Odd issue with TriX

Paul Howell

Subscriber
Joined
Dec 23, 2004
Messages
9,735
Location
Scottsdale Az
Format
Multi Format
I shoot Tmax 400 and Forma 400, my local camera store was out of Tmax 400, I bought a couple of rolls of Trix. I have not shot Trix in years, I shot the one roll with a Chinon AF point and shoot 35F, the other in a Minolta 700. Both rolls first 8 frames are good, then next 8 with just a hint of an image, then remainder roll are fine. Anyone else have any issues with Trix.
 

pentaxuser

Member
Joined
May 9, 2005
Messages
20,014
Location
Daventry, No
Format
35mm
Paul, I cannot offer any reasons that fit your description of what happened but it's an intriguing problem. Two different cameras with the exact same fault in the exact same number of frames? Difficult to believe that 2 rolls of the same type of film would have the same manufacturing defect in exactly the same place. If the films are both OK then it's almost equally difficult to believe that there is the same defect in 2 different cameras that is triggered at the same point in a film

A real "head scratcher" of a problem. I look forward to others' potential problem(s) identification(s) that reconcile the above facts

pentaxuser
 

albada

Subscriber
Joined
Apr 10, 2008
Messages
2,175
Location
Escondido, C
Format
35mm RF
Perhaps this was caused by a problem in a developing machine. Were these two rolls developed in some kind of machine?
 
OP
OP

Paul Howell

Subscriber
Joined
Dec 23, 2004
Messages
9,735
Location
Scottsdale Az
Format
Multi Format
The cameras did not start on the same frame, I must have wound the Minolta an extra frame, first frame is 2, the Chinon has auto adavnce, it started at frame 1. As the negative are now dry it looks like I have issues with 8 frames on the Chinon and 10 with the Minolta, I can see that the frames on each have a bit of image on the edge. The Minolta has a focal plane shutter which could account for the fade if the curtains were sticking, but the Chinon has a leaf shutter.

I used Paterson tank and reels. I a have a roll of Tmax 400 and 2 rolls of Finess 400 to develop, all three were shot with a different camera, a Pentax SF1N, Sigma SA7, and Minolta 9.
 

MattKing

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
53,249
Location
Delta, BC Canada
Format
Medium Format
Were they developed at the same time in the same tank?
 

gone

Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2009
Messages
5,504
Location
gone
Format
Medium Format
This is only a guess, but w/o further facts, it sounds like you got a bad batch of film. I know, practically unheard of w/ Tri-X, but what else could it be from 2 different cameras?
 

MattKing

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
53,249
Location
Delta, BC Canada
Format
Medium Format
May we see the negatives themselves, including the rebates, with a bit of the good frames at the end, for comparison?
 
OP
OP

Paul Howell

Subscriber
Joined
Dec 23, 2004
Messages
9,735
Location
Scottsdale Az
Format
Multi Format
It will take a couple of days, I don't have a working negative scanner, but I will print a contact sheet that I can scan and post as positives .
 

MattKing

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
53,249
Location
Delta, BC Canada
Format
Medium Format
I just hold the negatives up in front of a window or blank computer screen and take a cel phone or digital camera shot. That may or may not be an option for you.
A negative image is probably better. But if you can only provide a contact sheet...
 

Sirius Glass

Subscriber
Joined
Jan 18, 2007
Messages
50,411
Location
Southern California
Format
Multi Format
bdial said:
Do the two rolls have the same emulsion number?
Click to expand...

I would not expect Tmax 400 and Forma 400 to have the same emulsion number.
 

MattKing

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
53,249
Location
Delta, BC Canada
Format
Medium Format

reddesert

Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2019
Messages
2,430
Location
SAZ
Format
Hybrid
Possibly the film jumped a turn while loading onto the reel and you had several frames' worth of overlap that didn't touch developer, except where some leaked in at the edges? This seems a bit unlikely as that also often results in incomplete fixation. But more possible than a manufacturing issue that only affects part of a roll of film and still allows frame numbers and a trace of the image to show up.
 

koraks

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Nov 29, 2018
Messages
23,427
Location
Europe
Format
Multi Format
momus said:
it sounds like you got a bad batch of film
Click to expand...

Nah...that's right at the bottom of the list of possibilities. This is some kind of operator error, but the question is what exactly. Let's wait for the examples of the problem, those will give some clues I'm sure.
 

Tel

Subscriber
Joined
May 9, 2011
Messages
977
Location
New Jersey
Format
Multi Format
The probability that two cameras exhibited the same problem more or less in sync with each other is almost nil. And the likelihood that two separate rolls would be damaged in sync with each other at the Kodak factory is also slim. As the OP seems to be saying that both rolls were developed in one tank at the same time, that's where the problem most likely was. It'll be interesting to see the negs and especially the rebates
 

Don_ih

Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2021
Messages
7,857
Location
Ontario
Format
35mm RF
If it is due to lack of developer on those parts of the film, you would expect, between two rolls, that the impact would be on up to 4 partial frames - the same if there is a defect with the film itself. If the defect is exclusive to full frames, the problem is likely with exposure - either the camera or the photographer.
 

GregY

Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2005
Messages
3,501
Location
Alberta
Format
Large Format
Agreed..... likely a developing problem...... I've never had QC issues from Kodak film.....
 

pentaxuser

Member
Joined
May 9, 2005
Messages
20,014
Location
Daventry, No
Format
35mm
GregY said:
Agreed..... likely a developing problem...... I've never had QC issues from Kodak film.....
Click to expand...

What kind of developing problem can you get with first X frames OK then Y frames just a hint of an image and then Z frames at the end OK? Not a challenge to your statement but a genuine desire to find out what kind of a problem in development can cause this?

Thanks

pentaxuser
 

MattKing

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
53,249
Location
Delta, BC Canada
Format
Medium Format

Film sticking to itself during the development stage, and then releasing thereafter, resulting in the undeveloped portion being fixed to blank.
It is hard to make this happen, but not impossible.
 

Tel

Subscriber
Joined
May 9, 2011
Messages
977
Location
New Jersey
Format
Multi Format
Uneven distribution (agitation problem) exhaustion, contamination in the developing process are all possible. Far more likely than a manufacturing fault. As users, we tend to think of a roll of film as a stand-alone product, which it isn't. A roll is just a tiny slice off a huge sheet of film; any defect would likely affect hundreds of rolls rather than one or two. If you take another look at the recent youtube video of Ilford's factory, they say that they can detect defects in the coating of less than a millimeter. I'm sure Kodak meets or exceeds those standards.
 

pentaxuser

Member
Joined
May 9, 2005
Messages
20,014
Location
Daventry, No
Format
35mm
MattKing said:
Film sticking to itself during the development stage, and then releasing thereafter, resulting in the undeveloped portion being fixed to blank.
It is hard to make this happen, but not impossible.
Click to expand...

Thanks Matt but presumably for it to happen twice makes the odds against this being the case even higher? We haven't seen the negs yet but the way Paul describes it I had assumed that the faintness affected all the thin negs equally so it indicates for this to be correct the sticking was the same for all the affected negs on both films?

It would look likely that Paul has a lot of experience in developing as well so on a ranked list of likely causes film sticking would be low on the list


pentaxuser
 

GregY

Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2005
Messages
3,501
Location
Alberta
Format
Large Format
By the same thought process, Kodak has a lot of experience making film...... you'd think we would have heard about these kind of failures from others? Do we have a year of manufacture? Batch #?...... or any other details to tie the 2 rolls of film together?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…