Film Development Issue - Help Appreciated

Hey all,

 

I recently got supplies to develop my own B&W film at home and just finished my first roll with this set up and the images came out odd. I'll attach a few below but they appear muddy, dirty, and streaky with appears appearing at different development stages. I've experienced the issue with a strip of blackness at the right hand side of images before and chalked it up to my camera but this streaky, patchy and muddy appearance is new for me

 

I used D-76 to develop a roll of Ilford HP5+, pushed to 800.

 

Any thoughts or notes from experience that I can utilize to prevent this from happening with future rolls would be awesome! Thanks ahead of time and stay safe!

 

 

 

 

Possibly underdeveloped (did you increase the development time ?), chemicals at the wrong temperature, and / or insufficient agitation or fixing. Can you try re-fixing some of the negs where there are faint lines co-inciding with the sprocket holes ? This might at least eliminate insufficient fixing as a cause.

It mostly looks like not enough agitation, but maybe also underdevelopment.

 

Kodak recommends the same times for EI 800.

 

Also possible is old developer. Does it look brown or clear? Has it been used for other rolls?

Was the temperature and time right?

 

Otherwise, yes, underfixing, or not enough agitation in fixing, can cause looks like this, which can

be fixed with refixing.

Possibly underdeveloped (did you increase the development time ?), chemicals at the wrong temperature, and / or insufficient agitation or fixing. Can you try re-fixing some of the negs where there are faint lines co-inciding with the sprocket holes ? This might at least eliminate insufficient fixing as a cause.

 

 

Thanks for the timely reply Tony! I did increase the development time and adjusted time additionally for any temperature change. I can be sure to give that a try and see what happens. Thanks for the response! I’ll check back

It mostly looks like not enough agitation, but maybe also underdevelopment.

 

Kodak recommends the same times for EI 800.

 

Also possible is old developer. Does it look brown or clear? Has it been used for other rolls?

Was the temperature and time right?

 

Otherwise, yes, underfixing, or not enough agitation in fixing, can cause looks like this, which can

be fixed with refixing.

 

 

The developer was brand new and just made the day before and the temperature was slightly off but I again adjusted everything to correct for that temperature. I can try re-fixing to see if that helps. I also realized that I left the second film reel in only put in enough chemicals for a single reel. I’m wondering if too much chemical got attached to that empty reel that not enough reached the loaded reel. Thanks for the fast and thorough reply, I really appreciate it.

I also realized that I left the second film reel in only put in enough chemicals for a single reel. I’m wondering if too much chemical got attached to that empty reel that not enough reached the loaded reel. Thanks for the fast and thorough reply, I really appreciate it

 

 

Yes the second reel would have disturbed the free flow of chemical while agitating, that is if you agitated by inverting the tank up and over. If you were using the twiddle stick to agitate, it wouldn't make any difference.

Re-fix and re-wash - this time fix twice as long as before.

Re-fixed the negatives and it cleared up that muddy appearance! Thanks for the help everyone! I still have stripes of areas of under and overexposure that I believe to be in-camera issues as they are consistent previous negatives that I have.

 

Learned a lot through this mistake and I hope to continue to improve the quality of my negatives. Have a good one and be safe everyone!

Yes the second reel would have disturbed the free flow of chemical while agitating, that is if you agitated by inverting the tank up and over. If you were using the twiddle stick to agitate, it wouldn't make any difference.

 

Yes, I did agitation through inverting and simultaneous rotation of the canister. No use of the twiddle. I'll remove that second canister with the next roll and see how it affects the result. Thanks for the tip and response.

Test fixer before session cut off a sniping from the tongue and in room light, swish it in the fixer. You will observe this sniping turn from opaque to clear film. Time this action. Time in fixer is double time to clear. This works every time!

Test fixer before session cut off a sniping from the tongue and in room light, swish it in the fixer. You will observe this sniping turn from opaque to clear film. Time this action. Time in fixer is double time to clear. This works every time!

What a great trick! Thank you, I will have to utilize that in the future!

Yes, I did agitation through inverting and simultaneous rotation of the canister.

You've been watching YouTube videos, haven't you?

 

Those videos ought to be taken down! The agitation technique shown is just stupid, wrong and based on zero knowledge of how liquids and gases flow and interact in an enclosed volume.

 

Do not slowly invert and rotate the tank in a figure of 8 pattern. What's needed is a fairly rapid inversion by simply tipping the tank straight over. You'll then hear and feel the air-space bubbling through the film spirals. Hold the tank upside down for about 2 seconds, then right it again. Bang the bottom of the tank on your work-surface to dislodge any air bubbles that might have stuck to the film surface - a towel or piece of scrap cloth will absorb the impact and stop damage to the tank or worktop.

That's it! That's all you need to do, and there's no 'blocking of agitation' by multiple reels in the same tank. That's another nonsensical myth.

 

If the OP is still reading: I'm curious what fixing time they gave the first time around? And whether they followed the same 'agitation' technique as for the developing?

(I've put the word 'agitation' in quotes, because from their description, they weren't really agitating the chemicals at all!)

That's it! That's all you need to do, and there's no 'blocking of agitation' by multiple reels in the same tank. That's another nonsensical myth.

 

The OP had only poured enough developer for one reel Joe. Surely a second reel, an extra empty reel in the tank would be undesirable when you want a smooth flow of the chemical inside the tank while agitating. A second empty reel would tend to block the chemical's flow both ways, over and back again. It would be a different matter if both reels were loaded with film, in which case I'd use the twiddle stick, I use it for all my agitation anyway, because the film is in the developer for the full development time rather than the intermittent developing caused by inversion agitation. Your 2 seconds each time is non-development time, how do you compensate for that lost time ?

 

(snip)

Your 2 seconds each time is non-development time, how do you compensate for that lost time ?

 

You mean the time when the tank is upside down, so the chemistry is away from the film?

 

I remember learning about tray development of film many years before I actually did it.

 

You make the film in the shape of a U with film clips on each end.

(This was explained by my grandfather when he gave me my first film clips,

which I still have.)

 

The emulsion holds enough chemistry when it is out to keep on developing.

 

Also, when you pour out at the end, it keeps developing until the stop bath hits it.

 

Timing is from when you start pouring one step, until you start pouring the next one,

allow maybe 15 seconds for pouring out.

A second empty reel would tend to block the chemical's flow both ways, over and back again.

Not at all. With inversion agitation, it's the air bubbling through the solution that does the main job of agitation. And gases flow very freely through the comparatively large gaps in a film spiral.

Your 2 seconds each time is non-development time

Don't be silly!

The developer doesn't instantly drain from the surface of the film and stop working.

 

Look; inversion agitation has been used in single and multi-reel tanks for years with total success.

 

I've used amateur and professional sized rotary processors, cages with multiple reels in 3 gallon tanks, plastic 'twiddle stick' tanks (when there was no alternative) and even dish developing. Of them all, dish developing is by far the least reliable method IME, because of the risk of immersion marks and air bells. The rest pretty much give identical and totally reliable results, provided you use the correct technique for each method.

 

With inversion agitation, that technique is the one that I and others have described above.

 

So let's have no nonsensical theories, based on zero evidence or scientific fact, about how chemicals flow between spirals in a tank. Or how developer instantly stops working if it leaves the surface of the film. Do your research.

Edited April 27, 2020 by James G. Dainis