Problem with pinholes in Adox/Efke 50

[RobertV]

I think I actually did try the AM50 once, about ten years ago. Is AM50 the stuff that comes in small brown plastic cylinders with a white cap?

Yes it is, in 60ml brown bottles. AM50 is a modified Windisch pyrocatechine (Brenzkatachin in German) developer. pH 12,1 It's in the same catechory of Beutler (Metol based) and Tetenal Neofin Blau/Blue.

Demi water you only need with developers without Calgon and those who are used in high dilutions. Here the minerals in your tap water can have some interference with the developing compound and change the pH of the developer.
Or for making a stock where some developers have a shorter lifetime due to the metal ions in the tap water.

 

[Cor]

FWIW..a bit related..

I shoot quite some MACO 820 IR film, 4*5 format, which is actually EFKE PL100, sensitized for recording also IR light. I guess 1 out of 3 sheets show 1 or 2 pinholes. Perhaps pinhole is not the right description. These are circular clear spots on the negative, diameter say 0.5-1mm. I think that there was no emulsion there to start with, and that the processing has nothing to do with these nasty spots. I use a tanning developer (PyrocatHD) a water stop and slightly acid fix..

Best,

Cor

 

[sandermarijn]

These are circular clear spots on the negative, diameter say 0.5-1mm. I think that there was no emulsion there to start with, and that the processing has nothing to do with these nasty spots.

Mine are about the same size Cor, not larger in any case, and they seem to be totally absent of emulsion too. I've started to think these may indeed be manufacturing defects.

 

[sandermarijn]

Demi water you only need with developers without Calgon and those who are used in high dilutions. Here the minerals in your tap water can have some interference with the developing compound and change the pH of the developer.
Or for making a stock where some developers have a shorter lifetime due to the metal ions in the tap water.

I make my D76 stock with tap water, but this is probably a more tolerant developer.

I have another question, maybe you know. My X89 fixer has run out and I've switched to Adolux Adofix (smelly stuff). Would this fixer be acidic enough to worry about?

 

[Mahler_one]

Hi Sander: You noted that you liked the Adox film, etc., etc. However, with the problems you are experiencing, and the uncertainty such problems have engendered, why not change film to Delta 100 or Fuji Acros and simply "relax" in the knowledge that there will be no manufacturing defects to deal with? Staining developers to harden the emulsion will not be needed, and you can continue to use your ususal darkroom techniques. The "look" of the negatives, and hence the prints, might be "different", but at least you will have no concerns about negatives that will be unusable. It might be reasonable to address the problems you are experiencing with the Adox representative on the APUG thread. Even those of us who have not yet used Adox film would be interested in any reply you receive. The increasing number of posts concerning the quality of Adox films certainly is worrisome to those of us who are considering trying such films. There are many who have had no problems with Adox films, and the increasing number of questions raised as to why there is such a disparity of experience(s) is puzzling. Indeed, does one now "have" to use a staining developer with Adox films in order to be sure that the emulsion will remain intact? Just wondering without any wish to defame, or harm, Adox in any way. However, if there are problems with their films then such problems should be addressed.

I hope everything is fine in the Netherlands? Any more Leica get togethers planned?

Ed

 

[sandermarijn]

Hi Ed, everything fine here apart from the weather.

I do use films from the major manufacturers as well, but they don't offer a film with the retro look of Adox 50. At the moment, if I want film that works then I choose Fuji; if want to just play around (99% of the time), then I experiment with 'more obscure' films. I don't really mind the pinholes for that purpose, even though I'd rather see them go of course.

Contacting Adox is a possibility. I guess that would mean contacting Foto Impex. My last two emails to them went unanswered, so I will leave writing to them up to somebody who has more of an entry with them. In any case I think it's doubtful if they would acknowledge a defect in their own product. It may also be doubtful if a large number of complaints will lead to a change in production quality (if something is wrong with that in the first place). I would guess that either there are coating problems and Adox know that themselves already, or Adox think there are no problems (which may be true). In either case a 'question' wouldn't have much impact. Or maybe I should write them, it doesn't cost me. I'll think about it.

I don't know any other Leica photographers btw, so I can't say about get togethers, sorry. Actually I don't even own a Leica, only a Bessa R2A with a Zeiss lens.

 

[RobertV]

I make my D76 stock with tap water, but this is probably a more tolerant developer.

I have another question

D76 is a very tolerant developer. I was pointing to Xtol, based on Ascorbic Acid. Here you can have a problem depending on the local tap water.

An acid fix, can in the dilution 1+4 not damage a film either. Also an acid stop in 1,5% - 2% can not cause pinholes. Only a very base developer (pH=14) can cause under acid circumstances problems on the surface. One of the reasons Diafine is NOT recommended with an acid stop. Above mentioned regular stop is approx. within pH 4,0-5,5. Above this value most indicators are going to blue.

 

[Mahler_one]

Sander: I think many of us use the same approach to photography that you do, i.e., we view photography as a "hobby" and enjoy "playing around" with various films and developers. If we can't have fun, then what's the use of having a darkroom, and the luxury of using various films!

I thought we had met at a Leica get together in Amersterdam about 10 years back, but I guess not. I've since moved on to LF, and was hoping to try the Adox films to see what the "retro look" was all about. However, it certainly isn't too much fun to expose lots of negatives, and see pin holes in many of them! I'll wait until the possible quality issues are put to rest.

Be well, and be sure to keep us all informed about what transpires with your Adox adventures!

Ed

 

[AgX]

FOTOKEMIKA-NOVA d.o.o.
Šubićeva 14
10430 Samobor, CROATIA

Tel.: +385 1 3361 133
Fax.: +385 1 3362 961
Email: info@fotokemika.hr

 

[sandermarijn]

I think I've got an answer to my question now: the acidity of the fixer or stop is not responsible for the pinholes. Thanks a lot to all you guys, you've been of great help. I will post an update whenif I make some progress in my pinhole struggle.

 

[thefizz]

I am certain that its a quality control problem as I use Efke's Infrared film and get pin holes, dots and scratches very often. I never have these problems with Ilford, Kodak or Fuji films.

 

[Mahler_one]

Have you tried the Adox formulations of the same films fizz, and if so, have you experienced the same quality issues? The formulations of the films are supposedly the same (?), although manufacturing techniques and tolerances might be different.

 

[thefizz]

No I haven't used any Adox films unless they are rebranded under a different name?

 

[Markus Röhling]

Maybe it's simply dust?

While I remember having pinholes on 35mm film only from Efke films, I have them also on Ilford films for large format, though I pay three times as much for a HP5+ than for a Adox CHS in 9x12 cm.

Markus

 

[clayne]

Not, only, but also dust embedded in the emulsion...
Sometimes they are so evident to render the picture useless...

I've also seen this - and it sucks. But honestly I think it was my own doing rather than the manufacturer's (this was Fujifilm who have quite good QC).

 

[Removed Account]

Have you tried the Adox formulations of the same films fizz, and if so, have you experienced the same quality issues? The formulations of the films are supposedly the same (?), although manufacturing techniques and tolerances might be different.

I have a box of Adox CHS25 and a box of Efke PL25, they both have the same emulsion batch code on them so I'd presume that they are both exactly the same!

 

[per volquartz]

Presoak film for at least 3 minutes...

... when you use "reg" developers, 5 minutes if you use a pyro developer.
Use a water stop - NO acetic acid!
Throw your acid fix as far away as you can (legally) and get an alkaline fix like Formulary TF-4 (or make your own alkaline fix from scratch).



Per Volquartz

Dead Link Removed

Latest images from China:
Dead Link Removed

 

[Markus Röhling]

Again, we are in 2009, so if a film limits my developer choice to yield acceptable results then it's out of my list.
As simple as that...

Every film limits the choice of the developer, though some films have more limits, some less. Maybe you should change to digital photography?

Markus

 

[Philippe Grunchec]

All films are equal, but some are more equal than others -

 

[wogster]

Every film limits the choice of the developer, though some films have more limits, some less. Maybe you should change to digital photography?

Markus

I have seen films that could be souped in just about anything, and give excellent results, other films are much more fussy. The price of the film isn't an indicator of which is which.