Any way to boost -very- underdeveloped film?

[tertiarymatt]

Hi all.

Longtime lurker, and you all have been very helpful to me on more than one

occasion...

 

Here's the situation:

 

I work in a lab, and we process film with a Jobo.

Turns out one of our tank lids is just a little bit busted, and leaky.

 

So, i processed a roll of T-max 3200, and it came out pretty transparent, as the

developed leaked out before it could do its thing. Unfortunately, the fixer did

a much better job than the developer, and fixed the film pretty well.

 

There are a few frames that have -something- on them, but they are very, very faint.

 

The customer is (justifiably) pissed off, and refuses to believe there's really

not much that can be done.

 

I have seen it suggested that one can bump up the contrast of very thin negs via

toning with selenium, but I have also seen it said that selenium won't help.

 

Any thoughts on this? Is there some secret magic bullet to getting more info off

this film that I don't know about?

[blarg_.]

I think the best you'll be able to do is scan the frames that came out and see what you can do digitally. I don't think toner will make enough difference to make it worth the effort.

[robert hall]

Looks like we have lost the brain trust for working with film.

 

I would first try a density boost via bleach and redevelop. You would need to redevelop in a non sulfite developer, I use PMK (pyro) at about 80f, high strength like 4+8+100 as opposed to 1+2+100. I repeat the process twice. You can find a pmk kit from photographers formulary as well as the kit for intensification.

 

The bleach uses potassium dichromate and the process will improve the density of the film if there is actually something there in the first place.

 

After you have done the process a couple of times, you can then use either selenium or one last bleach and redevelop in a sluphide toner. This can add substantial density to the neg, but it will be a final step. Once that is done, it is set.

 

At that point I would scan, process and perhaps use a film recorder on the negative.

 

Best of luck.

[tertiarymatt]

Hi there Robert!

 

I have a couple questions:

 

Firstly, how thin is too thin? On casual inspection, the film appears to be completely blank; it requires pretty close inspection to discover the frames on the film, but there are some discernible details. I have yet to try scanning the film as it is.

 

Secondly, if i read your post correctly, you're suggesting to bleach in dichromate, and then redevelop with a strong PMK solution (just seeking to clarify). Also, could you give me a little insight on the chemistry involved here?

[skygzr]

Toning will add a little density, but it won't help if the film is clear.

[jack_tripper]

you can selenium tone it

[rustys pics]

Selenium toner won't do much. Bleaching it sounds like a really bad idea if there is little density there....

Back in the good old bad old days, Kodak made a thing called Chromium Intensifier for a problem such as yours. It will not add detail which isn't there; the idea is to build up some density by plating the silver with chromimum. (Lord knows anyone with a photo chemistry background can give a much better explanation of how it works!).

Check a dusty back shelf in an old photo store and they may have some. Be careful though, I've since learned that chromium is really nasty stuff.

[fourthst]

Matt, the following excerpt comes from an article written by John Sexton.

 

INTENSIFICATION:

Kodak Chromium Intensifier has little effect on T-MAX emulsions. However, Kodak Rapid Selenium Toner can be used as a very effective proportional intensifier on T-MAX. Selenium toner has the advantage that there is NO increase in grain size, and actually enhances the permanence of the negative.

 

I have found that I am able to increase the contrast about one full paper grade (N +1 is Zone System terminology) on a properly exposed T-MAX negative with selenium intensification. I intensify in Rapid Selenium Toner diluted 1:2 (strong!) with working strength Hypo Clearing Agent for 10 minutes at 68 F. The film is then washed normally. I have had good success with intensification of portions of large negatives to increase the contrast locally. This process is permanent - experiment with test negatives first!

[robert hall]

Matt,

 

If your negs are that thin, there is very little hope. One has to have something in the first place.

 

If you can see an image clearly with full detail however thin, you may have a chance.

 

You understand my post completely. (however as thin as you describe your negs, this probably is a waste of time in anything, including selenium.)

 

I suggested for getting the kits from photo formulary. They can help you use them safely and properly. They have both the bleach and the pmk kits to do this. The formulas I use is the same posted by Steve Anchel in the "darkroom cookbook". It's potassium dichromate and sulphuric acid. The PMK has Pyrogallic acid. Both are quite poisonous if handled improperly.

 

Please don't let people who apparently have no idea how to handle chemicals scare you off from using them if one can do so safely. If you are not skilled in proper handling techniques this would be foolhardy to do any darkroom exercise without proper safety training. If you want something really nasty, I would be happy to help you with mercury intensification. Hey! at least it is reversible. :)

 

 

 

Russ,

 

The fist step in intensification is in fact the dichromate bleach.

 

The process is a bleach and redevelop just like one does when one sulphide tones.

 

 

 

I have used this process on clients negs for years when they come to me with thin negs. It will not produce miracles, but it will get an image.

 

Paul,

 

Quoting John from a net search is one thing, giving it a try yourself is quite another. Give it a try sometime and see for yourself.

[fourthst]

Robert, you are correct. I have never used the chromium intensification on tabular films (though I have used chromium successfully in the past on non tab films). I do on occasion use selenium intensification with good success on tabular film. I was actually just trying to allay any fears Matt may have had about chromium being a "really bad idea" as Russ suggested to being an idea that just might not work. Actually, I hope not to have to use chromium intensification but if the need arises I will give it a shot. Thanks.

[tertiarymatt]

Thanks guys! I really appreciate the input.

 

I'm not terribly put off by the chemistry. I've worked in research chem labs in the past, and know when I need to be careful (i.e. always!).

Unfortunately, we don't have particularly good ventilation in the photolab I'm working at now...

 

It seems to be a moot point, however, given the thinness of the negs, and that they are a T-max type film.

I scanned a half dozen frames last night, using Silverfast, and even with multiple passes per scan, etc, they're pretty terrible.

 

Robert, out of curiosity (and since I may end up having to do it anyway, as the customer might insist, regardless of the chances of it creating any improvement) I'd like to go over the details a bit more.

 

If i understand correctly, the acidic chromate solution bleaches the silver from elemental silver back to a salt, the film is re-exposed to strong light (just a guess), and then redeveloped in the PMK (with some density increase from the staining effect?), washed and fixed, and then this is repeated. At the end, one could bleach and redevelop with a sulphide toner to get another density boost.

 

And finally, what's the downside? Are there any risks to the film/images involved? With there being such a small amount of silver on the emulsion at this point, is there a risk of losing any into solution during the bleaching steps? Loss of what detail there is, etc?

 

Thanks again! It's nice to have very knowledgeable folks around when you find yourself in a tight spot!

[chris_waller]

You could try intensification using selenium toner, as suggested above but my experience is that the effect is minor. Or you could try chromium intensification, which is slightly more effective, but I stress 'slightly'. Finally, there is mercury intensification, which is very effective, but this involves mercuric chloride, which is intensely poisonous.

[chris_waller]

You could try intensification using selenium toner, as suggested above but my experience is that the effect is minor. Or you could try chromium intensification, which is slightly more effective, but I stress 'slightly'. Finally, there is mercury intensification, which is very effective, but this involves mercuric chloride, which is intensely poisonous.

[wieslaw1]

If your film is developed in PMK (staining developer) Se toner will

not have any effect on it, since the stain prevents Ag - Se

exchange.

[User_502260]

I haven't used chromium intensifier recently but I must have some around. One possible solution for this problem is to put the negatives into a slide copier and shoot them onto Technical Pan or Imagelink or even Pan F+. This is done to try to increase the contrast. You can then scan the resulting images.

[robert hall]

You have the idea Matt. That is how it works.

 

Sounds like there would be little downside to giving it a try unless something else happens during processing. Anytime we touch the film there is that possibility.

 

Wieslaw,

 

This is news to me. Could you give me some direction on a source for your statement, or perhaps you would simply expound on your statement a little more?

 

Jeff,

 

This is not a bad idea either as it is a non destructive attempt to restore an image. I would look for a film that may have a little more tonal expansion range, such as FP-4 (Ilford) with brackets at one and two stops under exposure then use a N+1 and N+2 development on them to see what one might achieve.

 

Best of luck Matt,

 

Robert

[tertiarymatt]

Thanks again, everyone, for the various suggestions!

 

While browsing around on Photographer's Formulary, I noticed a "Silver Intensifier", which deposits more silver on the film.

 

Any one have any luck with this, alone, or in combination with other intensification steps?

[wieslaw1]

Robert - regarding Se - I know that from my own experience.

The stain/coating which forms on the surface of negatives is in

my opinion due to oxidation of pyrogallol, an ingredient of PMK

developers. It boosts the contrast/density slightly but constitutes

a diffusion barrier for Se solution.