weird pattern on film

[chris_hutchins]

I processed two rolls of delta 400 this afternoon and both have a

kind of vertical banding across the frame and rebate at regular

intervals all along the length of the film. I'm stumped as to what

could have caused this.

 

Cheers, Chris<div></div>

[colmmccarthy]

Looks like an agitation problem to me. Sadly enough, I like the look of that negative scan. I think it's from too much agitation, as it looks like it's bleeding from the sprocket holes.

[rich_ullsmith1]

Copy the agitation and sprocket holes.

[ronald_moravec1]

Not enough agitation. Use only enough liquid to cover the film. More inhibits movement of the developer inside the tank.

 

If you are using the Patterson tank, invert twice every 30 sec and allow time for the developer to run into the dead space in the top.

 

If it is a single reel stainless tank, invert 5 to 7 times in 5 sec every 30 sec.

 

If you have a two reel stainless, load film on the bottom reel and have an empty on top. Use only enough to cover the film during rest portion of the cycle. Invert twice in 5 sec every 30 sec.

 

Every time you set the tank down,either plastic or stainless, rotate it 1/4 turn so you start with different agitation the next time.

 

Do some pics of you house or car until you get it down.

 

Do not try agitating by spinning with a tool in the center. You will get more development on the edges than center with that method.

 

All the above applies to fixer too.

[jay_de_fehr]

I really doubt that your problem results from too little agitation, but more likely too much/too agressive agitation. Those marks are called surge marks, and are caused by the developer surging through the sprocket holes. Agitate more gently, and your problem will likely go away. Good luck.

 

Jay

[kin_lau]

Looks like it could also be fixer exhaustion as mentioned (been there, done that). Trying re-fixing.

[esben_jensen]

Too little developer?

[ronald_moravec1]

This is my second response. I have a friend who did high end wedding work and his developing technique was plus x in

d76 with initial agitation for 45 sec and one time in the middle for 15sec very gently. It obviously worked for him decades ago, but I tried it and got EXACTLY what you pictured. He went through cases of 100 foot rolls annually and developed 100 plus rolls every Sunday night. He had many photographers working for him to consume all this film.

 

Continuous agitation is used in Jobo and other processors works without all the marks shown. I used my Jobo for this before I went back to manual agitation with rest periods.

 

I use all the agitation techniques I explained and never got anything but uniformly developed negs. In fact the 5-7 inversions is on the Kodak website as being their procedure.

 

Some may be sucessful using minimal agitation, but I could never get it to work or see any advantage to it with my lower volumn.

[chris_waller]

They are flow marks resulting most probably from too regular an agitation pattern. I use Paterson tanks and invert four times in the first 30 seconds, then once every 30 seconds after that. A few seconds before each inversion I give the tank a swift half-turn as it stands on the bench to impart some circular motion.

[chris_hutchins]

Thanks for yout answers. I'll try doing it more gently next time! I was pretty disappointed as there were some nice pictures on both rolls but they're not usable now.

 

Chris

[nikos peri]

Bromide drag.

[colmmccarthy]

As pointed out above, it's from too vigorous agitation. Too little agitation wouldn't cause those surge marks.

[paul_hoyt]

Chris, you have noticed the responses suggest too much and not enough agitation. This is a real problem with film development that too much and not enough agitation can appear to have the same results. What is your agitation scheme? I have found for tank development that continuous agitation for the first minute (which includes addition of the developer) and end-over-end mixing (twice) every 30 seconds produces evenly developed negatives.

 

Paul

[chris_hutchins]

I was using the ilford beginners guide which says 4 inversions each minute. I suspect that I may have been a bit vigorous with my inversions and I know I didn't rotate between inversions as someone else has suggested.

 

Chris

[silent1]

Combined with the partial reversal of some dark areas (which would be light in the negative) I'll vote on the side of underfixing, due to either insufficient fixer to cover or nearly exhausted fixer. Do the negatives look milky at all? If so, get them back in fresh fixer ASAP to minimize the damage from printing out in the light.

[gaius1]

Ilford says 4 inversions in 10 seconds every minute, so each 2x180 degree turn should take 2-3 seconds. That's quite slow with a single reel tank. Kodak says 5 inversions in 5 seconds every 30 seconds, which still isn't all that vigorous.

[paul_hoyt]

I agree with Guy, your Ilford instructions are not too agressive. I invert, invert, invert, invert in 5 seconds every 30 seconds. If you swirl the tank you can "spin" the developer along the edges of the reels and have a centrifugal effect which will produce uneven development of the negatives. Some of the respondents suggest you refix the negatives, they could be correct. I use Clayton Rapid Fixer concentrate. I make the recommended dilution for film and store it in a gallon container, but grabbed the concentrate by mistake last weekend. The negatives would not clear in the concentrate, a greater concentration of "fixer" does not fix. When I placed the negs in the working solution, magic happened. Did your negatives feel "slimy" after they were fixed? Mine were like greased pigs until they cleared in the correct bath. I knew something was wrong as soon as I touched them. It is either too little agitation or a fixing problem, your agitation protocol is not too agressive.

 

Paul

[neil_rankin1]

I too have suffered wierd sprocket impressions on my negatives, but I have cured it with this program: first 30 seconds continuos agitation, then ten seconds of agitation (4 inversions I think) every minute. My development times are usually between 8 and 11 minutes. If my times were 6 minutes or less, I would agitate more frequently. Also, whoever mentioned using just enough developer to cover the reel is right on. This may be most important of all, as my problem disappeared immediately once I used this practice. This problem is not that hard to correct once you find your appropriate method, so have fun.

[al_divenuti]

>>Not enough agitation. Use only enough liquid to cover the film. More inhibits movement of the developer inside the tank

 

Not necessarily. I've actually found that just covering the film can cause streaking with intermittent agitation. I think this might have something to do with bromides that reside very close to the film adhering to the film when agitation causes the developer to flow off of the film but I don't know for sure. Regardless, I've never had any streaking problem ever with intermittent agitation once I adjusted my developer volume from 255 ml (just enough to cover film) to 350 ml.

 

Also keep in mind that with intermittent agitation you are likely to have a greater buildup of bromide in the region of the film and with less developer the concentration will be higher - even locally.

 

I think you would need a tank almost completely full before you are preventing the developing from adequately flowing around the film.

[chris_hutchins]

I developed another film this morning and had no problems. I was more gentle with pouring the chemicals and with agitation which seemed to work. I was also using my own chemicals rather than communal ones which cured any problem with the fix.

 

Since I wanted to shoot film quickly to use to practise my processing, I went out and had a go at shooting from the hip. The attachment is one of my favourites - blurred but I like the composition.

 

Thaks for all your help,

 

Chris<div></div>