Weird "Grain" or Something Else??

[matthewm]

Hey y'all,
I developed my first roll of film in more than 10 years over the weekend (whew, I'm rusty!), and it initially turned out okay just looking at the negatives in the light. It was a roll of Tri-X (fresh) developed in CineStill's Monobath (first roll from a fresh bottle so I know the chemicals are good).

However, I noticed yesterday when I went to scan in a couple of the negatives that I'm getting some dark, yellowish areas on the negatives and when I scanned one of the photos in, I'm seeing what looks almost like tiny grains of rice instead of film grain. It's organic in nature and doesn't appear across the entirety of the image. I'm attaching a crop or two so you can see it...

Is this chemistry-related? Or possibly a bad roll of film? I've developed hundreds of rolls of film (black and white), albeit a long time ago, and I'm at a loss here with what could have gone wrong or what I'm missing.

Thanks,
Matthew

 

[radiant]

That's called reticulation, too much temperature difference before fixing.

 

[MattKing]

Welcome back.
We sure are seeing an interesting variety of problems since monobath's have come back into play, aren't we?
It does look like reticulation. What was your wash temperature?

 

[Donald Qualls]

Don't know how you could introduce enough temperature swing to get reticulation with a monobath. However, Df96 does like to run on the warm side; if the wash was cold water, or very hot, I suppose it's possible. But I agree, that looks like reticulation.

 

[Sirius Glass]

With modern films it is hard to get reticulation. One must use extremes in temperature to get it.

 

[MattKing]

Do monobaths have the propensity to soften previously hardened emulsions?

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Looks like reticulation... but for clarity, ask Chris

 

[Auer]

We sure are seeing an interesting variety of problems since monobath's have come back into play, aren't we?

Pretty common with new to market products that people lack experience with, no?

 

[Auer]

Don't know how you could introduce enough temperature swing to get reticulation with a monobath. However, Df96 does like to run on the warm side; if the wash was cold water, or very hot, I suppose it's possible. But I agree, that looks like reticulation.

Maybe if the film was very cold from being outside?
Or having a much cooler/hotter rinse than dev as you suggested, but by how much?

I seem to recall that @Huss tried to get reticulation with DF96..??

 

[Don_ih]

I had similar reticulation on film that baked in a car for a couple of days.

 

[matthewm]

Thanks for all the replies y'all... I developed at the recommended 70F for 6 minutes. I did rinse my film before actually processing it (as I always have done) using tap water that was just lukewarm. I know that's not scientific and "lukewarm" can be 70 or it can be 92. But it was essentially room temperature water. And I tempered my measuring device before pouring my chemistry into it so that I didn't pour 70º liquid into a 60º container and cause it to drop in temperature.

So strange... I'm going to have to process a few more rolls before I know for sure. Wondering now if Monobath just isn't worth the little bit of time savings over a traditional process. Especially if it's more finicky than a standard process.

 

[Donald Qualls]

This kind of thing can happen with any process -- in my experience monobath is no more prone to problems than conventional three-bath processes, and in some ways it's less prone (you can't possible pour the fixer before the developer, for instance, because you're pouring a mixture of both). I quit using Df96 mainly because I tried replenished Xtol and got a permanent darkroom, so there was no more need -- but I have a bag of the dry version stored away, and I'm likely to take it with me on my next vacation, so I can process my film at the beach house instead of having to haul it all home and process it after I'm back to working full time.

 

[matthewm]

This kind of thing can happen with any process -- in my experience monobath is no more prone to problems than conventional three-bath processes, and in some ways it's less prone (you can't possible pour the fixer before the developer, for instance, because you're pouring a mixture of both). I quit using Df96 mainly because I tried replenished Xtol and got a permanent darkroom, so there was no more need -- but I have a bag of the dry version stored away, and I'm likely to take it with me on my next vacation, so I can process my film at the beach house instead of having to haul it all home and process it after I'm back to working full time.

Well that's good news. I had only heard (mostly) good things about it. Glad to hear you had a positive experience as well. I'll keep at it and try some more film. I'm documenting what my process is each time so that I know if I'm getting better or worse results, what I need to do the next time.

Really thankful for all of the insight here. I've been away for a while, but recently decided to put down my digital cameras (because it feels too much like work) and pick up my film cameras. So far in January, I've "treated myself" to a Bessa R2 + Nokton 35/1.4, Canon EOS 1N and Fuji GW690. Now I just gotta get this developing under control.

 

[Donald Qualls]

Now I just gotta get this developing under control.

All it takes is practice. Some of us have been practicing for a very long time. Some pick it up faster than others, too. keep at it, and you'll soon find it getting easier and more natural.

As an example -- yesterday, I processed a roll of B&W Lomography Orca 100, and a roll of XP2 Super -- simultaneously. I ran the XP2 Super in stand process at room temperature (C-41 chemistry, normally 100F); poured the developer, gave the first minute of continuous agitation, then set the tank at the back of my counter, measured, poured, timed, etc. for the Xtol replenished for the Orca 100 -- and had that all done by the time the XP2 Super needed stop bath and fixer (I was also running bleach bypass on it). Less than an hour combined for both. Back in '03, when I started doing my own film again (after learning in 1969 and doing it sporadically through the '70s), I couldn't have even considered doing that -- but yesterday, I did it because it was convenient and time-saving.

 

[Sirius Glass]

All it takes is practice. Some of us have been practicing for a very long time. Some pick it up faster than others, too. keep at it, and you'll soon find it getting easier and more natural.

As an example -- yesterday, I processed a roll of B&W Lomography Orca 100, and a roll of XP2 Super -- simultaneously. I ran the XP2 Super in stand process at room temperature (C-41 chemistry, normally 100F); poured the developer, gave the first minute of continuous agitation, then set the tank at the back of my counter, measured, poured, timed, etc. for the Xtol replenished for the Orca 100 -- and had that all done by the time the XP2 Super needed stop bath and fixer (I was also running bleach bypass on it). Less than an hour combined for both. Back in '03, when I started doing my own film again (after learning in 1969 and doing it sporadically through the '70s), I couldn't have even considered doing that -- but yesterday, I did it because it was convenient and time-saving.

Hmm ... , let me guess one can develop XP2 Super at room temperature because there is not color shift?

 

[Donald Qualls]

Hmm ... , let me guess one can develop XP2 Super at room temperature because there is not color shift?

Bingo!

 

[matthewm]

yeah... I've done a lot of film in my life, but not recently. Just wanted a break from digital. I'm enjoying the process. Not frustrated yet. LOL

 

[Saganich]

To get that level of reticulation the film would have to have experienced like a 70 C change in temperature at some point, well beyond normal processing. That begs the question: Can reticulation occur prior to processing or prior to exposure or is it only when the emulsion is softest? Are there other assaults besides temperature (chemical, radiation, pH) that could cause the same damage during processing? Is monobath photography's quantum world?

 

[Saganich]

I had similar reticulation on film that baked in a car for a couple of days.

Was that before or after being exposed?

 

[matthewm]

I thought this was a little extreme in terms of reticulation. I've seen reticulation before (have even experimented with it). But this is really, really extreme. The only other thing I can think of is that this film was ordered online from The Find Lab and I guess there's a chance maybe it was X-rayed or put through some sort of radiation at some point in it's journey to me???

 

[Don_ih]

Was that before or after being exposed?

The film I had got baked in my van in a camera. I forgot it was there. Probably heated up to 45 degrees C or so.

Also, the film was Plus-x.

Xray fogging doesn't look like reticulation. Depending on the strength of the signal, it looks like more or less regular sinusoidal fogging. See https://www.kodak.com/global/en/service/tib/tib5201.shtml

 

[Craig75]

Yellow marks on negative + only some of image being reticulated is really odd.

Ive reticulated film using kodak darkroom book and that needed ice water and 40 degree water to crack the emulsion.

So god knows whats happened there. Don heisz's comment seems the most plausible.

 

[matthewm]

I’m just gonna chalk this up to a weird anomaly. The film was brand new and I took it from my climate-controlled closet (just a coat closet) and put it in my camera that I carried around with me for the day. Never left it in the car. Really strange. Maybe I just got a bad roll.

I’ll keep at it and see what happens.

 

[runswithsizzers]

Did you mail order the film? And was it shipped to you recently, or back during the summer?

My metal mailbox is painted black, and it gets hot inside on sunny days. And I wonder about the inside of those dark brown UPS trucks; some have plastic tops to let in light (and possibly solar heat?).

 

[matthewm]

It was mail ordered recently. But I developed a roll of Ektar from the same order last night and it looks beautiful. Go figure...