Weird "Grain" or Something Else??

[Donald Qualls]

The other thing is that the marks look awfully regular -- they don't look much like the examples I've seen of reticulation.

Reticulation, when I've seen images of it, has always looked like continuous lines in a convoluted pattern like what mathematicians call a "space filler curve". This looks like the pattern on treaded steel plate -- short lines in a partial weave pattern. This film didn't get into contact with a coarse weave fabric while the gelatin was wet, did it?

Edit: I just looked back, and the pattern isn't regular enough for fabric, but it's not the "space filler curve" I'm used to seeing in reticulation, either.

 

[matthewm]

The other thing is that the marks look awfully regular -- they don't look much like the examples I've seen of reticulation.

Reticulation, when I've seen images of it, has always looked like continuous lines in a convoluted pattern like what mathematicians call a "space filler curve". This looks like the pattern on treaded steel plate -- short lines in a partial weave pattern. This film didn't get into contact with a coarse weave fabric while the gelatin was wet, did it?

Edit: I just looked back, and the pattern isn't regular enough for fabric, but it's not the "space filler curve" I'm used to seeing in reticulation, either.

Yeah. I'm kinda chalking this up to a bad roll of film. LOL

 

[Donald Qualls]

Bizarre. It almost looks like an odd case of wrapper offset. Do you still have the backing? Or was this 35mm?

 

[matthewm]

Bizarre. It almost looks like an odd case of wrapper offset. Do you still have the backing? Or was this 35mm?

This was 35mm. The film is pretty discolored as well. I'm really thinking maybe I just got a bad roll or something. I have another roll from the same order that I'm going to shoot and process to see if maybe it's a batch issue or if I just got REALLY unlucky.

 

[Donald Qualls]

Hmmm. Tempting to ask how you mixed the Df96. Distilled or DI water? Hottish when you mixed (so everything dissolves as it should)? Those marks just about could be from incompletely dissolved thiosulfate crystals from the fixer bag... And if so, the problem likely won't repeat, because the fixer will have finished dissolving in the interim.

 

[matthewm]

Hmmm. Tempting to ask how you mixed the Df96. Distilled or DI water? Hottish when you mixed (so everything dissolves as it should)? Those marks just about could be from incompletely dissolved thiosulfate crystals from the fixer bag... And if so, the problem likely won't repeat, because the fixer will have finished dissolving in the interim.

I used the pre-mixed liquid version of it and I'll have to look at my notes, but I'm fairly certain it was 72F when I developed. That being said, I developed in a Lab-Box and I didn't do any sort of "bath" to sit the box in so the temp on the chemicals most certainly dropped a little bit. I can't imagine it dropped enough to do this to the film, but next time I develop a roll, I'm going to run some warm water in the sink and sit the box in it to sort of temper it before adding any chemicals and then I'll just leave it sitting in there through the developing process. I did that last night with my color developing and the chemicals only changed by about a half a degree over the course of development.

 

[Craig75]

Its actually a cool effect. I'd be cropping that pig in back of truck picture heavily (like you have done to show us) and making an 8x10 of it to exaggerate the effect.

Youve been dealt an odd hand but plenty to play with there.

 

[Donald Qualls]

I developed in a Lab-Box and I didn't do any sort of "bath" to sit the box in so the temp on the chemicals most certainly dropped a little bit.

I can't picture the gradual temperature drop that occurs during development causing reticulation -- normally you'd expect that if you were processing at 80F and your wash was 55F out of the tap -- and even that's less likely now than it would have been, say, forty years ago (emulsions are harder now, in part because machine processing runs at higher temperatures than it did in the 70s and 80s).

 

[foc]

I developed in a Lab-Box and I didn't do any sort of "bath" to sit the box in so the temp on the chemicals most certainly dropped a little bit

Could there have been moisture or residue on the film guide in the lab box?
I have not used one but is there any roller in the unit that comes in contact with the film?
I remember a similar pattern problem years ago with C41 machine processing and it was caused by a Noritsu dimpled roller. (just a thought).

 

[Auer]

Could there have been moisture or residue on the film guide in the lab box?
I have not used one but is there any roller in the unit that comes in contact with the film?
I remember a similar pattern problem years ago with C41 machine processing and it was caused by a Noritsu dimpled roller. (just a thought).
View attachment 264778

LB has no roller, but a plastic guide that is very easy to keep clean. It couldnt really cause this effect.
I have one, and cant see anything in the LB that could do this.
Its fairly thick plastic and if the LB is not too far from the Dev temp I cant see it causing a radical drop either.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

...and when you want to purposely reticulate a film, it's darn near impossible.

 

[AgX]

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

Even in old textbooks it is rather looked at as historic.

 

[AgX]

Re

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?).

Reticulation is an effect that if at all comes into existance at wet, swollen gelatin layers, thus is a processing artefact. You will not produce it at transporting dry films after processing.

 

[Donald Qualls]

Could there have been moisture or residue on the film guide in the lab box?
I have not used one but is there any roller in the unit that comes in contact with the film?
I remember a similar pattern problem years ago with C41 machine processing and it was caused by a Noritsu dimpled roller. (just a thought).

This pattern isn't quite regular. Manufactured items like those Noritsu rollers generally are.

 

[runswithsizzers]

Re

Reticulation is an effect that if at all comes into existance at wet, swollen gelatin layers, thus is a processing artefact. You will not produce it at transporting dry films after processing.

I notice your wording, "You will not produce it at transporting dry films after processing." If mail-order film gets too hot during shipping, any damage that might occur would be before processing, if that makes any difference.

I remember learning about reticulation in a medium format photography class as something that can happen during processing with significant changes in temperature. But I've never seen it. So I have no real experience with reticulation, and my comment was pure speculation (and worth whatever the going rate is for unsubstantiated internet opinions .

However, I did see in post #10 that someone did have actual experience with film left in a hot car, and that person saw something similar. Not clear if the heat exposure was before or after processing. (See also #22 and #23)

 

[AgX]

No, you got mislead by me... I just wrote "after processing" as the metallic silver can have (at least in theory, I even got no resp. example at hand) in the wet gelatin have effect on reticulation. Forget it about it...


Again: there is no chance of reticulation at a dry layer.

 

[matthewm]

For anyone following along with this thread, I developed a couple more rolls of film using this developer and got this result on another roll. I'm assuming it's the chemistry at this point as I developed some other rolls using the same brand chemistry but a different bottle and I didn't get the same results. Win some, lose some. I'll toss this bottle and go with the new bottle from here on out.

 

[pentaxuser]

I take it that there is nothing in the scanning that might cause this? I'll admit that if the scanner and the scanning setup is the same it would appear not to be the cause but then the fact that you have had this now twice does make me wonder. I take it that under a very powerful loupe or better still under a grain magnifier nothing shows up on the negs?

pentaxauser

 

[matthewm]

I take it that there is nothing in the scanning that might cause this? I'll admit that if the scanner and the scanning setup is the same it would appear not to be the cause but then the fact that you have had this now twice does make me wonder. I take it that under a very powerful loupe or better still under a grain magnifier nothing shows up on the negs?

pentaxauser

under a loupe I can clearly see the texture so it’s not scanning that is the issue. I can only assume that since it was different films from different batches and manufacturers that it has to be the chemistry.