What is wrong with this neg?

[10speeduk]

Hi All, I am finding that the last two rolls of B&W Tmax100 I have processed have tiny white specs of highlight on them that look like stars (see attached)

The dev and fixer were brand new that day (ilfosol-3 and ilford rapid fixer). The stop is old though but one shot and not reused. The negs also look rubbish! I developed for the 5:30 as recommended. I have previously done the same with perfect negs as the outcome!!!

Ideas?

Thanks as I dont feel confident to run a B&W at the moment!

Paul

 

[pentaxuser]

Is this a scan of the neg made into the equivalent of a print or a scan of the best print you were able to produce?

If the dev and fix were brand new and the time was as per the manufacturer's time then I am puzzled especially if you are saying that the same dev, fix and times had previously produced good negs and prints.

Maybe you can expand on exactly what the details of the good negs were in the past and exactly what you did this time?

For instance were all the negs like this on this occasion or only this one?

pentaxuser

 

[markbarendt]

Clear spots on the negative create black spots in the positive.

Opaque spots on the negative create white spots in the positive.

I'm going to say you have dirt/dust specks. They should be visible with a magnifier.

Try washing again.

 

[nexus757]

Dust. Most likely you just need to wipe down your scanner with glass cleaner and blow your neg with canned air before scanning.

 

[randyB]

To me, it looks like it could be very out-dated film, the emulsion is starting to degrade which would also cause the flat uneven contrast from top to bottom. If the film is not old then perhaps it could have gotten very hot for several days which would also degrade the emulsion.

 

[10speeduk]

Thanks randy, im going with that one!

 

[Helinophoto]

Check your negatives at an angle to the light.
For example, if you have a spot-light or similar in the ceiling, hold the negative strip horizontally in your hands (as you were looking on them, but with the emulsion side towards you), make sure the background is dark/black. Then let the light from the spot hit the negative top/bottom border, if you vary the angle of the negatives to the the light, you should be able to see any dust as they are lit up up on the negative surface. (I do this every time I'm going to print, and it's very easy to spot dust-specks this way).

I check the front and the back of the negative, blowing canned air as needed, works like a charm.

 

[bdial]

The spots look like dust other crud either on the negative or it could be on the scanner. Check the negative as mentioned. Often the dirt gets there from your water. You may need to use filtered water, or give the film more protection from airborne dust while it's drying.

Some adjustments in your scanner app or in post scanning would improve things, as the film rebate area should be black rather than grey, but that's OT here. Posting in DPUG should get you some good help for that part.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Was the negative scanned with the ICE [dust removal scan] turned off?

 

[Richard S. (rich815)]

Emulsion problem or something in the water. How old is the film? Also did you wash and rinse the containers you mixed the developer and fixer in well before using? I used to get similar sometimes but now use distilled water and have nothing like this.

 

[Prof_Pixel]

Was the negative scanned with the ICE [dust removal scan] turned off?

You can't use ICE with silver B&W images and the original poster is using B&W Tmax 100

 

[Sirius Glass]

You can't use ICE with silver B&W images and the original poster is using B&W Tmax 100

Which was exactly why I raised the question. A few weeks back there was a thread asking about a negative problem and I noticed what looked liked artifacts from ICE on the photograph. I posted around post #8 that I believed that ICE was the problem. Weeks later, guess what, the OP posted that ICE was the problem. Years ago I had a problem with spots that could not be found on the negative and ICE was the culprit. Why not raise the question before the thread gets to 50+ posts and dumping good chemicals?

 

[Prof_Pixel]

The images in that posting had a sort of 'small pox' pitted appearance which is lacking from the OPs image.