Please help me identify my film developing problem

[blackmelas]

On the negative, in the midtones of the cloudy sky, there are streeks running perpendicular to the direction of film travel. I've darkened the whole scan somewhat to highlight the problem but it definitely shows in the print. I have'nt yet found the problem on two other frames of the roll, one I printed and one I scanned.

Shot on Bronica RF645, Pan F plus
Developed on SS reel and tank
Prescysol using Peter Hogan's recommended semi-stand method at 24 degrees for 10:30min
water stop for 1 minute
alkalai fix for 5 minutes

Thanks for your help,
James

 

[titrisol]

I like those streaks, look like rain when looked from afar.

If it wasn;t rain in the horizon then me guesses is a porblem with bromine drag during stand development

 

[Jim Jones]

It looks like slightly erratic shutter operation. If so, it will be most obvious at the highest shutter speed, and not noticable at low speeds. If this is the problem, a CLA will likely be required.

 

[ricksplace]

I agree with tritisol. It appears that if the streaks run perpendicular to film travel, they are vertical with regard to how the film sits in the developing tank. With stand development, there isn't enough agitation to prevent bromide drag appearing on the negative. The bromide "runs down" the negative and leaves streaks. I have had this happen with high dilutions and little agitation. It seems to be particularily bothersome when large amounts of clears sky is involved.

Nice shot.

 

[Claire Senft]

This is I believe the type of problem that would be quickly solved by bringing your mother-in-law into your darkroom.

 

[JBrunner]

I can't offer a better explanation. However, you are aware that photographs like this sell for super big bucks on ebay.

 

[Bob Carnie]

Looks like insufficient agitation in the first 15 seconds of development to me.

 

[babil]

As already mentioned it looks like bromide running down. Did you presoak the film? If not, try presoaking for 3-5 min. in 20C
cheers

 

[Gerald Koch]

Stand development and semi-stand development can cause problems among these are streaking and mottling. Because of this film manufacturers like Kodak have long discouraged its use. For some reason it's become fashionable as a routine development technique despite the serious drawbacks.

 

[titrisol]

I read the PeterHogan websote, he recommends agitation for the first 1 minute and none afterwards?
Maybe presoak may help or some agitation in the middle of the development.

 

[Bob Carnie]

first fifteen seconds in any chemical are of prime importance to agitate.

 

[KenS]

This might well be one of these times when Occam's razor "takes flight".

Since this effect does not occur on other frames on the same roll might we take a look at the possibility of a perfectly "natural" phenomena, where sunlight light at an angle might well be reflecting down off some clouds (at a higher elevation), through the spaces between the cloud cover that is recorded on film.... and producing momentary sunbeams that you managed to record with the given exposure.

Ken.

 

[blackmelas]

Wow! thanks for the responses. This is the only Pan F I developed with Prescysol and the only frame on this roll with a lot of space given to relatively little detail. So perhaps the bromide drag only affected this frame as ricksplace points out. I'll have to read up on bromide drag...

Titrisol- the semi-stand is a 5min presoak, 1minute agitation, then an agitation at 3:30 and at 6:30 then stop at 10:30. Perhaps I missed an agitation???

JBrunner- Maybe I can Photoshop the bromide streeks out and sell sloppy inkjet prints on the bay .

Thanks to all for looking and for the great advice,
James

 

[JBrunner]

No- don't do that, you have squint and find some kind vague image of a religious icon, and then list it for like $200k!

 

[blackmelas]

P.S. Claire, NEVER, NEVER, NEVER, NEVER, NEVER, NEVER, NEVER, NEVER, NEVER, NEVER, NEVER, NEVER, NEVER, NEVER, NEVER, NEVER, NEVER, NEVER, not in a million years

 

[titrisol]

Are you sure this was not a natural phenomenom?
As i said in my 1st post that looks like rain in the mountains.... have seen that many times when gorwing up in the mountains and have tried to get it on film, but never had success. Semms like you did

The streaks are too many and to me they don;t taste like bromine

Wow! thanks for the responses. This is the only Pan F I developed with Prescysol and the only frame on this roll with a lot of space given to relatively little detail. So perhaps the bromide drag only affected this frame as ricksplace points out. I'll have to read up on bromide drag...

Titrisol- the semi-stand is a 5min presoak, 1minute agitation, then an agitation at 3:30 and at 6:30 then stop at 10:30. Perhaps I missed an agitation???

JBrunner- Maybe I can Photoshop the bromide streeks out and sell sloppy inkjet prints on the bay .

Thanks to all for looking and for the great advice,
James

 

[blackmelas]

Are you sure this was not a natural phenomenom?
As i said in my 1st post that looks like rain in the mountains.... have seen that many times when gorwing up in the mountains and have tried to get it on film, but never had success. Semms like you did

The streaks are too many and to me they don;t taste like bromine

I supose it maybe possibly perhaps could have been but the weather wasn't like that this day. Only in my re-visualization (I haven't learned to pre-visualize) did I wish to print down the sky a bit and that's when I noticed the streeks. I had very bright sun behind my left shoulder and bright thick clouds in the frame. Anyway if I don't print the sky down too much I can almost accept the streeks as rain as you say but I still see it as a flaw in my photo.

The other possibility mentioned was the shutter. Could the RF645 leaf shutter make parallel patterns like this? I would expect to see the uneven exposure carried into the snow which is also relaatively featureless.

Thanks again Titrisol and everyone,
James

 

[skahde]

I'd try a little more agitation. With Pyrocat I invert the tank once in a minute and the results are even as well as sharp. Precysol shouldn't behave much differently.

Leaf shutters don't cause parallel streaks (or any other kind of streaks if they are postioned close to the aperture rather than the film plane). Vertically travelling focal plane shutters don't cause horizontal streaks and vice versa. You get the picture.

Stefan

 

[Ole]

It could be jut me, but I don't understand the reason for "semi-stand" development at all.

First of all, there's too much gitation to get the beneficial effects of stand development. Second, there's too little agitation to get the beneficial effects of that - even development, repeatability across frames on a single roll et cetera.

If minimal agitation is to be used, it should be done with a developer suited for stand development, otherwise high contrast scenes like this example will be prime candidates for bromide drag. And if you use such a developer (e.g. FX-2), why not go the whole way and do a proper stand development? If the developer in question does not have some magical bromide-drag avoidance component, agitate sufficiently to aviod the drag.

Just my 10 øre (about 2 cents)...

 

[blackmelas]

It could be jut me, but I don't understand the reason for "semi-stand" development at all.

First of all, there's too much gitation to get the beneficial effects of stand development. Second, there's too little agitation to get the beneficial effects of that - even development, repeatability across frames on a single roll et cetera.

If minimal agitation is to be used, it should be done with a developer suited for stand development, otherwise high contrast scenes like this example will be prime candidates for bromide drag. And if you use such a developer (e.g. FX-2), why not go the whole way and do a proper stand development? If the developer in question does not have some magical bromide-drag avoidance component, agitate sufficiently to aviod the drag.

Just my 10 øre (about 2 cents)...

Peter Hogan uses the Semi-Stand as the preferred method of development with his Prescysol and touts sharper negs with smoother tonality as the result. Until this single frame I've had great results on dozens of rolls.
Thanks
James

 

[Jim Jones]

. . . Leaf shutters don't cause parallel streaks (or any other kind of streaks if they are postioned close to the aperture rather than the film plane). Vertically travelling focal plane shutters don't cause horizontal streaks and vice versa. You get the picture.

Stefan

You're right. After 53 years of Leicas I just can't get used to the idea of rangefinder cameras having between-the-lens shutters.

 

[Charles Webb]

The majority of the developing techniques that are so popular with todays photographers were available and at times used back in the 40's and 50's.

They were generally used in an attempt to save a negative that had been made under horrible lighting conditions. They were never the developer of choice for negatives made under favorable conditions. We used "standing development" only for difficult high contrast situations, not for normal "sunny 16" scenes. The Pyro "stain" developers used in the 50's and 60's were seldom if ever used for normaly exposed negatives. Again were used to level or reduce high contrast components in the negative to a point where they could be printed on a grade 2 paper.

I am sure my comments will bring many flaming arrows my way, but what I have said is fact. I really do not care a bit what any negative is developed in, but what information/details the negative can deliver to the final print.

Many of todays "popular developers" are now celebrating their 15 minutes of fame. Tomorrow will be another day!

Charlie................................

 

[Ronald Moravec]

Film is made to be agitated in the developer. Follow instructions.