Some strange low-density spots on my film

OP
OP

MsLing

Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2023
Messages
137
Location
Guangzhou China
Format
Multi Format

except wash, i use distilled water in all processes
 

MattKing

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
53,267
Location
Delta, BC Canada
Format
Medium Format
That appears to be light fog - it is a faint image, rather than a problem with chemicals.
 

koraks

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Nov 29, 2018
Messages
23,472
Location
Europe
Format
Multi Format
That appears to be light fog - it is a faint image, rather than a problem with chemicals.
I think what we're talking about is not the big artifacts, but the small ones here:

The big ones look like they're caused by how the backlit negative was photographed.

It's really odd, this one. I'm quite sure (but would have to check) that I've developed Fomapan200 4x5" in my own version of instant mytol. Not 100% sure though...What I am certain of is that I've never seen these particular spots on this film. Or any kind of conspicuous defect, really.

@MsLing are you still using a soak prior to development? I'm clutching at straws here, obviously. It's really odd. I wouldn't be surprised if you would hit upon a sheet of film that breaks the pattern of this particular type of developer correlating with this particular defect. I.e. it might be a 'simple' case of one sheet being affected, while the next one isn't, regardless of how the film is developed.
 
OP
OP

MsLing

Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2023
Messages
137
Location
Guangzhou China
Format
Multi Format
That appears to be light fog - it is a faint image, rather than a problem with chemicals.

May be my phone and hand.

No, I didn't use, just directly pour developer in. I decide to try FomaRotro320
Quite nice. Rodinal 1+100+2g sodium isoascorbate/L

Same sheet with Rodinal is OK. I am now mixing another version with pure water.
 
OP
OP

MsLing

Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2023
Messages
137
Location
Guangzhou China
Format
Multi Format
Surfactants! I think the lack of surfactants cause those spots. Without it, developer cannot opportunely soak emulsion. I added some drops of surfactants into developer and developed another sheet of Retro320, no visible spots and density seems bit lower than without surfactants.
 

koraks

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Nov 29, 2018
Messages
23,472
Location
Europe
Format
Multi Format
Makes good sense; surfactants are often added to developers (e.g. C41 developer usually has surfactants in it) as well as to the film emulsion itself, although in the latter case the rationale might also be coating dynamics.
 
OP
OP

MsLing

Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2023
Messages
137
Location
Guangzhou China
Format
Multi Format
Obviously cleaner
 

Attachments

  • 20250816_171319.jpg
    819.9 KB · Views: 13
  • 20250816_171310.jpg
    829.5 KB · Views: 11

koraks

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Nov 29, 2018
Messages
23,472
Location
Europe
Format
Multi Format
Certainly looks like it, although you may now have something else going on here:

However, maybe this is not in the actual negative and it's just an artifact of photographing the negative. I boosted the contrast in the example above to make it easier to see what I'm referring to.
 
OP
OP

MsLing

Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2023
Messages
137
Location
Guangzhou China
Format
Multi Format

I check it on negative, that's a shadow of something, film is clean.
 
OP
OP

MsLing

Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2023
Messages
137
Location
Guangzhou China
Format
Multi Format
Yeah, so I purchase 500ml BASF XP-30. To confirm if antifoam works or not, I also buy some Dow Corning KEF-1410.
 

koraks

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Nov 29, 2018
Messages
23,472
Location
Europe
Format
Multi Format
I can relate. You run into this one particular thing that you'd expect should work - and yet, it doesn't. So you keep pushing it until you get it to work, even if there's an alternative. Is it necessarily productive? Perhaps not. Sometimes we learn a thing or two in this way; whether that's worth it, I guess is kind of individual. Either way, I think the option of just sticking to a working alternative has occurred to OP. Apparently they prefer not to. As bystanders, we're then left with the choice to either help them or to step aside.
 

John Wiegerink

Subscriber
Joined
May 29, 2009
Messages
3,691
Location
Lake Station, MI
Format
Multi Format
I'm guilty of be a little stubborn at times too. Just ask my better half she'll tell you.
 
OP
OP

MsLing

Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2023
Messages
137
Location
Guangzhou China
Format
Multi Format
Why keep exploring this problem if you’ve identified an alternative developer that works well with the Fomapan?? Just use what works and forget the Ascorbate developers.

One reason is to get faster film speed. Ascorbic+phenidone developers are safety, eco-friendly, neutral and high performance. Then, I prefer replenishing Xtol if I need a modern look. Ascorbic developers often make a shorter toe and more linear curves. Also, fine grain developers form a filamentary structure way more different from what acutance developers build. Revenge mentality may also a particular reason, Xtol destroyed film I exposed when suffering altitude sickness ...

And for me, get to the bottom of a problem may bring some new knowledge, further understand its principle.

And to who helped me, thanks for all of your suggestions
 
Last edited:
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…