Processing trouble

[luis_martins]

hi all,

 

yesterday i processed a roll of ilford hp5+ from a friend together

with one of my rolls. both shot at iso 400. the developer was xtol

(1+1) and the whole process went smoth and clean.

 

when i was hanging the film to dry i was shocked ! my roll was

perfect, as all the previous rolls i've done, but my friend's roll

was realy bad, i'd never seen anything like that before:

 

- the film base was milky, even after re-fixing, and i'd fixed for 5

minutes in the first time !!

- density was almost null, even the film tip which was exposed to

daylight wasn't as dark as the film tip from my roll !

 

what could have gone wrong ? was it a bad film ?

your opinions will be most welcome !! :-)

 

btw: this film had writen on it "safety film ilford hp5 plus", is

this a different stuff ?? this is bulk film, from a 100 feet reel.

 

[],

[steve_unsworth1]

Were both films in the same tank? If so, was your friends film the one on top? If it was, did you use enough developer to cover both films?

[luis_martins]

yes, both films were in the same tank, with enought developer, stop and fixer.

[luis_martins]

i'm sure of the above, but i can't remember which one was on top.

i remember having some problems with 120 films, not using enought soup, but this never happened again because i always use a bit more chemicals to prevent this.

 

i just remembered, my friend's film was in the bottom, i remember pulling my roll out and seeing how good they looked !

[stephen hazelton]

Was your film HP5+ also? What developing time?

[lex_jenkins]

Could your friend's film have been long-expired, fogged, heat damaged or some other problem?

[luis_martins]

stephen: yes, my film was also hp5+, i processed for 12 minutes in xtol (1+1) at 20 degrees. ilford recomended times, which has always given me good results.

 

lex: that could be a reason, i'll tell that to my friend.

[pavel_hampl_prague_cz]

in the Ilford documentation for HP5+ they write that the anti-halation backing clears during development. So not during fixing. Are you SURE that you put the filn into the developer? It would be really stupid fault, but can happen.

[jimvanson]

<i>anti-halation backing clears during development. So not during fixing</I><p>Interesting...does that mean that if I put a length of unprocessed HP5+ into fixer it <i>will not</I> clear? This is the procedure I use to test fixer.<p>I snip the leader off the roll of film I�m processing. I then swirl the leader around in my fixer. I take note of the time it took for the leader to clear. Twice that amount (of time) would be the length of time I use to fix my negs with. I do that with all conventional films. HP5+ would act just like any other films. The fixer would clear the film; anti-halation layer and all.<p> Is this still not the case?

[pavel_hampl_prague_cz]

I do not do such experiments to determine the fixing time, although I have read about this rule. I use time recommended by the manufacturer. Generally I use czech Fomapan 100 and its green antihalation layer dissolves during development. I did not try the ixer only, but sure I will do it.

 

Regarding the Ilford films - I looked over their docs and all of them should dissolve the AH layer during development. Except the Pan100 and Pan400, which should be clear already. (strange)

 

I tried to look to Agfa materials but could not find anything similar.

[luis_martins]

pavel: i'm 100% sure i put the film in the developer, otherwise the other roll of film wouldn't be developed either !

 

i'm talking about a perfectly processed film, of which i made contacts with a grade 2 filter and had rich shadow detail, good highlight detail and another roll of film with all the problems described above. both processed in the same tank, ie. at the same time, with the same chemicals ! (it's two reel tank)

 

[],

[jimvanson]

Luis...if I was a betting man I'd say Lex's theory is what I'd lay my money on. Your friend somehow cooked (maybe literally) the roll he gave you. If you�re using Xtol 1+1 you must be using it one shot so the rest of your stock is fine. I might (so as to not egg on the film Gods) be tempted to throw out the fix...although it shouldn't mater. My final thoughts are next roll you process use a test roll just to make sure that you have not overlooked anything that would cause you to loose irreplaceable images.

[luis_martins]

thanks jim, that is also my theory, that the my friend's film is to be blamed. i always use all my film developers one shot, so the developing process is consistent and i do the fixer test just like you described.

 

thanks everyone for your thoughts !

[richard_cochran]

<cite>anti-halation backing clears during development. So not during fixing

</cite>

<p>

<cite>

Interesting...does that mean that if I put a length of unprocessed HP5+ into fixer it will not clear? This is the procedure I use to test fixer.

</cite>

<p>

There's a difference between the anti-halation dye and the

silver halide emulsion. The silver halide is milky whitish,

opaque or translucent. The anti-halation dye is much more

transparent. Its color varies on different films (I haven't

processed HP5 in so long that I don't recall its color), but

it's often greenish or bluish.

<p>

Everyone should fix a bit of undeveloped leader once in awhile,

both as a test for fixer, and to see what happens. You'll

see that it clears well enough that you can see through it,

but, depending on the film and developer you use, it may

have a different color cast than unexposed sections of film

that were developed before fixing.

<p>

<p>

<cite>

btw: this film had writen on it "safety film ilford hp5 plus"

</cite>

<p>

I'm not so familiar with the Ilford line, but Kodak stopped

using the words "Safety Film" a long time ago. Maybe

early '80s? It's been so long,

I don't remember. They used to use the term to reassure

you that it the film <b>wasn't</b> using a nitrocellulose base,

because the ancient nitrocellulose-based films had a nasty habit

of spontaneously catching fire in storage. But Safety Film

has been the only thing available for so many decades, they

no longer need to advertise it, just like Ford no longer

needs to advertise that its cars have electric starter

motors (versus the old crank start model T).

<p>

Anyway, if Ilford had a similar timeline for the use of the

term "Safety Film" on its edge markings, that may be your

answer. The film could be many decades old. Can anyone

more familiar Ilford's edge markings confirm or deny?

[tim obrien]

Having just processed a couple of rolls of HPP5Plus the other night, a rare film for me to even shoot, I can tell you, there might not be a colored anit-halation backing on that film, neither the presoak (yeah, I know Ilford tells me not to), nor the Rodinal came out colored looking.

Weird. I am use to purples, greens, and blues. To have none was a bit strange.

 

BTW - hypo clear clears out anti-halation backing pretty good too.

 

tim in san jose

[luis_martins]

hi tim, hp5+ is my standard 400 iso film and i can tell you that it has an anti-halation backing which has a purple colour. usualy the chemicals don't come out of the tank with this colour as happens to kodak films, which make my developer and fixer trun redish.

 

with ilford films, you need to fix the film for a bit longer to remove the anti-halation so the film base comes out clear, specialy with delta stuff, otherwhise it will be realy purple.