jim_gardner4

Scan of 5x4 neg and its positive. Thin cloud in a VERY even toned sky. I know sky isnt ideal to test on but the positive is so bad its worth looking at.<div></div>

There are a lot of suggestions above and I will be re reading them all shortly although I think I can rule out some of the possibilities; I kept the last mix of fixer that I used and have just tested it. It took 30 seconds to make a piece of film transparent and another 30 secs to clear it completely. I have used stainless tanks for 35mm and 120 for ages but the problem is not as bad when I went back to plastic reels and tanks. The 5x4 tank is plastic and new so dont think it could be contaminated. I have tried new developer,stop, fixer and wash agent from unopened bottles or packets. I cant do anything for a day or two now but the next thing I will try is taking all my gear to a mates in another area to see if his water makes any difference or get someone to develop one of my films in my dark room to see if their techniques make any difference. There is no increased density between frames and I have attached a scan for you to look at. The 6x4.5 negs were taken last year and print very well, the 35mm were taken this March, they are the sea and beach and although its not too obvious on the scan, a print really shows the uneven density.Thanks all for your help so far, please keep it coming and watch this space.<div></div>

Juergen, I havent moved and the water is from the same taps in my darkroom. Film is all the same make but from different batches, some 12 months older than others. I will try a different make fixer although I have used new bottles from a different outlet. I am wondering if the water hardness could have changed somehow and may buy some bottled water to try. Thanks for your input, Jim.

For 20 years I have been developing films from many different 35mm and medium

format cameras using ID11 1+1 @20degrees C in either a stainless or plastic tank.

Unfortunately in the last six months it has all gone wrong. Whether I am

developing 35mm, 120 or 5x4 film it seems now I can hardly develop a film without

terrible uneven development.

 

I have found that with 35mm and 120, the film shows higher densities along both

edges. It has been said that this could be because I may be ?swirling? the tank

causing the solution to go round the edges of the film faster than the centre and

so cause increased development to the edges. I don?t believe I am doing anything

different from hundreds of other films and so cant see any reason why this

should be the case, however I have also tried other agitation methods to stop this

but the problem remains. A plastic Patterson type tank using a rod to turn the film

spiral does help but it could be better.

 

90% of the film I use is Ilford Delta 100 and I usually develop it as follows;

11 mins (unless the shot has very little or very high contrast) in Ilford ID11 mixed

1+1 at 20 degrees C, 30 seconds in Ilford Ilfostop mixed 1+ 19, about 4 minutes in

Ilford rapid fix mixed 1 + 4 all at 20 degrees, followed by 10 minutes water wash

also at 20 degrees with a few ml of wash agent in the last wash. I always tap

the tank to remove bubbles and agitate for 10 secs every minute.

 

As I mentioned, agitation has been the same for years although I have now tried

turning the tank over top to bottom, figure eight rotations, faster and slower

agitations, longer, shorter and 5 secs every 30 secs. None of this seems to make

any difference. I have also tried Ilfosol S film dev and a Kodak stop; same results.

Although I do not pre soak films, I never have done so cant see why that would

be needed now if it wasn?t for the last 19 years.

 

I did 2 test shots yesterday of a plain magnolia painted wall which is of totally

uniform tone. These negs were developed in a Combi-plan tank using Ilfosol S

mixed 1+9 for 6 mins and the result was the most "blotchey" piece of film I have

ever seen with probably about a 3 or 4 stop range in it!

If any one has any ideas I would love to hear them.

Many thanks.<div></div>

Tried another test roll yesterday and deved it very carefully as Michael suggested so as not to let the solutions swirl round faster in the top or bottom of the tank. Have also tried a different developer but unfortunately the results are still the same. I have attached one as an example. Any help would be very very welcome.

Sorry, how do I attach more than 1? Anyway this is the last one.

Will try and attach other 2 now.

I have been processing my own b&w films for years but often both edges of my

negs are darker than the middle resulting in prints with very light edges. I

have tried both stainless and plastic tanks/reels for all formats and a tank

and dev trays for the 5x4, agitation 10 secs per min and on other films for 5

seconds every 30 seconds. I usually use ID11 at 1:1 for 11 mins but have also

tried Ilfosol S to see if there was any difference. Temperature is always bang

on and stop and fix solutions are always fresh. I generally wash for not less

than 10 mins. It seems that the darker areas on the negs are always at the

edges, I.E on 35mm the dark areas will be along side the sprocket holes, on

120 they will be on the edges of the film and the same on 5x4 although in the

example I will try and show the "bad" bits are patchey either side of the

tree. I assume that because I use 3 different types of tanks (and sometimes

trays for the 5x4) I can rule out a problem with the tanks. In the examples I

used 3 different formats so 3 different cameras with 3 different lenses so

that must rule out a camera/lens fault.It cant be too little developer,stop,

fix because it is on both edges and also happens when developing in trays.

Does anyone have any ideas what the cause could be? I am afraid my computer

skills are slim to nil so have scanned 3 negs at low resolution and will

atempt to attach them and hope you will all excuse the poor quality but they

are good examples of the problem.

Ken, thats part of the problem while the other part is why 2 brand new Lee filter ring adaptors made for that size lens wont fit? The plastic lens cap doesnt have bendable flanges, they are solid and moulded with the cap.

I have now bent the flanges on the uv to the point of them only just fitting into the lens diameter. Still loose. I then put a very thin piece of gaffer tape (1mm wide and 20ish mm long) along the uv flanges to increase the pressure on the filter/lens fit. That helped a lot but I still needed to put an inch of tape over the filter ring and lens joint on the bottom. For an outfit that costs several thousand pounds, I think having to put gaffer tape on it is really poor.

Thanks so far. Ok I now know what the silver pin is for but am faced with the horrible possibility of having to tape the uv filter on. If I dont do this the lens cap would have to be extremly loose before it becomes a more free fit than the uv. Also if I do manage to get a Lee filter holder that will go on the front of the uv, it is bound to be tighter than the uv to lens fit resulting in exactly the same problem. Seems to me to be a classic case of over enginnering when a normal thread would have done a better job. Shame. Andrew, point taken (but it was frustration rather than excitment).

I have just bought a new 503cw with Planar lens. To protect the glass on my

new lens I also got a Hasselblad uv filter that has the bayonet fitting (you

know where Im going with this already). I also use Lee filters and have all

sorts of their threaded ring adaptors for different lenses so I brought a Lee

filter "Hass 60" ring for my new lens. Ok so here is the problem(s). 1.The uv

filter is a smooth fit but will never snap into place so whenever I take the

lens cap of it takes the uv filter off as well. 2.The lee filter/Hass 60

adaptor ring I brought only turns very slightly onto the uv filter before

becoming solid, then when I take it off it takes the uv off as well and its

then a struggle to seperate the two off them. I tried the Lee/Hass 60 directly

on to the lens but that was even tighter. I rang the shop and they sent a new

one straight out to me. The new one is even worse, there is no wey I can turn

it more than a couple of mm on to either the Hasselblad uv or directly on to

the lens. 3.The Hasselblad uv has a small silver pin going through the outer

ring next to the glass. It runs in the same direction the camera is pointing

i.e along the lens direction, not across it. What is it for? As it lines up

just past one of the bayonet clips when the filter is on, I could see that if

it was a screw it would be a very effective way to secure the uv onto the lens

but as its a pin, if it were pushed through, there would be no way of pulling

it back again to ever get the filter off. I have examined the lens the adaptor

and the uv at length and am sure there is no way the uv can snap into place so

it doesnt come off with the adaptor or lens cap. Does any one else use this

set up or have any suggestions?

I bought a s/h enlarger with cooling fan. I reckon I can feel vibration but cant see any movement when looking through grain magnifier. I also put a switch in the circuit (bit naughty) and did another print with fan switched off. Cant tell any difference yet.

Understand perfectly, thanks. N.B,I just took a scrap film and measured the amount of film that is unwound in one turn of the film spool (just holding it in my hand)at the start (nearly full spool) and end (nearly empty spool). The difference is well over an inch! I realize that one turn of the winding crank doesnt neccessarily mean the film spool turns one turn but after reading the above I wondered how much difference there was from start to finish. Bit anal maybe but I had never thought about it before and didnt realize the difference would be that much. Thanks all for the help.

Russ, understand what you are saying and that makes sense but I'm sure my Bronica never used to do it.

Antonio, mine does it with film in but cant say I have noticed it without film in.

After a long time of wanting one and saving cash I have finaly brought a new

503cw. It arrived this week and I put a film through it just to try it and get

used to it. When I wind the film for the first 3 or 4 frames, the winding

crank has tension on it all the way through its travel. By the 5th or 6th

frame the last 15 degress (roughley) of travel has little or no tension. As I

expose and wind on through the film the "loose" part of the travel gets

greater until it gets to approx 45 degrees. I developed my film and had a look

at the frame spacings which all seem equal. Can any one tell me if this

progressive looseness is normal as you make more exposures? Thanks.

Q.G, thanks for that. It makes sense now.

I am still on my journey of discovery trying to learn about Hasselblad bodies

and the lenses used. Could anyone tell me if modern (less than 10 years old)

lenses have 1/3, 1/2 or even full stop increments? Also are all the lenses the

same in this respect? If they are in 1/3 or 1/2 stop steps, how does this

work when the EV coupling lock is engaged? I.E if the lens is set at 1/125th

at f8 then you close the aperture down 1/3 or 1/2 a stop, does the shutter

speed change in 1/3 or 1/2 stops as well? I cant believe you could only set

full stops could you!?

Thankyou all. This is a big decision for me (?????) so I have taken your advice on board. I will also go to the NEC this weekend and see which cameras I can try out.

Firstly, sorry if this question has been asked a lot before. I have looked for

ages but cant quite find the answer I am looking for.

I am trying to find out as much as poss on 501CM and 503CW as I really fancy

one. My research was going well but hit a wall when I read about the "EV

dial". I understand about EV, shutter speeds etc etc and their relationship

but I dont want to measure in EV. I know my meter and to a point I know light

and how it works/reflects/glares. I want to take a meter reading, think about

the subject at that point and overall and make my own adjustments, its how I

work and it works for me. Anyway, the question. Can I disengage this EV dial

permanantly and just set shutter speed and aperture on the lens or is it all

locked in? Do all the lenses have it? Also, why the extra shutter in the body?

I know Bronica make the body-film back light tight using the mirror. Are they

missing something or am I?

Not sure about the 80-200 but I have the 28-70 3.5 D and it really is a great little zoom, very sharp and fairly compact. You will be well pleased with it.

Well Mondays been and gone and after reading the above and talking to other people I decided not to buy it. I am ok with the lens but the view finder issue was already playing on my mind so I have decided to wait for an S2. If it has the 50mm HC f2 on it, so much the better. Thanks for your help

Jeff, yeah a couple of thoughts. Firstly, good for you. My father had a 111f in the 50s? which I have used a few times and really got on with it. I dont know enough about them to tell you what to do but whenever I mentioned Elmar to him he would look a bit sideways and mutter "get a Summicron". As I said, my own experience is very little so there will be many other people here that can offer better advice than me but I really did get it "from the horses mouth". Re film processing; any way you can do it yourself? I would guess it would make the whole experience more enjoyable and give you control over it.

I'm fairly new to this forum so I offer my opinion with cation. You dont mention why you want zooms but the ones you are thinking of have a 3x or more range. If zooms were as sharp as primes i guess more people would use them but the fact is the longer the range, the less well they compare. My own limit is 2.5x, any more than that and the drop of in quality becomes a bit too obvious for me. I have a 35-70 and a 80-200 and like them both but the F2 is such a nice camera (and being manual takes a second to adjust)why not use primes with it? I cant comment on the 35-105 or100-300 because I have never used them but the 2 zooms I have cope well with most situations, its just that slight drop off in sharpness that means I would rather use primes.

I just had a look in the book and while it mentions doing manually, there doesnt seem to be anything about automatically. I believe this is usually done in camera when "image rotation" is turned on. In this case the camera decides which way the shot was taken and it is displayed on screen the same way.

Scott,Peter Brackzos The Nikon Handbook, when refering to to the lens, states,"it used the same optics as earlier lenses of this series". On the previous page in that book, when refering to the collapsible version, he writes, "This soft focus six element lens......" I am still undecided. They seem hard to come-by in the U.K and with import duty the S would be about 450 pounds and S2 seem to be about 600-700 pounds. Thanks everyone for your help, I must make a decission by Monday so any furthur help would be appreciated.