Ruined film: what does a newbie need to learn?

[stephen_hipperson]

<p>Fundamental questions I would ask - what camera are you using, what are the chances that film 3 didn't actually get exposed in the first place?</p>

[cj8281]

<p>I would say that it did get exposed, the OP stated earlier that there were no markings on the edges even. I only know of a few films that do not come with edge markings and they are all bulk roll type films. With the type of film it was and the lack of edge markings, I will agree with Leigh B. and Russ Kerlin above, the film was either fixed first or the developer was completely inert.</p>

[anand_n._vishwamitran]

<p>Stephen, rolls 2 and 3 were from a Leica M7. I suppose it is possible that the film never got exposed, but there is no way of telling now, is there? I don't believe I used the fixer first since all working solutions are in well-marked bottles, so assuming the film did get exposed, it must be as Clay/Leigh say that the developer was completely inert. </p>

<p>Paul/Charles, would oxidation of Rodinal be a problem too, or does this vary with developers? Interesting ideas on blowing air & using marbles! I would not have thought of either.</p>

<p>Russ/Craig, point well taken about simplifying things. The reasons I picked Rodinal were (a) I liked the look of images I saw posted on the Web (b) it was different enough from what my local lab uses (xtol). Even had I used D-76 and the same film throughout, I dare say I would have committed the same mistakes I did here. Also, I don't do this for a living, a large part of the fun is in experimentation and variety, so why restrict myself to a 'safe' combination - I want to commit mistakes early and often, just a different philosophy. </p><div></div>

[leighb]

<blockquote>

<p>what are the chances that film 3 didn't actually get exposed in the first place?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Irrelevant.<br>

The frame numbers and film identification are exposed at the factory.<br>

If the film is processed correctly that information will be present even if the film was never put in a camera at all.</p>

<p>- Leigh</p>

 

[eugene_anikin]

<p>I'd like to second what others have pointed out. The weak dilutions of developers do not keep. The developing agent have oxidized and that's what caused failure with your third roll. Stronger dilutions keep somewhat better if you take care to make sure that they have no contact with oxygen and store them at the lower temperature.<br>

For best and consistent results always fresh mix developer and final rinse with distilled water right before processing the film and never reuse them. Keep careful track of fixer usage and don't over-use it. I stopped reusing even fixer after noticing that if working solution of fixer has been kept for more than a few weeks it can create occasional holes in the emulsion of some films. For some reason, it always happened to the best frames on my rolls. So now I always fresh mix and don't reuse even the fixer. The only chemical I ever reuse is the bleach when processing color films.<br>

You are taking some beautiful photos, and in my opinion it's just not worth the risk of ruining them by skimping on the chemicals.</p>

 

[thirteenthumbs]

<blockquote>

<p>would oxidation of Rodinal be a problem too, or does this vary with developers?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Rodinal stock solution turns dark brown with age. Decreasing the oxygen in the partially used bottle may slow it down but the turning color does not affect its working properties when mixed to working solutions. Exhaling into the bottle <em>reduces</em> the oxygen as does adding marbles. Different developers oxidize at different rates. By reducing or eliminating the oxygen in the bottle will extend the shelf life of the contents. </p>

[ian_gordon_bilson]

<p>Interesting concept - exhaling into a container. I understand that the lungs extract roughly 10% of the oxygen in a breath,so the return on endeavor would be pretty marginal.<br>

A puff of butane gas would be much more effective. And,if you see no frame edge markings after development,either the developer is completely Kaput,or you have developed with stop bath,fixer,or plain H2O.<br>

A client recently requested Rodinal 1:200 for a roll of 120 Rollei-stand development 1 hour.<br>

Thats only 5.8ml of Rodinal in the tank. Since the customer is always right, I was surprised to find the resulting negs looked..nice.<br>

There is much more to Rodinal than "meets the eye".</p>

[stephen_hipperson]

<p>"The frame numbers and film identification are exposed at the factory." - I'll remember that for the future, thanks.</p>

[w3 aed]

As an old coffin dodger I have been processing mono film

for over 60 years. I have been down that side track of stale

developer in pursuit of cash saving out of sheer necessity.

However the failures and the loss of precious images have

never been worthwhile. I might go for a high dilution special

developer to get a special effect. but I keep life simple and

success rates high by using basic (ID-11 or D76) developer

only in one session per mix. But films have improved enormously over this period and excellent results have never been easier to obtain. Back that up with digital processing of the scanned negative and undreamed of quality for an amateur is now almost simple.

Stop bath? Spirit vinegar

(dilute Acetic acid). Fixer? Ilfofix Rapid (Ammonium

thiosulphate). I do keep a diluted bottle of the fixer, but I

always use the discarded clip of film ( I trim the leader end

straight to ease loading into the spiral and use that). My test

is simple, the time to clear the emulsion needs to be 30

seconds or less. This gives a safety margin over the 2

minute recommended time. This week I tested and used

made up stock from mid 2009 with excellent results on

Ilford Delta Pro 100 film.

As for wetting agent, I use liquid washing up detergent,

having spent 40 odd years in the Chemical industry I used

inside knowledge in this decision. One drop in a tank full of

rinse water is not worth saving.

As to scum on films, since we live in a moderately hard

water area I now take from the output from our water

softener for my film processing and never have that

problem.

Trickiest film I have processed? Kodak's Mylar based HIE

so flexible that getting it into the spiral is really tough.

[anand_n._vishwamitran]

<p>Thank you again to all the posters in this thread.<br /> <br /> I threw all the old stuff I had, and mixed a fresh batch of developer, stop, fixer and photo-flo. Worked like a charm. 2 weeks later, I mixed fresh developer and photo-flo but re-used stop and fixer. No problem again - <a href="http://www.vishwamitran.net/w3root/dspi.aspx?IMGID=1504-34">good images</a> resulted.<br>

<br /> So the stale developer was definitely the problem first time round. Lesson learned.<br>

Thank you to all!</p>