What the...? (Stand Processed Strangeness)

Messages
264
Name
Lee
Edit My Images
Yes
I've been away from here for a bit, as life got in the way of all things film related. However, I got back on it and managed to shoot a bunch of film over the past few weeks.
On Saturday I picked up some new chemicals (Rodinal and Fix) and yesterday set about stand processing two rolls of 120 (1x Pan F, 1x FP4) in two separate tanks, at the same time.
And this happened, to both films. The stripes are worse on the Pan F, but they're still there on the FP4!


Here are as many details and thoughts that I can think off as to how I managed to get such regular weirdness using a process that I've tried and tested countess times (*apart from one new thing, see below)
--
Box Brownie No.2 Model F
Ilford Pan F 50.
Exposed 20180709
Processed 20180722

Semi-Stand processed for 1 hour
Rodinal 1:100 (5+500ml)
(30secs inversions then 5 inversions at 30mins)
5mins wash
5mins fix.
*Chemicals all brand new that day.

It's not squeegee marks.
It's not in camera.
-I have the same effect, but to a lesser extent on a separate roll of FP4 from a separate camera that was processed exactly the same way.

My thoughts:
1: Temperature Fluctuation while developing. I was trying what I thought was a steady 20deg supply from a mixer tap . But it seems to uniform.
2: Air bubbles. But I gave the tank good bang each time and I've never had a problem with this before.
3: Slight agitation throughout process. I noticed that the tub I was using for a water bath wasn't quite large enough for 2 tanks. So they may have been slowly rocking in the moving water (see #1)
4: Wetting Agent Contamination. This might be the solution to the mottlng in general but not the stripes. Would serious wetting agent contamination also contribute to more bubbles? (see #2)
--
Any suggestions or further questions appreciated!
 
Last edited:
The camera or dirt in the felt in the film cassettes. To me, that looks very like dry scratching of the film. They are certainly caused by moving the film past something as the lines are parallel to the length of the film.
 
Last edited:
Looks like a very dirty negative to me. Surface contamination of some sort that has scattered across the whole surface and then run down the length of the film, maybe during drying.

1. Are the inside of the cameras clean? Check for disintegrating foam or other blackout material.

2. Are you in a very hard water area? This could be calcium on the surface.

3. Check all the equipment you used to make sure it's spotlessly clean.

4. Did you use water from a filter jug? Very old, or brand new filters can excrete fine particulates.

5. Can you see the contamination on the surface of the negative? Is it possible under a loupe to see whether it's a dark or light coloured contaminant?

Next steps:

Boil a pan of water for 5 minutes and let it cool overnight. Run it through a paper coffee filter in the morning and make up a batch of wetting solution with just 1 or 2ml of wetting agent per litre.

Carefully load the film back on a reel and give it a good wash in clean running water for ten minutes, then drop it straight away into the wetting agent for a few seconds. Hang it to dry in a dust free room, dip your fingers in the wetting agent and gently run them down the length of the film once to remove the excess water.

Re-scan the film and see if that's sorted it out.
 
The camera or dirt in the felt in the film cassettes. To me, that looks very like dry scratching of the film. They are certainly caused by moving the film past something as the lines are parallel to the length of the film.

Thanks. Should have said it was 120 film, so no cassette issues. Also, it is only on the frames, not between them so probably chemical related.
 
Looks like a very dirty negative to me. Surface contamination of some sort that has scattered across the whole surface and then run down the length of the film, maybe during drying.
1. Are the inside of the cameras clean? Check for disintegrating foam or other blackout material.
2. Are you in a very hard water area? This could be calcium on the surface.
3. Check all the equipment you used to make sure it's spotlessly clean.
4. Did you use water from a filter jug? Very old, or brand new filters can excrete fine particulates.
5. Can you see the contamination on the surface of the negative? Is it possible under a loupe to see whether it's a dark or light coloured contaminant?

Thanks for all the questions, answers are as follows:
I saw the stripes as soon as I took the film out of the last wetting agent rinse, so it wasn't a drying effect.
1. Cameras could be dirty, they're vintage Kodaks. So old that they were before blackout materials though to no foam disintegration. Also, they've been fine in the past.
2. YES. Water is very hard here, so calcium deposit _could_ be an issue. But that doesn't explain the banding or how surface deposits would work there way up/down the film during processing.
3. All hardware was clean, but see my note about wetting agent contamination.
4. NO I used straight (hard) tap water. And again not sure how this would lead to the horizontal lines.
5. Contamination is dark in each frame (but there is nothing between frames, so probably chemical)

That's a good call on the hard water. I will try boiling, cooling and filtering water on a test strip to see if it makes a difference.
Thanks
 
Also, it is only on the frames, not between them so probably chemical related.

This is faulty logic, if the light sensitive top layer of the film is damaged before exposure, then the developing chemicals remove it, the scratches would only show up in the frames.

I can't reconcile a chemical being at fault here, I've never seen phenomena like that from the chemicals.

Stripes along the length of the film definitely seem like scratches to me, probably from the film transport mechanism of the camera.

Realistically the only way to be sure is to run another roll through the same camera and get it developed by a professional lab, then see if the stripes are still present.
 
Thanks. Should have said it was 120 film, so no cassette issues. Also, it is only on the frames, not between them so probably chemical related.
You still have rollers and a film gate in 120 cameras. It does not require much corrosion or dirt on these to scratch the film. Even a clean, non-corroded roller that is not rotating properly could be the cause
 
I'm wondering whether you are unlucky enough to have two problems happening here: mechanical scratches and contamination of one or more liquids. The left side of the frame looks like scratches and the right side, where there are fewer scratches, looks like you have spots of deposited material (easier to see on the full image on Flickr).

Rob's right: get a lab to process a roll so you can narrow it down to a processing or camera error.
 
@robhooley167 , @john.margetts & @FujiLove I will scan at higher res later for reference.
Thanks for the questions, it's making think about all the details. However, this is on two films, from two cameras (The Box Brownie and a Brownie 20 Twin) The only connection between both films is the processing.
I'll also scan the other film this evening for further reference.

@dmb No, both films were in date.
 
I'm not so sure they're scratches. They look like they're made up of closely-spaced dots rather than clean lines, and there are bits where some stripes change direction a little while others nearby don't. Also, wouldn't scratches show up as dark rather than light? Aside from that, it would be pretty unusual to suddenly get the same issue in two separate cameras at the same time.
 
Sometimes a (shhh...digital) photo of the negative itself including the rebate and inter-frame area against a textureless backlight can help diagnosis where a scan does not.
 
Aside from that, it would be pretty unusual to suddenly get the same issue in two separate cameras at the same time.
It would be unusual. But the fact that the lines are in lines and parallel to the length of the film very strongly suggests that this was caused by the film moving. It is very easy to get chemical effects in stand development - that is the main reason we do not usually do stand development - but not in lines in that direction.
 
@schpleep Just wondering what type of tank you used and whether you inverted for agitation or maybe used the swirling stick if it was a Paterson tank?
 
It would be unusual. But the fact that the lines are in lines and parallel to the length of the film very strongly suggests that this was caused by the film moving. It is very easy to get chemical effects in stand development - that is the main reason we do not usually do stand development - but not in lines in that direction.
I just don't buy the hypothesis that two cameras simultaneously developed an issue that affects negatives in a strange way that nobody has ever seen before. The fact that the arrangement of chains of dots is longitudinal doesn't necessarily mean that they resulted from film movement. They're also horizontal when the film is on a spiral and in a developing tank, which might be construed as suggestive of some issue with fluid levels or the like. However, they don't look like scratches, and I think it would be stretching things to say they were tide marks of some sort.

We need more information, such as whether there are deposits on the film, damage to the surface, or even whether the patterns are the result of some sort of exposure.
 
Here we go... another frame from the same film. Tweaked it further in LR to bringout the anomalies.
(Scanned at 6400dpi on my v700)



And this is a 1:1 crop of the top corner of the wall:


As you can see: not scratches. So I'm agreeing with @Nomad Z that this is chemical.

It would be unusual. But the fact that the lines are in lines and parallel to the length of the film very strongly suggests that this was caused by the film moving. It is very easy to get chemical effects in stand development - that is the main reason we do not usually do stand development - but not in lines in that direction.
This is still my line of thinking too: The slight rocking caused by an uneven tub and the moving water in the water bath seems to have aligned what ever micro-particles/bubbles caused this. These may well have been caused by wetting agent contamination. On a related note @Peter B this film was in an AP tank, which has lot more nooks and crannies than my Paterson tank (that I used for the less affected roll of FP4)

All my kit is soaking now to try and remove any wetting agent contamination before trying again with not-moving water and steady tanks! If it happens again, I'll be very confused.
 
I just don't buy the hypothesis that two cameras simultaneously developed an issue that affects negatives in a strange way that nobody has ever seen before. The fact that the arrangement of chains of dots is longitudinal doesn't necessarily mean that they resulted from film movement. They're also horizontal when the film is on a spiral and in a developing tank, which might be construed as suggestive of some issue with fluid levels or the like. However, they don't look like scratches, and I think it would be stretching things to say they were tide marks of some sort.

We need more information, such as whether there are deposits on the film, damage to the surface, or even whether the patterns are the result of some sort of exposure.

I agree, although I took @john.margetts comment to mean the the film was moving in the chemicals.
1. There are no deposits left on the film.
2. The surafce appears fine in high res scans and through my loupe.
3. The only "sort of exposure" variable would be that I flew with these in hand luggage. But at ISO 50 and 125 we can hopefully rule that out!
 
I'm not saying it's chemical - at present, I have no idea what might have caused it.

1. There are no deposits left on the film.
2. The surafce appears fine in high res scans and through my loupe.

If there are no deposits and no damage, does that mean that the dots/lines are made of black metallic silver like any other denser part of the negatives?
 
Air bubbles will tend to grow where a surface has been roughened (a nucleation point). Some Champagne glasses actually have these etched into the bottom...but I digress...

These marks could all be air bubbles, and the lines are simply forming where the film very gently scraped along the pressure plates [edit: or some other physical contact]. The 'scratches' are normal, and not severe enough to damage the emulsion, but enough to encourage bubble formation. So again, this points to a development issue that's causing air bubbles to form. I'd guess at some form of contamination in the developer itself, or something that's being introduced into the tank, such as deposits from the camera, something on the reels, inside the changing bag, or even on your hands during the loading process (moisturiser, sun cream etc.)

Just guesses. I don't know enough about the causes of air bubbles in developers to help further.
 
Last edited:
Not that I have much experience but @FujiLove 's idea above, i.e. a combination of mechanical and chemical, does seem very plausible give the regularity of the lines
 
The slight rocking caused by an uneven tub and the moving water in the water bath seems to have aligned what ever micro-particles/bubbles caused this. These may well have been caused by wetting agent contamination. On a related note @Peter B this film was in an AP tank, which has lot more nooks and crannies than my Paterson tank (that I used for the less affected roll of FP4)

All my kit is soaking now to try and remove any wetting agent contamination before trying again with not-moving water and steady tanks! If it happens again, I'll be very confused.

Next time, I wouldn't bother standing the tanks in a water bath. Temperature isn't going to be too critical with stand development as long it's not too hot or cold, so as long as you start with the dev at around 20 degrees a few degrees fluctuation shouldn't make much difference
 
Next time, I wouldn't bother standing the tanks in a water bath. Temperature isn't going to be too critical with stand development as long it's not too hot or cold, so as long as you start with the dev at around 20 degrees a few degrees fluctuation shouldn't make much difference
Agreed, I think I was getting to fancy for my own good :/
 
Back
Top