Troubleshooting Negatives

Hi All,

I have been having intermittent problems with B&W negatives and lines appearing on the non-emulsion side. I don't want to call them scratches even though that is what they look like. Some lines run length wise along the film in varying lengths, while other lines will be somewhat perpendicular. These appear now and then while using the same film back and I always use Ilford film. I have attached some pics from my most recent development that I do myself. I ran a test shots of the cat to see if they would show up, took extra care in handling, developed at home, etc.

Any ideas here? Possible manufacturer's defect?

The next roll thru the same film back may not have any lines at all.



What's interesting is the lateral lines, if they always ran lengthwise I see this being a back issue.

Camera: Hassy 500CM, A12 back, Ilford 400

Thank you

Might be the cat trying to claw its way out of the negative..?
sorry, had to..

The longer scratches may be in-camera but the sideways irregular ones look like scratches that come from handling in the darkroom.

I recognize them because they are similar to what I get when I do sheet film processing in trays. If they are in the base (and you use a diffusion enlarger), they are most often invisible in the print. But if the scratches are in the emulsion they will show on the print - I can usually see emulsion scratches on the wet negative because it changes the surface of the water running off (if it looks like something you want to rub off the wet negative - don't. It'll make it worse).

So check how careful you are when loading and unloading reels.

I get these with Ilford film too, never with Kodak. I'm using it in a Mamiya 6. Don't know the cause, and they don't show in prints or scans of the film.

Firstly, I am sorry you have had a problem: Whilst never say never, these 99.99% do not look like marks that could be generated in manufacturing, lines along the path of the film are usually ( but not always ) camera generated, random or marks very similar to the other ones you have are usually 'handling' related.

As you have bought an ILFORD product it is certainly absolutely your right to return it to us and have it checked out, we have the film examined by our technical service team ( usually under a Electron Microscope ) we have three verdicts CAUSE Justified ( our fault ) CAUSE Not Certain ( we cannot identify a reason ) and cause NOT Justified, the number of scratches as 'our fault' are beyond miniscule.

We hold film ( processed and unprocessed ) from every batch quoted so we can always check back and verify.

Dust and grit where the film moves ( from cassette through the camera, and back out ) are the usual culprits, its one of the reasons why all film is 'Tubbed' or 'Foiled' during manufacture ( and should stay in them until loaded into the camera ) and the inside of cameras should be cleaned very regularly and very carefully, bulk loaders not cared for, handled poorly or left 'unprotected' are a very common cause of longtitudinal scratches, the next most common cause is handling or touching the film, or, when being loaded ( especially into spirals ) for processing, but the most common cause of film damage is during the removal of excessive liquid after washing but before drying, the film emulsion itself is swelled and wet and at its most vulnerable, ILFORD, KODAK and FUJI monochrome films are coated on BOTH sides, both can scratch, but scratches on the Emulsion side are the most likely to show in printing.

SO : Please view all the threads on APUG on 'good practice' in relation to drying films, there are lots and with lots of sensible learning points.


Simon ILFORD Photo / HARMAN technology Limited :

With 120 film the backing paper should eliminate in camera scratching of the back, and the front should run in clear air except for the rebates.

I always use a film squeegee but not had longitudinal scratches other than from corroded pressure plates on 35mm.

Try without gloves and different film batch.

Dear Rtcjr,

The scratches are from handling the film. You're not alone. ;-)

Edwal No-Scratch will solve the problem when printing.

Good luck,

Neal Wydra

I have had marks like that appear on Delta 400 rolls in the past. I'm 99.99% sure it wasn't my handling, because the Delta 400 roll was shot in the same camera, with the same back, as the other films I shot. Perplexed by my issues I even developed a roll of Delta 400 together with other films requiring the same developing time, and the only roll in a tank of four rolls that had these scratches was the Delta 400. I used Rodinal developer at the time, at 1+25. Stainless steel tanks, and Hewes reels.

The artifacts did not show up in printing, so no worries there. I can't see them in scanning either. But it did perplex me.

Thomas, on the surface (no pun) this looks like my ill handling of the film. The more I think about it, it would be logical to assume it happens on the reel - install or removal. Since the film back allows for defect free films, I cannot blame the back exclusively. I need to look back at my 100 Ilford negs for comparisons.

I am very careful with the film loading and handling and very surprised that I at times find this problem which is the reason for the post. I also, do not see the lines/scratches in a scan/print as well but that does not provide any consolation to me.


I'll check check my Ilford 100 and 400 to see if I can find a pattern relative to the 400.

Thanks everyone for your responses.

Rich

Rich

can you clean these marks off the base or are they imbedded scratches.

Hi Bob,

The marks do not come off, I am developing another roll of Ilford 400 now.

Rich

What in your process would you suspect would actually cause the scratches? I have a hard time believing that this only happens due to user error, when even films shot and processed with the same exact equipment, and even with other films in the same tank, and the only other common denominator is the film type? I just don't buy it.

And, since it's not on the emulsion side, your camera cannot cause it, since the backing paper is between any mechanical part of your film back and the film base. That just isn't a possibility.

Would the developer scratch the emulsion, perhaps?

Not trying to be difficult here, and I LOVE Ilford (I buy 90% Ilford film and 100% Ilford paper, selenium toner, and fixer). But I've seen a few reports like this now, and it's always Delta 400 in 120.

And for the record, I will continue to buy Ilford irrespective of this issue. They are a first class producer, and a first class operation.

Rtcjr said:

Thomas, on the surface (no pun) this looks like my ill handling of the film. The more I think about it, it would be logical to assume it happens on the reel - install or removal. Since the film back allows for defect free films, I cannot blame the back exclusively. I need to look back at my 100 Ilford negs for comparisons.

I am very careful with the film loading and handling and very surprised that I at times find this problem which is the reason for the post. I also, do not see the lines/scratches in a scan/print as well but that does not provide any consolation to me.


I'll check check my Ilford 100 and 400 to see if I can find a pattern relative to the 400.

Thanks everyone for your responses.

Rich

Click to expand...

Dear Thomas,

I always take note of what you say:

The numbers of QC's on film to all film rolls sold is tiny as you know, but I have taken the opportunity to check numbers to see if we have 'more' on DELTA 400 Professional ( pro rata ) the answer is we do not.

Simon. ILFORD Photo / HARMAN technology Limited :

Simon R Galley said:

Dear Thomas,

I always take note of what you say:

The numbers of QC's on film to all film rolls sold is tiny as you know, but I have taken the opportunity to check numbers to see if we have 'more' on DELTA 400 Professional ( pro rata ) the answer is we do not.

Simon. ILFORD Photo / HARMAN technology Limited :

Click to expand...

Hi Simon,

The one roll of Delta 400 I kept that shows this issue has one of the best negatives I've ever made on it. I would offer to send it to you for inspection, but I am very careful with that negative, as it's one that I've actually sold prints from, so there's a good chance I'll need it in the future.

I wrote it off as 'science fiction' a long time ago, but see this pop up once in a while, and it reminds me how strange it is.