• Welcome to Photrio!
    Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.
    Click here to sign up

Where'd these flow marks come from??

sly

Subscriber
Allowing Ads
Joined
Nov 12, 2006
Messages
1,677
Location
Nanaimo
Format
Multi Format
I've never seen this before.

I developed 2 rolls of SFX and 2 rolls of Delta 3200 in one tank. It was 9&1/2 min for one and 10 for the other so I put them in together, and gave them both 10 in DDX. I've mixed films before with same/similar developing times, though not these 2 films.

The Delta is ruined. These flow marks are all over it. I've attached the gap between 2 shots. The SFX is fine (see "Summer Feet" in the MSA gallery). I've used the Delta3200 a fair amount, always develop it in DDX, and have never had any trouble before.

Obviously I won't mix these 2 again, but what happened? The Delta was on the bottom of the tank, and the marks are worst at the end of the roll that was on the outside of the reel. Any clever clogs out there who knows what happened?
 

Attachments

  • Untitled-1.jpg
    66 KB · Views: 200
Last edited by a moderator:
the image is too dark on my monitor to make any time of evaluation
 
I too find the image pretty dark. But I can see the darker irregular “islands.” Those appear to be what happens when one band of film bellies out too much and contacts, or almost contacts the adjacent band. The gap between is almost but not quite tight and prevents developer from flowing in.

The area gets underdeveloped and lacks density on the negative. When printed or scanned the affected areas show the characteristic dark islands as a result. The cause is: the film didn’t load correctly on the developing reel.
 
Looks to me like the marks due to slow tank filling. 4 reel tanks are at the limit for filling via the cap. I take it you are using a stainless tank - the light baffle on the tank dribbles the developer in a few streams at the periphery and is probably the reason the outside turns were effected more than the inside. Usually the top reels have more marking than the bottom reels - but some film/developer combinations are more sensitive than others. It is possible that something dribbled off the SFX as the tank was filling, but my guess is the mix of films didn't have anything to do with the marking.

If you have a center rod for the tank try lowering all 4 reels into a full tank of developer in one swell foop, as it were. A pre-wet cycle might help, but remember to extend developing time a minute or so.
 
Ian - there was no sign of improper loading - I've done that enough in the past to be aware of how it feels, and how it looks as you take film off the reel.

Nicholas - I use the 4 reel tank fairly often and have never seen this before. It's confusing to me that there would be lots of this on the 2 bottom reels, and no sign at all on the 2 top reels if it was about filling problems. My assumption is that there was a layer of something on the SFX that flowed down onto the Delta and seriously disagreed with it.

Click on the thumbnail for a larger view. The flow marks show most on the right side (which would have been uppermost in the tank).
 
I have developed both in DDX but admittedly not together. However I cannot think of a reason why this particular combo should be a "NoNo" in the same tank. I think Ilford would mention this if there was the slightest chance of it being a disastrous combo.

Given what you have said about loading etc, it suggests that there may have been a problem with the D3200. Sounds unlikely I know but when all other causes have been eliminated then even the unlikely may prove to be the probable cause

Sorry that it happened

pentaxuser
 
Thanks Pentaxuser. The photos are not replacable - the grandbaby featured in them has now returned to Germany.
It was a new block of Delta3200 that I'd opened. I'll find an opportunity to shoot another from that block, but I've always trusted Ilford to make a consistently good product.
 
In view of it being a new block of D3200, the mystery deepens. I'd be inclined to load another D3200 from that block and take say 2-3 frames then do a clip test with only that clip in a one reel tank. This should identify whether you have a bad stock of D3200. Even if it is OK I'd be inclined to contact Ilford about it. It may offer to check the damaged film. I don't think I'd risk another whole D3200 film which might also have irreplaceable negs or at least very hard to re-take negs on it.

We know from another post that occasionally things do go wrong. I am thinking of the "blown-up" developer packs which was highlighted here on APUG and which prompted an announcement by Simon Galley of Ilford.

pentaxuser
 
Hi Sly

Usually when the emulsion is not covered with developer immediately you should use a 5 minute water presoak. I've been doing that with Jobo 3000 series drums for sheet film and Jobo 2500 series tanks and reels for roll film without a problem. With the BTZS tubes you do not use a presoak. The same should hold for your tank since the developer doesn't immediately cover the film. Also when comparing the same film and developer combination you could get different developing times and film speeds. I used to know all the tech guys at Jobo USA and they always recommended a 5 minute presoak.

Fred Newman
 

I predict that you will be using your passport and setting your watch back 8 hours in the not to distant future.

Steve
 
Slow pour and not enough agitation in the first 15 seconds will produce these maks ans Nicholas says,,,, probably the most common complaint here on APUG about marks on negs.

 
Bob Carnie said:
Slow pour and not enough agitation in the first 15 seconds will produce these maks ans Nicholas says,,,, probably the most common complaint here on APUG about marks on negs.
Click to expand...

It can be instructive to do this with a couple of prints. Make your exposure and slide them in to the developer, give just enough agitation to make sure the surface is properly covered, and then leave them until the image starts coming through. It is surprising how uneven the development can be, it does not even follow the pattern of highlights and shadows. It shows how important the initial agitation is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register