*Sigh* Spots on Negatives

[logan2z]

I've been working through developing my backlog of film and have been having pretty good results. However, the last couple of rolls of Tri-X 120 I've developed haven't gone quite as well - I'm seeing some circular dark spots in the scans of a few of the frames and I can't quite tell what's causing them (I do see corresponding lighter spots on the negatives if I look really closely, so not a scanning artifact).

I posted about this appearing on an earlier roll and a few people suggested air bells. I agitate pretty gently and always rap the tank on the counter a few times after every agitation cycle so I'm not sure what else I can try to eliminate air bells if that's what caused this. I've also looked closely at the negatives for drying spots/marks but I don't see anything obvious. I am reusing fixer that I mixed up recently, but I've only used it for a handful of rolls and I've done a snip test to ensure it's still working well. Fixing time is 5 minutes using Ilford's Rapid Fixer.

Given the attached image (darkened to make the spots more obvious), is the consensus still air bells? If so, it might be worth giving my Jobo roller a try instead of inversion agitation.

I'd like to try and re-wash the negatives just to see if these are drying marks, but I honestly don't know how I'd dry them now that they are cut into strips - there's really no appreciable area outside the frames to grab with drying clips. If anyone has any clever ideas, I'm all ears...

 

[logan2z]

Forgot to mention:

I'm developing using a Jobo 1500 series tank and reels. The film is developed in HC-110 Dilution H for 9 minutes. Continuous agitation for the first 30 seconds and then 3 gentle inversions (in 5 seconds) every 30 seconds after that. I'm washing the negatives using the Ilford wash method with a final rinse in distilled water + Photoflo (1:200) and then hanging vertically to dry for 24 hours.

 

[Tel]

Forgot to mention:

I'm developing using a Jobo 1500 series tank and reels. The film is developed in HC-110 Dilution H for 9 minutes. Continuous agitation for the first 30 seconds and then 3 gentle inversions (in 5 seconds) every 30 seconds after that. I'm washing the negatives using the Ilford wash method with a final rinse in distilled water + Photoflo (1:200) and then hanging vertically to dry for 24 hours.

I'm a longtime user of Tri-X and HC-110 and used to have spotting issues all the time. For a while I tried drying the film at an angle rather than vertically, so the final rinse water would puddle in the rebate rather than the image. This required a strange system of strings to pull the strip sideways and was generally a pain in the butt, so I went back to a vertical hang (and occasional spotting). Finally, I settled on a pure distilled water final rinse without the photoflo and I haven't gone back. A lot of people swear by photoflo (or equivalent) but I found I didn't miss it. I expect that differences in tap water from one region to another may be at fault, and each of us needs to adapt our final rinse to whatever conditions we have to deal with.

 

[logan2z]

I'm a longtime user of Tri-X and HC-110 and used to have spotting issues all the time. For a while I tried drying the film at an angle rather than vertically, so the final rinse water would puddle in the rebate rather than the image. This required a strange system of strings to pull the strip sideways and was generally a pain in the butt, so I went back to a vertical hang (and occasional spotting). Finally, I settled on a pure distilled water final rinse without the photoflo and I haven't gone back. A lot of people swear by photoflo (or equivalent) but I found I didn't miss it. I expect that differences in tap water from one region to another may be at fault, and each of us needs to adapt our final rinse to whatever conditions we have to deal with.

Curiously, I only seem to be getting these issues on 120 film, I haven't seen this sort of spotting on my 35mm negatives. I'm using exactly the same processing workflow, final Photoflo rinse and drying method for both. Maybe the increased surface area of the MF film makes it more prone to spotting?

Hopefully I can find a way to rewash/dry the cut negatives to determine if these are, in fact, water spots or caused by something else (eg. air bells).

 

[MattKing]

If there are light areas on the negatives, it isn't a problem with washing and drying.

 

[logan2z]

If there are light areas on the negatives, it isn't a problem with washing and drying.

They're nearly impossible for me to see, even with a loupe but I think I see some very faint light areas on the negative in the region of these dark spots in the scan.

So I assume you are leaning towards air bells, then. I'm very diligent about knocking the tank immediately after filling it with chemistry and after every agitation cycle. if I bang the tank any harder on my counter I'm afraid I'm going to crack it Not sure what else I can do to avoid it - except, possibly, rotary processing which I've yet to attempt.

 

[MattKing]

In my case, I pre-rinse with continuous rotary agitation for two minutes.
I then discard the rinse water, add the developer and agitate for the first 30 seconds using continuous rotary agitation. The rest of the development step involves standard Kodak scheme inversion agitation.
Do you, by chance, load the reels in a very dusty environment?

 

[logan2z]

Do you, by chance, load the reels in a very dusty environment?

No, not a particularly dusty environment.

I load the reels inside a changing bag that I shake/clean out before each use, and I use a rocket blower to blow dust off of the reels and tank components before loading the film.

 

[MattKing]

Don't clean out the bag before each use.
Clean out the bag after each use, and then close it.

 

[logan2z]

Don't clean out the bag before each use.
Clean out the bag after each use, and then close it.

I definitely close both the zippers before I store the bag, but now I'm trying to remember if I clean it out before I use it or after I use it It might be both, I'm neurotic.

 

[logan2z]

In my case, I pre-rinse with continuous rotary agitation for two minutes.
I then discard the rinse water, add the developer and agitate for the first 30 seconds using continuous rotary agitation. The rest of the development step involves standard Kodak scheme inversion agitation.

Just curious why you rinse and perform the first agitation cycle using rotary agitation and then switch to inversion agitation for the remainder of the process. Why not just go all rotary?

 

[MattKing]

Just curious why you rinse and perform the first agitation cycle using rotary agitation and then switch to inversion agitation for the remainder of the process. Why not just go all rotary?

When I tried all rotary, I could develop one 120 roll in a single Paterson clone reel, but when I developed two 120 rolls in a single Paterson clone reel, the films would move so much in the channels during the development stage that they would often end up overlapping and/or moving one end right out of the reel.
Apparently film is really slippery when it is in the developers (HC-110 or X-Tol) that I use.
The film happily stays in place if I use rotary agitation for every other stage - pre-rinse, stop bath, 1st fixer, 2nd fixer, rinse, HCA.
I do develop four 120 rolls in a single two 120 reel Paterson tank reasonably frequently, so in the interests of arriving at a single workflow that is usable for all sizes and quantities of film I usually develop, I arrived at this sort of hybrid approach.
Using rotary agitation for all the stages I use it for - including the relatively critical first 30 seconds of development - gives me consistent and uniform and repeatable results. Outside of developer, the smaller chemical volume required (650 ml works well in my tank's case) matches the size of the graduated cylinders I use and saves on some chemistry usage.
For developer, I fill the tank up to its litre capacity, but as I use my developer in a replenishment regime - X-Tol currently, and HC-110 before it - I have no concerns with wastage.
This is a workflow that suits my particular needs and circumstances, is relatively easy to use, store and retrieve given my space limitations, and is easy to maintain consistency with. Your workflow may very well be better suited to your needs.

 

[gone]

You can rewash the neg strips and rehang them, it's not as tedious as you might think.

I re-washed mine in a casserole dish. Then I took paper clips. and put one in each side of the bottom holes on one strip, and laced that into the top hole on each side of the next strip. I did this until all 36 negs were hanging.

 

[logan2z]

Your workflow may very well be better suited to your needs.

Well, I thought I had a workflow that was giving me consistently good results - at least for 35mm -but then I started developing some 120 and now I'm not so sure.

 

[logan2z]

You can rewash the neg strips and rehang them, it's not as tedious as you might think.

I re-washed mine in a casserole dish. Then I took paper clips. and put one in each side of the bottom holes on one strip, and laced that into the top hole on each side of the next strip. I did this until all 36 negs were hanging.

Right, I've done this with 35mm negatives before, but this is 120 so there are no holes to take advantage of.

 

[pentaxuser]

So just to be clear. Were you having success with all of your 120 and 35mm film in your backlog, then faults appeared? Was this 120 only and your 35 mm negs continued to be all OK ? Can you think of anything that may have changed in your 120 processing that might have resulted in these faults, assuming of course that the new faults are confined to 120 only?

I can think of nothing that you do in your description of what you do that might explain this change from OK film negs to the "not OK" film neg but clearly something or things has/have changed

pentaxuser

 

[logan2z]

So just to be clear. Were you having success with all of your 120 and 35mm film in your backlog, then faults appeared? Was this 120 only and your 35 mm negs continued to be all OK ? Can you think of anything that may have changed in your 120 processing that might have resulted in these faults, assuming of course that the new faults are confined to 120 only?

I can think of nothing that you do in your description of what you do that might explain this change from OK film negs to the "not OK" film neg but clearly something or things has/have changed

pentaxuser

I have just started working through the 120 in my backlog, I've been focusing on 35mm up to this point. I haven't seen these spots on the 35mm rolls I've developed.

As for 120, I've done a grand total of 4 rolls - the first roll looked ok, the second one showed spots like those in my first post above on one frame, and the last two showed spots on one and two frames respectively. So this issue is not affecting that many frames, but still annoying.

As far as I can tell, I'm doing everything exactly the same with my 120 film as my 35mm film - aside, of course, from configuring the Jobo 1500 series reel for 120 size film - the same chemistry amounts/dilutions, same agitation scheme, same development time/temp, etc.

I seem to have a knack for running into these strange, inexplicable film development problems. Lucky me

 

[Brendan Quirk]

Finally, I settled on a pure distilled water final rinse without the photoflo and I haven't gone back

This works great for me.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Finally, I settled on a pure distilled water final rinse without the photoflo and I haven't gone back. A lot of people swear by photoflo (or equivalent) but I found I didn't miss it. I expect that differences in tap water from one region to another may be at fault, and each of us needs to adapt our final rinse to whatever conditions we have to deal with.

Because of variations in local water and technique, sometimes PhotoFlo will not help the situation, but in a large portion of situations, it helps.

 

[logan2z]

So just to be clear. Were you having success with all of your 120 and 35mm film in your backlog, then faults appeared? Was this 120 only and your 35 mm negs continued to be all OK ? Can you think of anything that may have changed in your 120 processing that might have resulted in these faults, assuming of course that the new faults are confined to 120 only?

I can think of nothing that you do in your description of what you do that might explain this change from OK film negs to the "not OK" film neg but clearly something or things has/have changed

pentaxuser

So one thing that I have done differently with the last few rolls - which were all 120 - is reuse the fixer and stop bath. Previously, I had been mixing up fresh batches of fixer and stop bath for each roll of film. This was wasteful but I was trying to eliminate variables as I worked to come up with a successful workflow for myself. Is it possible that re-using the fixer and stop bath across development sessions has caused this spotting issue? Perhaps the used fixer is the culprit? Just throwing it out there as it is the one difference that I've introduced into my workflow recently.

 

[BMbikerider]

There would be no problem with re-using fixer until near exhaustion because you don't let the film dry between the fixing baths and the rinse stages. Do you mix a new final bath, i.e after each film or do you re-use it? I would continue using photo-flo or the Ilford equivalent but these only use a tiny amount of the stock wetting agent, over doing it will or could be the cause of your problem. All you need the photoflo to do is break down the surface tension of the water, so don't over do it

I have acquired a small usable syringe with a long hollow tube to measure .5 of a cc of Photoflo per 250cc of water when using a JOBO to process any 120 film. The version of the JOBO I have has two speed. and you can shut off the reverse. I always set the speed to slow and constant one way rotation for 1 minute then empty the drum. Over agitation will create bubbles and go towards creating the marks.
I may be lucky where I live because the water here is quite soft, running off the hills and permeating through bogland peat to the reservoirs so it has no chance of mixing with limestone which will make it hard. I cannot remember the last time I had that problem.

 

[koraks]

I don't see how these slight minus-density spots, provided they actually are present on the negatives, could be caused by any processing step after development, unless silver bleaching chemicals have been near the film or the processing equipment, which I suppose is rather unlikely.

In general the most likely cause in a case like this is a scanning/digitization problem, followed by bubbles adhering to the film during development.

So in short:

is the consensus still air bells?

As far as I'm concerned, yes, BUT provided that...

They're nearly impossible for me to see, even with a loupe but I think I see some very faint light areas on the negative

...this is accurate and the existence of these spots on the actual negatives can be confirmed.

A darkroom print, if feasible, would of course be helpful here to ascertain if the problem exists in the physical realm or if it's a digital artifact.

 

[MattKing]

Is it possible that re-using the fixer and stop bath across development sessions has caused this spotting issue?

Fixer that isn't past capacity or deteriorated is robust - I often use my 1.9 litres of mixed up fixer for at least 20 rolls (probably at least 8 sessions).
Citric acid based stop bath (e.g. Ilfostop) can have problems with mould growth, if the time between sessions is long, and conditions are mould friendly.
Acetic acid based stop bath (e.g. Kodak Indicator Stop Bath) is more resistant to mould.
For film, I use the Kodak version. In my case, if I expect to do several developing runs over one, two or three days, I will re-use the stop bath over those few days. Otherwise, I use the stop one-shot, at half strength, and then discard it.
That being said, I don't see how mould in any stage after development could cause light spots on a negative.

 

[logan2z]

That being said, I don't see how mould in any stage after development could cause light spots on a negative.

It seems the only logical conclusion, then, is air bells. You mentioned dust earlier in the thread, but a) I'd expect if that were the case it would affect my 35mm film as well and b) I would think the spots would be smaller/more sharply focused.

If air bells, I'm not sure how I can eliminate them beyond what I'm already doing - rapping the tank on the counter after pouring in the chemistry and then doing it again after every agitation cycle. And I'm still unclear as to why it only seems to happen on 120 film

I think I'm going to try developing a roll using rotary agitation via my Jobo roller and see how that works out.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I reuse the stop bath until the indicator starts to change color. I reuse the fixer until the fixing time starts getting too long. Your problem is air bells, not the chemicals. I use 500ml for my 1500 tanks and the 3010 Expert Drum and have never had your problem.