T-Max 400 in D76 1+1 - mottling problem

[Bill Jamieson]

After more than 40 years of using Ilford films, I thought I would give T-Max 400 a go. Over the last couple of weeks I've exposed and developed seven 120 rolls and processed them in D76 1+1 as per the Kodak October 2007 data sheet F-4043. On the whole I've been very impressed with the results, except that some films exhibit a mottling in areas of dense even tone e.g. sky. There doesn't seem to be any rhyme or reason to this - one film can exhibit this fault and the next one is absolutely fine. The negs were scanned at 4000 ppi and the mottling only becomes obvious at about 50% screen enlargement so at normal print sizes it probably wouldn't be obvious but all the same there is something wrong that I would like to get to the bottom of.

Bill

 

[RobC]

that looks like hard water marks to me in the lighter areas and lack of them in the darker areas.

Is that Stow as in Stow on the Wolds? thats a limestone area which usually gives hard water supplies to homes.

Try mixing your dev stock and diluting water using distilled/de-ionised/filtered water and see if it helps.

And out of curiosity, are you using a pre-soak before dev ?

 

[MattKing]

Does the mottling appear when you examine the negatives under a magnifier? It may be that what you are seeing is actually an interaction between something like hard water deposits and the scanning process.

 

[pentaxuser]

I take it that the mottling can be seen on the negative with a loupe i.e. it is not a scanning issue? Try printing a 8x10 from the neg and see if there is mottling on the print.

RobC the OP lives in the Scottish Borders not Stow on the Wold in the Cotswolds. I had thought that all water o'er the border was soft.

Some things are in fact soft in the Cotswolds as well. Mainly the tourists willing to pay the prices in the clothing and antique shops

pentaxuser

 

[Bill Jamieson]

Pentaxuser is right that Scottish water is generally soft but in any case I always use home treated water (carbon filter + reverse osmosis) for dev, stop bath, fixer and final wash. I don't actually have a powerful enough magnifier to examine the negative closely (nor am in a position to do a darkroom print these days) but I'm fairly sure it's not a scanning issue as the negs are consistent within any one film.

Bill

PS No, I don't use a pre-soak.

 

[RobC]

In that case I have no idea which isn't much help.

 

[Bill Jamieson]

Thanks all the same, Rob.

 

[pentaxuser]

It defeats me as well, Bill. It seems to be a random thing in that some of the films and developer are OK and others are not but the odds against getting a mixture of good and bad films and developers are incredibly high

You haven't said how long ago you developed Ilford films but I don't think it has anything to do with changing films. I take it that the D76 for both the good and bad films is the same stock solution

You have largely or probably definitely ruled out changes in tap water as the cause as well

I am somehow drawn back to scanning but it's no more than a gut feeling

pentaxuser

 

[RobC]

one thing that occurs to me is that Kodak agitation routines seem to require longer initial agitation and more frequent agitation than Ilford recommends. Are you using the Kodak agitation routine?

 

[RobC]

I assume there is no sediment in dev or fixer that could have contaminated the film ?

I think you need to examine the neg close up to see if you can see any residue of any kind on it becasue thats what it looks like but impossible to be sure from the scan.

 

[Xmas]

Well Tmax is difficult to fix try refixing a strip with the symptoms again for normal fix time in fresh fixer washing and drying and rescanning.

A plastic aspheric loupe is necessary even with an enlarger.

If that does not work try Delta 400 - it is difficult to fix as well fix for twice normal time discard after fewer films...

 

[Bill Jamieson]

The last time I developed any Ilford films was getting on for a year ago (a batch of about 15 rolls of Delta 400 in DD-X) and there was no trace of this problem.

The most recent roll of TMY-2 was developed yesterday (Thursday) morning and was OK. The previous one I did on Wednesday afternoon - film from same pack of 5. developer from same stock solution, fresh fixer (reused for the next film), agitation as per Kodak recommendations - and the mottling is quite distinct in sky areas of the scan (but, as I said before, it only becomes obvious at high magnification). Perhaps Pentaxuser is right and it's a scanning issue.

Easiest solution would be to revert to Delta 400 - in truth there doesn't seem to be much difference between the two films except for the cost issue with DD-X (and yes, I do use it at higher dilutions than Ilford's recommended 1+4, but that doesn't help when I only have a couple of films to process. Mind you I should probably use ID11 stock solution in that case).

 

[Xmas]

Delta 400 is ok in

Microphen stock
Or ID11
Or Rodinal 1:100 stand 60 minutes ~ but contrasty

 

[RalphLambrecht]

After more than 40 years of using Ilford films, I thought I would give T-Max 400 a go. Over the last couple of weeks I've exposed and developed seven 120 rolls and processed them in D76 1+1 as per the Kodak October 2007 data sheet F-4043. On the whole I've been very impressed with the results, except that some films exhibit a mottling in areas of dense even tone e.g. sky. There doesn't seem to be any rhyme or reason to this - one film can exhibit this fault and the next one is absolutely fine. The negs were scanned at 4000 ppi and the mottling only becomes obvious at about 50% screen enlargement so at normal print sizes it probably wouldn't be obvious but all the same there is something wrong that I would like to get to the bottom of.

Bill

Try a 5-min presoak and see if it helps.For me it did notbut YMMV. Are you by any chance have a severe temp change in your process? such as very hot or cold wash water?:confused:

 

[StephenT]

I'm wondering if D76 is perhaps not the best choice for TMAX films. I thought that XTOL was one of the preferred developers for TMAX.

 

[Bill Jamieson]

Thanks for the suggestions, Xmas. I have tried re-fixing and washing a strip but that has made no difference.

Ralph, I try to work to fairly tight tolerances regarding temperature and the different solutions (and wash water) are usually within 0.2 - 0.3 deg. C of each other.

 

[RobC]

taking your posted image and inverting it back to negative does show some very dark specs which does look an awful lot like residue of some kind or possibly over activity in the chemistry maybe caused by developer containing micro particles of undissolved chemical.

I was told years ago that its a good idea to leave freshly mixed developer stock for 24 hours before using it so you can be sure microscopic particles are fully dissolved.

Just a thought as I really don't know if thats the cause.

 

[Richard S. (rich815)]

Tmax 400 is D-76 is capable of terrific results so I see no need to change your developer if it's getting you what you like. That said I also find it wonderful in Rodinal and HC-110. I get that mottling on occasion too and I think it's either some hard water deposits or could be some D-76 chemical remnants too. I also never really figured it out but do not see it that often enough to avoid D-76. That said I more often use Rodinal and HC-110 due to their convenience but go back to D-76 to remind myself how nice it can be too:

Tmax 400, D-76 1-1


Tmax 400, D-76 stock

 

[Gerald C Koch]

Is the film within its expiration date? I have seen this occasionally with outdated 120 film.

 

[RobC]

I blame the Scotch Mist!

are the films refrigerated and do you give them time to warm to ambient temp before opening packaging?

Are the mottled images at start, middle or end of roll or all along it?

 

[Bill Jamieson]

To cover some of the points that have been raised:-

1. The mottling is visible on every frame of the affected rolls.

2. Expiry date of the film is 2/2017. The film was bought late last year (with the intention of doing a trial much sooner but I've only just got round to it) and stored in a drawer in the coolest room in the house - temperature never gets above about 15 deg C, even in mid summer (but that's a Scottish summer for you!).

3. I wonder if there might be some currency in the undissolved microscopic particles of developer theory. That would certainly fit with the first four films, where only the 1st and 2nd films are affected - the 1st film may have been processed the same day as I mixed the developer but I'm not certain now. I'm not so sure that it fits with he next three films I developed (using the second litre of stock solution), although the last film is certainly OK.

I still have three films and a litre pack of D76 left, so I think a further trial is called for, mixing the D76 a few days in advance of processing.

 

[Xmas]

I think one of the 1927 era data sheets mentioned the activity would change in the first 24 hours.

And the single pack Kodak developers use strange techniques.

But you should use the correct mix temp and let any sediment settle .

I decant carefully into tank as my water is way hard.

I filter before pouring stock back into stock bottle too.

But I'd be suprised if that were the problem you could rescan a n to n+1 rebate to see if the mottle had moved if you cannot see it with a loupe.

 

[RobC]

I was thinking about why leaving for 24 hours would improve the developer and I suspect its more about allowing it to "mature" meaning all the chemicals have had time to react together to give the correct makeup. Just becasue the powder has gone into solution doesn't mean the reactions have stabilised. I suspect its really more about that than micro particles becasue I would have thought you would be able to see if it wasn't 100% clear.

Anyway, its worth trying and as Xmas says, use the correct mixing temp which will help with the reactions during initial mix. And probably not a good idea to cool it down straight after mixing by putting it in the fridge. i.e. Leave in room temp for at least 24 hours before using and then see if that helps.

 

[Bill Jamieson]

Thanks all for your suggestions - I will try paying more attention to my mixing regime which seems to be the most likely cause of my problem, even if the exact mechanism isn't totally clear.

Bill

 

[RobC]

Kodak changed their formulation of D76 a while back so that the chemicals could be packaged together in one bag. ID11 is still in two bags and is closer to the original ID11/D76 formulation but I believe Ilford farm out the production ID11 and possibly Kodak too so although we like to believe these are very old tried and tested formulas, there are always subtle changes taking place which we're not told about. They are brand names rather than fixed formulas. If you want fixed formulas you have to mix your own from individual chemicals.