Which is what we get - check the 5th image, the portrait-orientation negative. Higher density on the left, lower density on the right.But the effect of a retarded start of development would mean different densities at both side of borderline between bath and air.
How long does it take you to mount the tank after pouring in the developer? That needs to be done quitw quickly. I can imagine surge marks occur if there's too much time between putting in the chemistry and the start of agitation.
Another possible cause is contamination of the developer, but with good cleanliness and one shot use this shouldn't be an issue.
Well, I do it in exactly the same way and never have any problems with it, so I suppose this is not the issue.Hrm, yeah that would make sense. I try to get the tank on as fast as possible, but I don't own the lift attachment, so I need to fill the canister, get the top on and get it onto the magnet. I do that as fast as I can, but it does take a few seconds to get it rotating
However it can't hurt to check if the fluid level turns out to be where this artefact shows up. It seems pretty close to me in any case.
Just a thought: this might not be processing related. It almost looks like a moving light leak. Are all the affected rolls from the same camera, shot outdoors in bright sun? If so, you may have a light leak at the door hinge, small enough you only see it when the sun shines directly on the hinge.
Edit: Oh, not so much for that last posted image... Carry on...
Well, I do it in exactly the same way and never have any problems with it, so I suppose this is not the issue.
However it can't hurt to check if the fluid level turns out to be where this artefact shows up. It seems pretty close to me in any case.
Could it be a problem with the final rinse? How are you drying the film?
Uneven drying, leaving a final rinse residue, might cause a streaking problem.
I wouldn't suggest a photo-flo dip after final rinse - final rinse includes its own surfactant.
Can you try drying a roll at an angle different from vertical? If you dry the film at 30 degrees from vertical, and you see strange streaks on that film, also 30 degrees from vertical, that would be a clue that there is a problem with the final rinse you are using.
Do not use PhotoFlo for color slides or negatives. It is for black & white only.
How would PhotoFlo affect colour films in a negative way compared to b&w films ?
Its shortcomings are from a time when a dedicated stabilizer was needed for colour films.
(One could debate whether colour films need a higher degree of biocide, but this too would not be related to the artefact we are discussing.)
How would PhotoFlo affect colour films in a negative way compared to b&w films ?
Its shortcomings are from a time when a dedicated stabilizer was needed for colour films.
(One could debate whether colour films need a higher degree of biocide, but this too would not be related to the artefact we are discussing.)
It's part of the story told in the thread linked to above. Another essential part is that the dyes in current c41 stocks were re-engineered to not be dependent on the protection of formaldehyde to remain stable over the years.At least, that's what I read on the internet. So it has to be right, right?
I don't remember anything about photoflo being detrimental in any way. Nor could I conceive of a likely mechanism for this.
Sorry for quoting myself.Final rinse is essentially a surfactant - maybe even photo-flo itself - and some additional important extras, some of which are intended to stay on the dried film..
If you just use photo-flo, you don't get the important extras.
If you add photo-flo to the final rinse, you end up diluting the important extras.
If you use photo-flo after final rinse, you end up washing some or all of the important extras off.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?