Agitation issues?

[Flighter]

As mentioned in another thread I had run another roll of 120 size Fomapan 200 through my TLR to see if the use of an alkaline fixer would reduce the issue I've been having with black spots, etc with this film. It didn't but I did have another issue with developing this time as shown below - banding showing up in the light areas like the sky. The effect was most prominent in the exposures towards the middle of the roll, the boathouse in the second image was at the start of the roll and the house in the third image at the end (although faint banding can still be made out).

It's not a scanner artifact as the banding is easily visible on the negatives.

As the film sits in the tank (Paterson System 4) the banding is in the horizontal, not vertical direction, and I'm wondering if it is down to using the 'twizzle stick,' for the first agitation interval, thereafter periodic inversion agitation was used. Developer was Ilford Microphen (6 minutes at 20°C) and a 3 minute prewash was used. This prompts another question, is a prewash advisable?

Any other ideas as to what would cause this banding and how to avoid it in the future?

 

[auntiemaryscanary]

I've always prewashed Foma films for no other reason than turning my developer bright green.

I can't help with your query on the lines but a move away from the Foma 200 seems in order. I really rate the Kentmere 100 & 400 in both 120 & 35mm, not 200 of course. I've not had any issues with these films - my own errors aside

Edit: I regularly slit the 100 & 400 for my Minolta 16's and have recently used the 100 in my Minox B. I'm more than happy with the results given either the small or tiny neg sizes.

 

[StephenM]

It might be surge marks

https://help.cinestillfilm.com/hc/en-us/articles/360029186851-What-s-the-difference-between-Bromide-Drag-and-Surge-Marks-

If that link seems plausible as an explanation, you could look further into it. The developing time is relatively short, and depending on how long the first agitation was, could be an explanation.

I've not used a prewash in a Paterson tank, but on the other hand Kodak chemists do say that a prewash is advisable.

 

[Sangoma]

Never had it and use the same tanks.

However I never used the twiddle stick, always invert.

Also my prewash is not timed, but about 5 fills and a few inverts and empty with just tap water, until the green gel has washed off..

We do not normally prewash unless the developing tine is going to be under 5 minutes.

I have never thought the twiddle stick is a good idea, as the developer has a long way to travel to get fresh developer on the centre parts of the film, whereas with inversions, it only has to go from one side of the film to the other.

 

[Flighter]

Thanks all.

I've still got a couple of rolls of Foma 200 left but have read some good reviews for Kentmere so plan to get some, just trying to decide between 100 and 400.

It does sound like surge, and I'm wondering if the reason for the middle of the roll being more affected is due to the more restricted circulation there.

Ironically, I never used to use the twiddle stick and then I read somewhere that it was meant to be used right at the start to get rid of air bells as it cut down on the delay involved in getting the cap on and inverting. However, I think for my next roll I'll go back to just using inversion. I also think I may have twiddled too long!

I'm also tempted to stop prewashing but just wondering whether I should stick to just changing one thing at a time.

I switched to Microphen for my last two rolls to see if it would help with getting rid of the black spots (which must be clear spots on the negative) as Microphen was one of the developers listed on the Foma data sheet. Prior to that I used Caffenol which is one-shot so no worries about it going green.

 

[Sangoma]

Thanks all.

I've still got a couple of rolls of Foma 200 left but have read some good reviews for Kentmere so plan to get some, just trying to decide between 100 and 400.

It does sound like surge, and I'm wondering if the reason for the middle of the roll being more affected is due to the more restricted circulation there.

Ironically, I never used to use the twiddle stick and then I read somewhere that it was meant to be used right at the start to get rid of air bells as it cut down on the delay involved in getting the cap on and inverting. However, I think for my next roll I'll go back to just using inversion. I also think I may have twiddled too long!

I'm also tempted to stop prewashing but just wondering whether I should stick to just changing one thing at a time.

I switched to Microphen for my last two rolls to see if it would help with getting rid of the black spots (which must be clear spots on the negative) as Microphen was one of the developers listed on the Foma data sheet. Prior to that I used Caffenol which is one-shot so no worries about it going green.

We decided on a very complicated decision process for the 100 and 400

100 for summer and 400 for winter

I like the 100 better, but it is just too slow for a lot of shots in poor light.

 

[swanseamale47]

I'm another who has never used the stick, I always inverted the tank. Never had that even with x-ray developer which gave a stupid short dev time (for urgent press work back in the day) I'd be tempted to use a prewash first as well if time isnt a concern.

 

[soupdragon]

Oddly enough, and for the first time, I'm seeing something similar with C41. It is most obvious in the sky to the right.
The only things I did differently were to put one film in a multi reel tank, used a full litre of dev/blix and used a brand new AP Compact Spiral.

It was very hot here on Saturday and the humidity in my changing bag was very high which made the film slightly tacky.
As a consequence the film jammed a couple of times and came out of the tank with kinks.
These may or may not be the cause and will be watching this thread

 

[soupdragon]

As mentioned in another thread I had run another roll of 120 size Fomapan 200 through my TLR to see if the use of an alkaline fixer would reduce the issue I've been having with black spots, etc with this film. It didn't but I did have another issue with developing this time as shown below - banding showing up in the light areas like the sky. The effect was most prominent in the exposures towards the middle of the roll, the boathouse in the second image was at the start of the roll and the house in the third image at the end (although faint banding can still be made out).

It's not a scanner artifact as the banding is easily visible on the negatives.

As the film sits in the tank (Paterson System 4) the banding is in the horizontal, not vertical direction, and I'm wondering if it is down to using the 'twizzle stick,' for the first agitation interval, thereafter periodic inversion agitation was used. Developer was Ilford Microphen (6 minutes at 20°C) and a 3 minute prewash was used. This prompts another question, is a prewash advisable?

Any other ideas as to what would cause this banding and how to avoid it in the future?

View attachment 392327
View attachment 392329View attachment 392328

Just looking, is it possible your light seals are failing?

 

[Flighter]

Thanks again all.

Kentmere 100 on order, that should get rid of the sunny weather!

I'll prewash and invert for the next roll.

I hadn't thought about light seals but will give them a look. It's a new to me camera so this was the first roll, really to see how bad the lens was as it has coating damage and haze but also to see if an alkaline fixer helped the Foma 200.

 

[Flighter]

Oddly enough, and for the first time, I'm seeing something similar with C41. It is most obvious in the sky to the right.
The only things I did differently were to put one film in a multi reel tank, used a full litre of dev/blix and used a brand new AP Compact Spiral.

It was very hot here on Saturday and the humidity in my changing bag was very high which made the film slightly tacky.
As a consequence the film jammed a couple of times and came out of the tank with kinks.
The may or may not be the cause and will be watching this thread

Lovely colours though. Stunning!

 

[soupdragon]

Lovely colours though. Stunning!

Can you see the odd looking streaks in sky part of the picture?
Unless it's clouds

 

[Flighter]

Yes I can, like gentle ripples in the sky on the right, but I had to really look for them. Your marks aren't as straight as mine so I don't think they are caused by whatever caused mine and do look as if they might be more from the film buckling as it was loaded onto the spiral.

 

[soupdragon]

Another example.
I wonder if it's my film squeegee doing this?
I am p***ed off now.

 

[Deleted member 95430]

I dont think you are doing anything wrong, i've seen lots of reports of this particular film across the web

Fomapan Creative 200 120 Black dots and...streaks

Pretty much the whole roll looks like this. RO9 one shot 1:50 68c 8 minutes continuos rotation (Lab Box) (Fresh Bottle) Eco-Pro clear Stop bath 1:32 2 minutes Cinestill F96 Fixer 2 minutes Bessa 46. Never seen anything like it with either Ilford or Kodak films in same camera. Clarification...

www.photrio.com

 

[FujiLove]

Another example.
I wonder if it's my film squeegee doing this?
I am p***ed off now.

View attachment 392431

Yes, those do look like scratches on the top left. I always dip my fingers into the rinse-aid, shake off the excess fluid, then run the film between my 2nd and 3rd fingers (because that seems to be the softest part of the hands) to get rid of surface water. Works great, with no water marks or scratches.

 

[Flighter]

I dont think you are doing anything wrong, i've seen lots of reports of this particular film across the web

Fomapan Creative 200 120 Black dots and...streaks

Pretty much the whole roll looks like this. RO9 one shot 1:50 68c 8 minutes continuos rotation (Lab Box) (Fresh Bottle) Eco-Pro clear Stop bath 1:32 2 minutes Cinestill F96 Fixer 2 minutes Bessa 46. Never seen anything like it with either Ilford or Kodak films in same camera. Clarification...

www.photrio.com

Thanks for that, I'm not sure though as this is the first time I've had an issue with banding. Once I've sorted out a lens hood I will put another roll of Foma 200 through the camera and see what I get.

 

[Flighter]

Another example.
I wonder if it's my film squeegee doing this?
I am p***ed off now.

View attachment 392431

Yeah, it does look like a bit like smear marks so could be from the squeegee. As with your other shot, the marks do not appear level (assuming the image is on its side in the developing tank) so I wouldn't think it's surge marks.

 

[Stephen L]

Just to throw my expert opinion into the ring, having just developed my first film in 40 years. Processing Fomapan 200 (35mm) in a Paterson 4 tank, I used the twiddle stick exclusively, and did not pre-wash. The developer came out clear. No banding.
PS For my next film I have loaded a Kentmere 400 into the Kiev 4. We'll see how that goes. As I didn't have any issues this time I'm tempted to not change my methodology.

 

[Flighter]

The developer came out clear. No banding.

That's a difference between 35mm Fomapan 200 and the 120 Fomapan 200, the 120 film has an anti-halation backing that washes out a bright green colour, like the creme soda drink I remember from my youth. I don't know if there are any other differences between the two sizes.

As I didn't have any issues this time I'm tempted to not change my methodology.

Agreed, if it works, it works.

 

[Flighter]

This was from the previous roll (different camera and different batch number) but no banding other than a darker band down the right hand side.