White dot on neg - solutions?

[pentaxuser]

I made a print(5x7) last night and noticed that on it there was a small black dot about 1mm in the sky area. On very close examination of the neg(35mm) with a loupe I coud just about see a white dot on the neg which is in the neg. It's not a speck of dust or object attached to the surface of the neg as far as I can see and is almost undetectable with the naked eye on the neg even when you know where to look.

Despite its smallness it couldn't be ignored since being black it stood out on the print. My first thought was to scrape the dot away on the print and then spot. This was difficult even under a magnifying glass and may have been made worse by the paper being RC glossy. I did get the black removed but created an indentation in the surface which was difficult to spot. I used Tetenal Spot pens which I have found to be quite good for small white spots on the print

It's OK but not if it had been a special print for framing or to be presented to someone.

Had it been special what other solutions would have been available to me from either the neg or print end of the problem?

Thanks

pentaxuser

 

[ann]

Rather than scrape away the black dot, get some iodine at the drug store, take a toothpick and file away the end to make it as small as possible.

Take the toothpick and tip it with iodine. Re-fix the print in normal fixer after the spot has been removed.

Then spot as usual.

 

[AgCl4ever]

You can also use bleach (ferricyanide, not household) on the black spot on the print, then fix, etc. Or, you can use photo-opaque on the pinhole on the negatiive, then spot the print; this can be delicate with a tiny pinhole on 35mm.

Ken

 

[Donald Miller]

I prefer to retouch the negative. Using scarlet cocein and a 10/0 brush the negative defect can be retouched one time in lieu of removing a dark spot frome each and every print. Retouching the negative will usually leave a white spot on the print which is a lot easier to deal with than a dark spot on the print. Retouching the negative also eliminates the refixing and rewashing of the print which is required with both iodine and ferracyanide.

 

[pentaxuser]

Thanks all for all the answers. Repairing the neg sounds useful if you were ever to do more prints as Donald points out. A couple of you have mentioned ways of doing this such as photo opaque and scarlet cocein. Are these the same thing? I have never seen such materials listed in UK photo suppliers so I wonder what I need look for?

I have seen stuff called photo mask listed which is a liquid which hardens to a rubberised skin and is used for protecting parts of prints that you don't want to tone. Is this the same stuff and would it work on negs?

One of the problems of cross Atlantic solutions to problems is the use of different names and occasionally the lack of the same material this side of the Atlantic.

Donald. Presumably a 10/0 brush is about as fine as you can get but will be fine enough for even tiny blemishes on a 35mm neg?

Incidentally as the neg was not precious I thought I'd have a go with a pencil but it was hopeless. It's point seemed fine enough but it just wouldn't deposit graphite to cover the blemish. Maybe it wasn't soft enough. However in trying to use it I strayed beyond the blemish and was certainly able to affect the neg and subsequent print. It made me wonder if someone was artistic enough whether he could alter a sky to the print's benefit.

Thanks again

pentaxuser

 

[Donald Miller]

Thanks all for all the answers. Repairing the neg sounds useful if you were ever to do more prints as Donald points out. A couple of you have mentioned ways of doing this such as photo opaque and scarlet cocein. Are these the same thing? I have never seen such materials listed in UK photo suppliers so I wonder what I need look for?

I have seen stuff called photo mask listed which is a liquid which hardens to a rubberised skin and is used for protecting parts of prints that you don't want to tone. Is this the same stuff and would it work on negs?

One of the problems of cross Atlantic solutions to problems is the use of different names and occasionally the lack of the same material this side of the Atlantic.

Donald. Presumably a 10/0 brush is about as fine as you can get but will be fine enough for even tiny blemishes on a 35mm neg?

Incidentally as the neg was not precious I thought I'd have a go with a pencil but it was hopeless. It's point seemed fine enough but it just wouldn't deposit graphite to cover the blemish. Maybe it wasn't soft enough. However in trying to use it I strayed beyond the blemish and was certainly able to affect the neg and subsequent print. It made me wonder if someone was artistic enough whether he could alter a sky to the print's benefit.

Thanks again

pentaxuser

Photo opaque and scarlet cocein are two different things. The cocein can be diluted to lighten the value of the application and built up as need with subsequent applications. A 10/0 brush is undoubtedly sharper than a pencil. Photo opaque would be used to block all light transmission through areas of the neg. The rubber masking compoound you men-
tioned is not suitable for this application.

35 mm negs are probably going to be difficult to retouch small blemishes. Scarlet cocein can be used to affect regions on the negative...such as adding density to lighten overly dark regions in addition to retouching blemishes.