So what's your point.

My point is that I have never encountered the description of tunneling with regards to a simple dev/stop/fix process. However, it sounds impressive. Did you make it up?

 

[Sirius Glass]

I've never used a stop bath with film, just a half minute water wash.

- 1

 

[RobC]

My point is that I have never encountered the description of tunneling with regards to a simple dev/stop/fix process. However, it sounds impressive. Did you make it up?

Well perhaps if you have never heard it before then you're not as well informed or smart as you think you are. This is illustrated by the fact that the quote has the authors name at the end of it but in your ignorance you have ignored that.