One transparent negative when developing 2 rolls at once

[Sara valdez]

Hello! I need some help. I am having trouble developing my rolls of film. I have had two casualties today. The first time I developed 3 rolls at once with one liter of solution, consisting of 250mL of Kodak D-76 to 750mL water for 19 minutes and obviously this was a mistake. The roll on the bottom of the tank was transparent with no visible leaders along the sides. While the other two were just fine. I did research online and many people said that the transparency was due to lack of developer, and so I recalculated and decided it would be smartest to do 2 rolls using 500mL stock and 500mL water for the same time. Regardless, The bottom row still was transparent. I am really confused as to what I should do, and obviously hesitant to continue developing with out advice from others.

 

[mshchem]

What type of developing tank are you using? The most likely cause is the film didn't transport through the camera.

 

[Sara valdez]

I am not really sure what brand the tank is because I got it from eBay but it’s Japanese, has 3 reels.

 

[BradS]

The whole roll on the reel at the bottom of the tank is transparent...but the other two came out ok?
This does not sound like a developer problem to me.
Sounds more like a whole roll of photos exposed with the lens cap on...that is to say, that the film is not exposed or grossly underexposed.

 

[BradS]

I am not really sure what brand the tank is because I got it from eBay but it’s Japanese, has 3 reels.

If you put all three reels in the tank and add a liter of water...does the water cover all three reels?

 

[Sara valdez]

I don’t believe it’s a problem with the camera or the negatives being underexposed since the other rolls were taken during the same period.

 

[BradS]

BTW, Welcome to APUG

 

[Sara valdez]

If you put all three reels in the tank and add a liter of water...does the water cover all three reels?

Yes it’s a little bit less than 1L

 

[BradS]

It is not a developer issue then.
It is a lack of exposure issue.

 

[Sara valdez]

It is not a developer issue then.
It is a lack of exposure issue.

I am still a bit confused though because why would it happen twice? Coincidence maybe. This has never happened to me before so I am not sure it’s an issue with exposure. Could it be that the developer is too weak or something with the tank?

 

[Kino]

Welcome to Photrio! That is a real puzzler!

The odds of that happening twice is pretty high, for sure. But let me get this straight; there is NO lettering or numbers on either of the clear rolls?

 

[Luckless]

For clarity it may be worth posting up a photo showing the affected negatives if you can. [if you don't have a light table, thin paper taped to a window can do. The difference between extreme under development and no development can be hard to see at times.]

And also a description of how you agitate during development.

May also be worth comparing batch numbers on your film. While my top guess would be that you're somehow getting one reel too high in the tank and not in the developer for the bulk of the time (ie, can the reels slide up and down in the tank?), another option is possibly that you've had the misfortune of picking up a few rolls from a bad batch of film that slipped through QA.

 

[MattKing]

Is there any chance that the roll you think was on the bottom was actually on the top?

 

[Sirius Glass]

When you say no leader markings, do you mean the edge markings [also called rebate]?

 

[Kino]

Sorry for the dogpile; people just want to help.

I'll back out and let the capable people help!

 

[removed account4]

I am still a bit confused though because why would it happen twice? Coincidence maybe. This has never happened to me before so I am not sure it’s an issue with exposure. Could it be that the developer is too weak or something with the tank?

hi Sara welcome to Photrio!
I think it was a coincidence. Was the film new/fresh or was it old and expired ?
sometimes old / expired film doesn't expose very well ... and seeing the film was at the bottom of the tank
and there were other films that developed in the same tank i don't think it could have been the developer.
Was the film Pan F 50 by chance and you waited a long time before you developed it ? While I haven' t experienced this myself
some people have trouble because after a certain amount of time the exposure isn't ...
Good luck !
John

 

[donkee]

If you can see the lettering and numbers on the edge of the film my bet would be that the film didn't go through the camera or if a rangefinder the lens cap was on. Even if you didn't put enough chemistry in the tank, and the reel with the blank film was on top parts of it would have been developed. I did that once when I began developing film. This is most likely not a developing issue.

 

[BradS]

If you put all three reels in the tank at once with enough chemistry to cover all three reels ....Then all three rolls of film sat in the same developer and experienced the same agitation...and the films on two of the three reels "came out fine". Then it is not the developer....all three rolls of film received exactly the same treatment. It cannot be that the developer was strong enough to properly develop two rolls but not the third (at all).

and if one liter of solution covers three reels then certainly one liter of solution covers two reels and if one of the two films in this case "came out fine" and the other is clear, then

It is not developer...It simply cannot be. It has to be lack of exposure. Or bad film or....magic.

 

[AgX]

Welcome to Apug!

I did research online and many people said that the transparency was due to lack of developer,...

If the affected film was at the top and you would invert your tank and and you had just enough developer bath volume for two films, the most upper film would be underdeveloped, but not clear, as it only gets fresh developer during inversions and that would be rather soon depleted in contrast to the complete volume.
Would you not be inverting the tank but instead rotating the reels by central stick (I do not even know such tank for three reels existed), then the most upper film would even come out complety clear.
In both cases though the most lowest film would be regularly developed.

 

[AgX]

A film coming out of processing completely clear, may have different causes:

a)
the film got no edge singing (numbers, type of film) at manufacture.
(This may happen by error or by purpose, but is rare.)

THEN

EITHER the film was not exposed in the camera at all (or underexposed below his threshold)
OR the film was not developed at all


b)
the film got proper edge markings at the manufacturer

THEN

it was not developed at all



The above applies to your case.
Of course fixing the film before developing or bleaching the film would yield a complete blank film too...

 

[mshchem]

Again the simplest explanation is that your 35mm film was not loaded in the camera correctly. You went out took 36 exposures without the film being transported to the take up spool. It's a very easy and common problem. Your blank film should still have a couple centimeters at the beginning that is black from exposure to light when you loaded the camera. The film should also have markings for frame numbers, Ilford, or Kodak etc along the edges.

When you load the camera give it two or three exposures before you close the back, just to make sure that the film is winding on.

 

[Raghu Kuvempunagar]

Next time you develop two rolls together, you can try this:

In total darkness, cut each roll into two roughly equal length strips. So roll #1 gives you strips 1a and 1b and roll #2 gives strips 2a and 2b. Load one strip from each roll into the same spool - say 1a and 2a in spool #1 and 1b and 2b in spool #2. Develop as you did previously and see what you get.

 

[AgX]

We still do not know if the film was complety blank.


The OP wrote:

The roll on the bottom of the tank was transparent with no visible leaders along the sides.

This could refer to the edge signing.
Or to the exposed start of the strip (film leader), but this could be cut off by accident completey.

 

[Sara valdez]

Sorry for the delay! I am posting photos of both rolls. This one here is from the first time around. The cause of the splotches are from improper feeding in the metal reel, and of which I should have practiced beforehand. Regardless, the negative is transparent for most other parts. Thanks for the help!

 

[Sara valdez]

Welcome to Photrio! That is a real puzzler!

The odds of that happening twice is pretty high, for sure. But let me get this straight; there is NO lettering or numbers on either of the clear rolls?

Thank you!

Yes I am a bit confused because, yes there is the Kodak 400TX label on the top as well as the numbers on the top and bottom.