Weird Pan X results

braxus · Jun 15, 2007

I was going to show a test of three films. Panatomic X, Plus X, and Efke 25. I had them all developed at a lab using HC-110B. Anyway the Efke developing time was off, so it was way over developed. Scratch that. I scanned up the Pan X and Plus X. Their density was normal. I got a weird pattern showing on the Pan X negs. Fog was noticable, but still usable. But the pattern was like some artwork over top the neg. I can't figure out what caused this pattern. I have shot from this 100' roll before and never noticed it. But here it was. Can this be caused from condensation of water vapor on the neg? If so I didn't wait long enough to roll the film. If this is water vapor on the negs, have I basically just ruined my 100' roll of Pan X? Or can it be salvaged? See below for a copy of the pattern.

http://www.photo.net/bboard/uploaded-file?bboard_upload_id=37014984

http://www.photo.net/bboard/uploaded-file?bboard_upload_id=37015084

ricksplace · Jun 15, 2007

Looks like reticulation. I kinda like it. Your lab probably washed it in water that was too cold. Rapid temp change causes the emulsion to shrink too fast and the patterns you see is the result.

braxus · Jun 15, 2007

If this is so, how is it then that it didn't effect the Plus X?

Chris Breitenstein · Jun 15, 2007

that is reticulated grain. typically caused by a rapid change in temp during processing. if it was done in a lab most E-6 is processed at 100F, and B&W is normally at 68F.

Im guessing the lab screwed up on this one.

Yours;

Chris Breitenstein · Jun 15, 2007

perhaps the Plus x was done in a different batch. or is more resistant to reticulation.

rusty71 · Jun 16, 2007

The latest Kodak and Ilford films are VERY resistant to reticulation. In fact, it's almost unheard of now. Panatomic X, being a much older emulsion would reticulate much more easily.

bob100684 · Jun 16, 2007

i'd guess EIR is also an older emulsion then? the only e-6 i did by hand was a 2 roll tank, the eir reticulated the regular elite chrome was fine.....confusing

Tom Hoskinson · Jun 16, 2007

bob100684 said:
i'd guess EIR is also an older emulsion then? the only e-6 i did by hand was a 2 roll tank, the eir reticulated the regular elite chrome was fine.....confusing

Kodak EIR is a false color infra-red film. It is designed for high temperature processing (AR5 and/or E6). The EIR film base is very thin and Kodak warns that it can CRINKLE easily during handling and mounting. The EIR emulsion should not reticulate.

http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/support/techPubs/cis188/cis188.jhtml#8996

Photo Engineer · Jun 16, 2007

Scott;

That is reticulation.

Perhaps the drying cabinet was too hot or the wash water was too hot. Whichever the case, the film was subjected to a sharp change in temperature.

Sorry to see this happen.

PE

braxus · Jun 16, 2007

Thanks everyone. I guess I'll just stick to using my main lab for B&W. It looks like I'll have to test my second 100' roll of Pan X anyway, so I'll do the test over at another time. When that happens I'll post the results.

bob100684 · Jun 16, 2007

Tom Hoskinson said:
Kodak EIR is a false color infra-red film. It is designed for high temperature processing (AR5 and/or E6). The EIR film base is very thin and Kodak warns that it can CRINKLE easily during handling and mounting. The EIR emulsion should not reticulate.

http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/support/techPubs/cis188/cis188.jhtml#8996

it is reticulated as far as I can tell, those same line's in the op's photos are present in the eir

Tom Hoskinson · Jun 17, 2007

bob100684 said:
it is reticulated as far as I can tell, those same line's in the op's photos are present in the eir

Well, Should Not does not equal Won't or Can't - - the emulsion must have gotten a very substantial thermal shock. The E6 emulsions are quite hard.

Weird Pan X results

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency