Kodak T-Max 400 emulsion defect?

I've just developed a 120 roll of T-Max 400, the first from a batch recently received. It was developed in a twin-spool tank along with the last roll of a previous batch, using PMK Pyro developer. To my dismay, the new roll exhibits strange artifacts, a sample scan of which I post below. The film is clean and free from anything adhering to the surface, and the old roll shows nothing untoward.

 

The only possibility I can think of is that there was condensation on the real element of the lens, (the camera was cold from sitting a car all night and I had to clean the front element of moisture before use), but I don't think this would have produced marks so well-defined. Any ideas out there?

 

Edited September 3, 2019 by rick_drawbridge

The only time I had that problem Rick, was from an old PhotoFlo mix. Though the spots were brighter, they were the same size and chaotic pattern over the whole neg

It could be condensing on other lens surfaces, but it could also be on the film itself.

Usually the effect is worse than that, but it could be that.

 

We are reminded to let film warm up when taking it out of the freezer

or refrigerator. Also when taking a cold camera to a warm place.

Thanks for the replies. It occurred to me that the first two frames on the film were taken the afternoon before the camera was left in the car overnight, and on checking them the same problem is evident. It's unlikely that these frames would have been affected by any later condensation.

 

Regarding the PhotoFlo, I just add a couple of drops of wetting agent to the tank at the end of the wash cycle and give the spools a good pumping up and down, so there's little likelihood of this being a problem.

Old fixer ?

Old fixer ?

Always a possibility, but I would have expected it to affect the companion film equally.

It's pointing to the condensation in the camera or condensation affecting the film some time before you put it in the camera, meaning you had better try another one from the same batch to see if it is also affected

It's pointing to the condensation in the camera or condensation affecting the film some time before you put it in the camera, meaning you had better try another one from the same batch to see if it is also affected

 

Yes, that's on my agenda. As soon as it stops raining...Thanks for your help. I'll report back.

Most of us who develop film regularly will have come across similar problems in the past. It's nigh-on impossible to tell for sure what the problem was, but I understand the frustration in not knowing. Knowing you are a regular poster to the film threads here, and knowing your usually very high standard, I doubt this is something you'll repeat if it is a developing issue. I would take it on the chin and move on. If the next roll ends up the same, then is the time to start dissecting the possible emulsion defects, or do snip tests.

Nothing on the lens makes that well defined a pattern on the film. At least not normally. If you had that much condensation inside the camera I'd be worried about rust and damage. Maybe open it up for a few days to be sure. It actually looks a bit like mold or similar thing on the film, but you'd have to put it under a microscope to get a better idea. I use a 20X folding loupe for stuff like that. It would make sense that condensation could affect unrolled film more than on either spool. I assume it's nothing related to enlarging or scanning.

This looks like a very similar problem, recent thread worth a read .....

White streaks/blotches on my pics: what did I do wrong?

Not as evident as the spots, but there's also some developer 'drag' halo around dark edges of the image.

 

Stand development by any chance?

Not as evident as the spots, but there's also some developer 'drag' halo around dark edges of the image.

 

Stand development by any chance?

 

You're right, but no, the film received two inversions on the minute, every minute, my standard procedure.

This is just a thought: I had a similar experience/outcome when using a catechol developer (obsidian aqua) and then fixing with Ilford rapid fix. I put it down to the acidity of the fixer interacting with the left over base developer. I have not had the problem since using home made hypo. But, of course, that doesn't explain the lack of the same outcome with the other roll. Arthur

But, of course, that doesn't explain the lack of the same outcome with the other roll. Arthur

 

Yes if it was the fault of the chemicals, both films in the tank would have been affected. We'll need to wait for Rick to expose and develop another roll from the suspect batch to see what's going on with the film, but I think there's a strong possibility that there was condensation/mold between the film and backing paper of that one affected film so far

I think it's a backing paper issue.

I think it's a backing paper issue.

 

OP explained one time bringing a cold camera into a warm place.

 

No explanation of the film before loading, after unloading, or other conditions of the film or camera.

 

The recommendation for both 120 and 35mm frozen film is to warm up to room temperature

before opening the moisture seal. The effect of even a small amount of moisture on film

and backing paper is hard to say.

Well, despite the day being dull and wet, I took the opportunity to clean and exercise a Bronica S2a outfit using the various lenses and viewers, and shot another roll of the T-Max 400 from the verandah and around the house. I processed the film using precisely the same procedure and chemistry I'd used for the suspect roll, and the results are just fine, with no repetition of the odd markings.

 

So, I think I'll assume that these were the result of moisture on the film caused by condensation within the camera. If they occur on a future roll, I'll reopen my investigation. I attach a sample pic; I'm finding that T-Max 400 and PMK Pyro are rather a happy combination.

 

Thank you one and all for your helpful comments and suggestions.