White Specs on negatives

Fp4. Weirdly I just did another roll, this time delta 400, and it appears fine. I could see the specs without scanning and this time I can’t. This time though I used rodinal 1:100 semi stand. Before I used ilfotec hc 1:31 for 6:30. The ilfotec is old (ish) and has sat under my desk since last year
 
I have had this a few times I think it's contamination from the backing paper, not sure if the film was left in a damp environment prior to processing.
 
steveo_mcg said:
I have had this a few times I think it's contamination from the backing paper, not sure if the film was left in a damp environment prior to processing.
Click to expand...
Oh right ok. Not that I can think of. Was kept in the same conditions as the roll that turned out of.
I think someone before had could be the fixer and it never happened again, maybe a dodgy roll then
 
White spots on a negative suggests decreased contact with developer e.g. air bubbles.

But if the example image above is the positive scan aren't they dark spots on the negative?

Dark spots imply too much development e.g. crystals of developer in contact with film.
 
Phil S said:
White spots on a negative suggests decreased contact with developer e.g. air bubbles.

But if the example image above is the positive scan aren't they dark spots on the negative?

Dark spots imply too much development e.g. crystals of developer in contact with film.
Click to expand...
Yes true on the actual negative, to the eye they appear as black.
that’s strange, I developed it as I normally would. Maybe the developer has had it?
 
Ben johns said:
Yes true on the actual negative, to the eye they appear as black.
that’s strange, I developed it as I normally would. Maybe the developer has had it?
Click to expand...
Could it have crystallized in storage?
 
Ilford have sometimes had some batch weirdness, haven't they? Might be worth getting in touch... but a response could be slow!
 
ChrisR said:
Ilford have sometimes had some batch weirdness, haven't they? Might be worth getting in touch... but a response could be slow!
Click to expand...
I would but I’ve used the developer before. It had sat for maybe...6 months since the last time I’d used it. I’ve taken a 3rd test roll today so tonight I’ve develop the same way I did with the roll that went wrong. If the same thing happens just have to assume the developer is gone and use the rodinal I’ve got
 
Ben johns said:
I would but I’ve used the developer before. It had sat for maybe...6 months since the last time I’d used it. I’ve taken a 3rd test roll today so tonight I’ve develop the same way I did with the roll that went wrong. If the same thing happens just have to assume the developer is gone and use the rodinal I’ve got
Click to expand...

At the risk of ruining a couple of frames, I would be tempted to cut the roll in two and dev one half in each developer to see if the problem shows itself on both halves.

If it does then clearly the problem isn’t with the developer but elsewhere ( film itself possibly)
 
Yea I think I will, the test roll today I don’t care about so probably do that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top