Weird leakage

[kminov]

In this case it's a Kodak Professional Polycontrast IV paper with some Ilford Bromophen, both expired. Do you guys have any idea which might be the culprit?

 

[koraks]

My money is on the developer. If you try fresh developer, you may find the fog of the paper is unacceptable. So the best solution would be to use both fresh(er) paper and new developer.

 

[kminov]

Thanks! Not sure there is a fresh batch of Kodak paper though.

 

[koraks]

Don't think so, I think they withdrew from the b&w paper business quite some time ago. But there are many other options that are also very good, fortunately!

 

[awty]

All my polycontrast is fogged. I find mixed Bromophen just doesn't develop when it is old. Not sure about the dry chemistry, would think it would last a very long time.

 

[bdial]

The developer is probably fine, the blacks look ok, and the overall contrast looks good. I have some Polycontrast that has similar fogging. Adding an anti-fog agent such as benzotriazole to the developer may help.

 

[koraks]

I thought we were supposed to look at the blotchy white patch in-between and below the two images. Perhaps I got that wrong. @kminov what is the problem precisely and where should we look in the picture?

 

[kminov]

It's like the blacks are leaking, some heavy smudges in the white parts.

 

[koraks]

Yeah, then I was looking at the right spot. My guess would be fogged paper in combination with old developer. But maybe it's just the paper as suggested above. Try some fresh paper to see what happens.

 

[kminov]

Will do, thanks!

 

[Hilo]

Did you use fresh stop bath, or water only?

 

[kminov]

I used some Foma fixer. I do remember it was smudging right out of the developer though.

 

[KenS]

My 'first' thought on looking at the what is supposed to be 'white' in the image is... that you may be 'over-exposing'
the paper, Try again.. after making a new exposure 'test' strip.
My 'second' thought? check your 'safelight' filtration for 'leakage'
My Third 'thought?... Old paper

Ken

 

[kminov]

Yeah, you're probably right on all of these, will try to adjust what I can. Kodak Polycontrast is really fast though, this was a 2 sec exposure at f11 with a 100 watt led bulb.

 

[koraks]

a 100 watt led bulb

That's a pretty massive amount of light output. Way beyond what your typical enlarger light source puts out. So a short exposure time would be no surprise.

 

[kminov]

I see. What would you recommend in terms of watts?

 

[koraks]

Generally something like 100W for an incandescent bulb works OK for 35mm and medium format. So in led territory that would probably something like 10-15W. Also helps to keep things cool!
One issue that may bring confusion is that some led bulbs are also labeled in "equivalent watts", so they are in reality only 10-15W but they are specified as 100W because it's a similar output to an old fashioned 100W bulb.

 

[kminov]

Oh, I see. Mine is about 100W in equivalent terms, I think it's about 13 "real" watts.

 

[pentaxuser]

If it is old paper as in age-fogged paper or old as in exhausted developer why is there only a problem in one corner of the paper or are we saying it is light fogged paper which might account for it being in one patch only?

Certainly any age-fogged paper I have ever had was uniformly fogged grey and the other sign was that even with fresh developer I couldn't get a decent contrast.

pentaxuser

 

[MattKing]

I certainly have encountered old paper that was mottled and had uneven visible evidence of fog. I expect that is what you have here.
Polycontrast IV was discontinued in 2005, so it is at least 14 years old.
And who knows how it was stored.

 

[kminov]

i could literally see the blacks flowing like an ink drop while agitating. And it didn't happen on every sheet. Could they be randomly affected by whatever damaged them?

 

[MattKing]

i could literally see the blacks flowing like an ink drop while agitating. And it didn't happen on every sheet. Could they be randomly affected by whatever damaged them?

Yes, although it more be accurate to describe it as "inconsistently" affected.
Variable contrast papers have a variety of different emulsion components, and those components may respond differently (over time) to age and sources of fogging, including heat.

 

[kminov]

Makes sense, thank you.

 

[MattKing]

What you saw might very well be related to or similar to what has been described as "infectious development". The Lith printers in the crowd may envy you - there aren't many papers left that will give you that.
Using old papers can be fun, and can be frustrating!

 

[kminov]

To be honest, I kinda liked the final effect, the leak blended nicely with the subject