Spots on black and white negatives

[Richard62]

Hi. I am trying to work out why I am getting tiny spots in some of my 120 film. Have read loads and there seems to be theories about faulty batches of film, effect on the backing paper of keeping the film in the freezer and precipitate in the fixer, so apologies if I am resurecting an old problem.
I have looked back over some recent films that have been developed to try and find a pattern.

FILM​	No. of films​	SIZE​	FREEZER​	DEVELOPER​	SPOTS (1)​	SPOTS (2)​
FOMAPAN 100​	1​	120​	N0​	FX39​	YES​	YES​
HP5​	2​	120​	YES​	HC110​	NO​	NO​
FP4​	2​	120​	YES​	FX39​	YES​	NO​
HP5​	2​	35mm​	YES​	HC110​	NO​	NO​
FP4​	2​	35mm​	YES​	FX39​	NO​	NO​
TRI X​	1​	35mm​	YES​	FX39​	NO​	NO​

SPOTS(1) are spots in both the darker exposed areas and lighter areas (the unexposed gap between the images). SPOTS(2) are spots in the darker exposed areas of the emulsion only.
The Fomapan spots were magenta in colour on the negative. This film was only purchased a week or two ago (fresh). Film used from the freezer is defrosted at room temperature for at least 24 hours before use. The HP5 120 expired in 2011 and the HP5 35mm in 2013 and both were fine.
All the films were processed using the same fixer (Fotospeed FX30). The concentrate does have some precipitate in it but I filter it though coffee filters before diluting to working strength. If the precipiate is the reason why does it not affect all the films? The four HP5 films pushed to 800 and 1600 ASA in HC110
Same washing and drying procedure for all films-which has worked for all the films previous to these.
I have attached a couple of scans of the worst culprits (foma on the left and FP4 on the right).
If anyone has any ideas as to the reason for the spots, I would be very grateful as I would like a solution before I use and process more of the 120 FP4 and Fomapan 100. Looking at what I have read, it could be something to do with freezing the film and/or the fixer but my results show that it could be either or both or none of these! I don't mind throwing out the fixer but would prefer not to thow out all the film!!
Thanks

 

[koraks]

The SPOTS(1) problem is backing paper offset, at least in the form shown in your FP4 (I assume FP4+) example.
The magenta SPOTS(2) on Fomapan AFAIK should wash out normally if a reasonably fresh fixer is used; I suppose you could just give an extended wash, perhaps with some sodium sulfite, too. If you do a search on this forum, you'll see this problem being discussed (although much less so than the backing paper issue). I've not personally seen these particular spots on my own film, so please refer to the advice others give concerning this specific issue.

The reason why you're not seeing this on your 35mm film is because SPOTS(1) is related to backing paper, which 35mm of course doesn't have. I think the SPOTS(2) issue is related to the anti-halation backing on the Fomapan roll films which is also lacking in their 35mm product.
The reason why you're not seeing this on the 120 HP5+ is sheer luck - or rather bad luck on account of the FP4+ and Fomapan. Backing paper offset problems are somewhat rare, but they do also occur occasionally with HP5+.

As always, it doesn't hurt to contact the manufacturers and provide them with examples of your problems. Always provide batch numbers and/or purchase dates.

Good job on systematically collecting evidence and presenting it so clearly!

 

[DeletedAcct1]

Hi. I am trying to work out why I am getting tiny spots in some of my 120 film. Have read loads and there seems to be theories about faulty batches of film, effect on the backing paper of keeping the film in the freezer and precipitate in the fixer, so apologies if I am resurecting an old problem.
I have looked back over some recent films that have been developed to try and find a pattern.

FILM​	No. of films​	SIZE​	FREEZER​	DEVELOPER​	SPOTS (1)​	SPOTS (2)​
FOMAPAN 100​	1​	120​	N0​	FX39​	YES​	YES​
HP5​	2​	120​	YES​	HC110​	NO​	NO​
FP4​	2​	120​	YES​	FX39​	YES​	NO​
HP5​	2​	35mm​	YES​	HC110​	NO​	NO​
FP4​	2​	35mm​	YES​	FX39​	NO​	NO​
TRI X​	1​	35mm​	YES​	FX39​	NO​	NO​

SPOTS(1) are spots in both the darker exposed areas and lighter areas (the unexposed gap between the images). SPOTS(2) are spots in the darker exposed areas of the emulsion only.
The Fomapan spots were magenta in colour on the negative. This film was only purchased a week or two ago (fresh). Film used from the freezer is defrosted at room temperature for at least 24 hours before use. The HP5 120 expired in 2011 and the HP5 35mm in 2013 and both were fine.
All the films were processed using the same fixer (Fotospeed FX30). The concentrate does have some precipitate in it but I filter it though coffee filters before diluting to working strength. If the precipiate is the reason why does it not affect all the films? The four HP5 films pushed to 800 and 1600 ASA in HC110
Same washing and drying procedure for all films-which has worked for all the films previous to these.
I have attached a couple of scans of the worst culprits (foma on the left and FP4 on the right).
If anyone has any ideas as to the reason for the spots, I would be very grateful as I would like a solution before I use and process more of the 120 FP4 and Fomapan 100. Looking at what I have read, it could be something to do with freezing the film and/or the fixer but my results show that it could be either or both or none of these! I don't mind throwing out the fixer but would prefer not to thow out all the film!!
Thanks

Foma has unofficially issued a workaround to fix the problem. Those spots are AHU that is stubborn to dissolve in normal developer and fixer. The film has to be treated in a mixture 50:50 of alcohol: water for an extended period of time (at least 20 minutes) to fix the problem.

 

[runswithsizzers]

I notice the FP4 example also has a lot of "dust"(?) that looks like contamination by some kind of fiber. I assume this is a separate issue, unrelated to the paper backing problem?

 

[Richard62]

The SPOTS(1) problem is backing paper offset, at least in the form shown in your FP4 (I assume FP4+) example.
The magenta SPOTS(2) on Fomapan AFAIK should wash out normally if a reasonably fresh fixer is used; I suppose you could just give an extended wash, perhaps with some sodium sulfite, too. If you do a search on this forum, you'll see this problem being discussed (although much less so than the backing paper issue). I've not personally seen these particular spots on my own film, so please refer to the advice others give concerning this specific issue.

The reason why you're not seeing this on your 35mm film is because SPOTS(1) is related to backing paper, which 35mm of course doesn't have. I think the SPOTS(2) issue is related to the anti-halation backing on the Fomapan roll films which is also lacking in their 35mm product.
The reason why you're not seeing this on the 120 HP5+ is sheer luck - or rather bad luck on account of the FP4+ and Fomapan. Backing paper offset problems are somewhat rare, but they do also occur occasionally with HP5+.

As always, it doesn't hurt to contact the manufacturers and provide them with examples of your problems. Always provide batch numbers and/or purchase dates.

Good job on systematically collecting evidence and presenting it so clearly!

Thanks for the information. What excatly is "backing paper offset"? I always pre-soak films in plain water for a few minutes. Does it help to add wetting agent to the pre-soak? The magenta spots on Fomapan 100 seems to crop up indiscussions. I thought the newest films would be free of this problem. I have some from a difffernet batch so will try that. My standard wash is one of a couple of minutes followed by 4 of 10 minutes (constant agitation) then final soak in wetting agent for a few minutes. I may try extending that. Thanks for your reply.

 

[Richard62]

I notice the FP4 example also has a lot of "dust"(?) that looks like contamination by some kind of fiber. I assume this is a separate issue, unrelated to the paper backing problem?

The images are from a scan (epson V850 3200 dpi). Theere may be a bit of dust/fibre from the scan as I made no attempt to edit the scans. Th spots on the film that totally spoil a darkroom print are clearly visible with a 10x lupe.

 

[Richard62]

The SPOTS(1) problem is backing paper offset, at least in the form shown in your FP4 (I assume FP4+) example.
The magenta SPOTS(2) on Fomapan AFAIK should wash out normally if a reasonably fresh fixer is used; I suppose you could just give an extended wash, perhaps with some sodium sulfite, too. If you do a search on this forum, you'll see this problem being discussed (although much less so than the backing paper issue). I've not personally seen these particular spots on my own film, so please refer to the advice others give concerning this specific issue.

The reason why you're not seeing this on your 35mm film is because SPOTS(1) is related to backing paper, which 35mm of course doesn't have. I think the SPOTS(2) issue is related to the anti-halation backing on the Fomapan roll films which is also lacking in their 35mm product.
The reason why you're not seeing this on the 120 HP5+ is sheer luck - or rather bad luck on account of the FP4+ and Fomapan. Backing paper offset problems are somewhat rare, but they do also occur occasionally with HP5+.

As always, it doesn't hurt to contact the manufacturers and provide them with examples of your problems. Always provide batch numbers and/or purchase dates.

Good job on systematically collecting evidence and presenting it so clearly!

Foma has unofficially issued a workaround to fix the problem. Those spots are AHU that is stubborn to dissolve in normal developer and fixer. The film has to be treated in a mixture 50:50 of alcohol: water for an extended period of time (at least 20 minutes) to fix the problem.

Haven't used Fomapan for many years. After pre-soak the water was very green when drained to I rinsed a couple of times until water was clear before developing. However the devloper still came out with a green tint when drained-so maybe extra prewash is necessary. Is it better to add wetting agent to the pre-soak? When you say 50-50 alcohol:water , what alcohol? I have a bottle of Isopropyl alcohol (rubbing alcohol). Is that suitable? Many thanks for your reply.

 

[koraks]

What excatly is "backing paper offset"?

It's a generic term (and not necessarily technically correct in this case) that refers to interactions between the photographic emulsion and the backing paper that's in direct contact with it during storage. It sometimes shows up as distinct copies of the printing on the backing paper, so some form of 'offset' printing (although unintended of course). In this case, it's not so much that a distinct printed pattern from the backing paper offset-prints onto the emulsion, but rather some kind of chemical reaction between the backing paper and the emulsion. It's aided/affected/moderated by moisture, and this likely explains the spotty pattern as they might well relate to small moisture deposits/buffers in the paper itself.

After pre-soak the water was very green when drained to I rinsed a couple of times until water was clear before developing.

This is entirely normal and in itself not indicative of any problems, although it's also anti-halation dyes that wash out. How/why these magenta spots occur and also relate to anti-halation measures, I don't know.

 

[retina_restoration]

Thanks for the information. What excatly is "backing paper offset"? I always pre-soak films in plain water for a few minutes. Does it help to add wetting agent to the pre-soak? The magenta spots on Fomapan 100 seems to crop up indiscussions. I thought the newest films would be free of this problem. I have some from a difffernet batch so will try that. My standard wash is one of a couple of minutes followed by 4 of 10 minutes (constant agitation) then final soak in wetting agent for a few minutes. I may try extending that. Thanks for your reply.

No amount of pre-wetting the film will fix "backing paper offset" damage. This is a chemical interaction between the chemicals in the paper and the emulsion, and once that has happened, the film is permanently damaged.

"The HP5 120 expired in 2011"

Even when kept cold, a film that far into "expired" territory is likely to suffer from wrapper offset damage. The way to avoid this, is to keep film cool (don't bother freezing it) and use it by its expiration date. This has been my policy for 10 years now and I have no issues with film as long as I regard it as a hard and fast rule. Long term hoarding of 120 film is only an invitation to disaster. Sheet films and 35mm films are far less likely to suffer once they pass their "best before" date - it's solely an issue with the backing paper used in 120 films.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I have been freezing film since 2003 and never had a spot problem with 135, 120 and 4"x5" black & white or color. Only freeze if the original packaging has not been opened otherwise one must put it in a ZipLock bag sealed with the air squeezed out.

 

[DeletedAcct1]

Haven't used Fomapan for many years. After pre-soak the water was very green when drained to I rinsed a couple of times until water was clear before developing. However the devloper still came out with a green tint when drained-so maybe extra prewash is necessary. Is it better to add wetting agent to the pre-soak? When you say 50-50 alcohol:water , what alcohol? I have a bottle of Isopropyl alcohol (rubbing alcohol). Is that suitable? Many thanks for your reply.

Yes, isopropyl is suitable. No wetting agent in the pre-soak, there's no need to.
The 50:50 alcohol:water mixture is not to be used as a pre-soak.
See here: https://www.photrio.com/forum/threa...t-black-magenta-spots-on-the-negative.184401/

 

[Richard62]

Yes, isopropyl is suitable. No wetting agent in the pre-soak, there's no need to.
The 50:50 alcohol:water mixture is not to be used as a pre-soak.
See here: https://www.photrio.com/forum/threa...t-black-magenta-spots-on-the-negative.184401/

Thanks. Had a look at the link and at least I can treat the developed negatives so Ill give that a go and report what happens.

 

[Richard62]

Thanks for the advice. I cut a strip of 4 negatives in half and followed the instructions in the link above. Treated one strip in isopropyl alcohol: water mixed 1:1 at about 20oC for 45mins agitating very gently once every 5 mins. Washed for 40 mins. The results are shown below (scanned in colour at 12800 dpi) . (The untreated one is out of focus but that was my fault when I took the photo - nothing to do with the treatment.) The spots have pretty much all gone with no effect on the image on the negative. The alcohol:water mixture had quite a purple colour at the end.

I have two other Fomapan 100 films bought at the same time as this one (both expire in 06/2027 not refrigerated) so I can assume these films will have the same problem. So my final question is this.
No damage was done to the film by treating it after processing but, would I damage the emulsion if I pre-soaked the films in alcohol: water mixed 1:1 to make sure all the AHL was removed before developing the film?
Thanks again

 

[koraks]

would I damage the emulsion if I pre-soaked the films in alcohol: water mixed 1:1 to make sure all the AHL was removed before developing the film?

That's not to be expected, but it also makes no difference whether you do the soak before or after actual processing. If you want to keep the developer clear because you reuse it, I can see you may want to do this before development. although the AH dyes don't affect the developer as such.

 

[Richard62]

Thanks. It will take a bit longer to develop the film, but at least the film can be used and not wasted.

 

[DeletedAcct1]

Thanks. It will take a bit longer to develop the film, but at least the film can be used and not wasted.

Foma makes good films and have a really decent customer care.

 

[DeletedAcct1]

That's not to be expected, but it also makes no difference whether you do the soak before or after actual processing. If you want to keep the developer clear because you reuse it, I can see you may want to do this before development. although the AH dyes don't affect the developer as such.

It's another whole different problem here

 

[koraks]

It's another whole different problem here

Which is...

 

[DeletedAcct1]

Which is...

it's not the colouring of the developer btw and the lenghty soak in 50/50 w:a mixture is to be expected to solve the problem the OP was having.

 

[DeletedAcct1]

would I damage the emulsion if I pre-soaked the films in alcohol: water mixed 1:1 to make sure all the AHL was removed before developing the film?

I'd not try that (I can hypothesize the alcohol can disidratate and mess with the gelatine layer somewhat and that's not recommendable before the developing stage) and I'd stick to Foma reccomendations as you've done succesfully.

 

[koraks]

it's not the colouring of the developer btw and the lenghty soak in 50/50 w:a mixture is to be expected to solve the problem the OP was having.

OK, you didn't understand what I wrote in #14. Disregard my post #18; it doesn't make sense to follow up on a misunderstanding.

I can hypothesize the alcohol can disidratate and mess with the gelatine layer somewhat

I don't see this happening. A gelatin layer is virtually unaffected by solvents like ethanol. The soak could be moved to the start of the process, but it'll do neither harm nor good to do so.

 

[DeletedAcct1]

A gelatin layer is virtually unaffected by solvents like ethanol.

Are u sure?

Diluting gelatin with alcohols--Conservation DistList

https://www.publish.csiro.au/bi/pdf/bi9520290

It's not without a reason that Foma engineers have suggested to treat the film in 50:50 w:a mixutre in the final steps and not before development.

 

[koraks]

Not.

Diluting gelatin with alcohols--Conservation DistList

In carbon printing, I routinely bring gelatin in either solid or dissolve state in contact with ethanol. Most notably when brushing a sensiziter using ethanol as a solvent directly onto an unhardened gelatin layer, which isn't affected by this at all expect that the ethanol is absorbed into the gelatin along with the small percentage of water in the mix.
Dunking a silver gelatin film into ethanol prior to development will do f-all to the emulsion as such. Not rinsing off the ethanol may affect the setting properties of the subsequent bath of course.
Besides, the link you provided is barely relevant since a silver gel film is a hardened emulsion, so the protein strands are already curled up and all intertwined.

 

[DeletedAcct1]

In carbon printing, I routinely bring gelatin in either solid or dissolve state in contact with ethanol. Most notably when brushing a sensiziter using ethanol as a solvent directly onto an unhardened gelatin layer, which isn't affected by this at all expect that the ethanol is absorbed into the gelatin along with the small percentage of water in the mix.
Dunking a silver gelatin film into ethanol prior to development will do f-all to the emulsion as such. Not rinsing off the ethanol may affect the setting properties of the subsequent bath of course.
Besides, the link you provided is barely relevant since a silver gel film is a hardened emulsion, so the protein strands are already curled up and all intertwined.

Of course the gelating hardening can be undone in any manner. There's also a significant difference in gelatine modification between a pure ethanol and a 50:50 mixture with water (or any other ratio for that matter).
This is what happen if an unexposed color film is treated with rubbing alcohol...

Lomography - Intoxicate Your Film

Soaking film in rubbing alcohol creates beautiful effects. It's easy too! Here's some tips for you to try.

www.lomography.com

 

[koraks]

Of course the gelating hardening can be undone in any manner.

No, it can't. And it's not what ethanol would even begin to do, either.

This is what happen if an unexposed color film is treated with rubbing alcohol...

This is about soaking unexposed film in alcohol while it remains in its 35mm cassette, then exposing and developing it. That bears no relevance to the matter of soaking a film in a water/alcohol mixture immediately before development.

Look, it's clear you're just trying to somehow prop up your allegation by randomly offering unrelated internet links. Let's just drop the subject; OP can give it a try if they please. I don't expect there will be any problems. It's easy enough for them to give it a try.