Topic: Weird white patterns on film

[SLVR]

Just got finished processing some BW.

I opened the dev tank with glee. As i peered in to look at my foma film i see white splotches every 5 or 6 frames. Almost like smears. They aren't transparent. But the silver has stuck to it. There's an image. Ive seen these before on film but in a blob rather than a smear and only in one place rather than the whole film.

Could it be a fixing problem? or some sort of film defect? I assume foma doesnt have the best quality control. Im waiting for the film to dry so i can scan it. Im a little dissapointed about the spots. Hopefully i didnt lose too many good shots. I do like the foma, and ive been having a lot of fun with my QL-17.

[SLVR]

So here's what it scanned like... The film itself is white so im not sure why its white in the scan since everything is inverted. If it were a light leak the film should be black. Also if it were a light leak the film wouldnt be translucent.

[moominsean]

Looks like developer issues...i'm sure leon would be able to give you more info but seems like the developer was lower than the top of the spool, so it would swirl but not cover the film throughout.

[calbisu]

Or maybe some part of the film was in direct contact with other film.

[LT]

Definitely poor coverage by developer:

• is it likely that the reels have risen up the centre spindle above the top of the developers inside the tank ?
• do you use a wetting agent inside the tank while the film is still on the reel? This leaves residue that can cause pernicious and stubborn bubbles which prevent the developers getting to the film evenly
• what is your agitation/ inversion technique like?

L.

[LeonY]

I have had rolls like this too.usualy, s Leon stated, the gilm spool is a little above the developer.great pix

[SLVR]

i'm not quite convinced this is the problem. Ive had the same problem with developer before. But it usually leads to a perfectly developed image on the bottom of the frame, and undeveloped on the top does it not? This looks overdeveloped on the bottom in the scans but the frames look like the have the same weight of silver on them as the top.

The film itself has some sort of milky white residue on it. I do use photoflo at the end of my batches, but ive had the same milky problem before when i didnt use any wetting agents at all.



On this roll of foma i did: Xtol 1:2 (since i mixed it concentrated, this has always worked out for me as 1:1 at regular strength) 8 min, 20 seconds of agitation on the start, 15 seconds of slow inversions (usually 3) every minute.

[LeonY]

Wow that is strange

[Pete_R]

Have you tried refixing it? Can't explain how it happend but it looks to me to be uncleared film and that means insufficient fixing. Worth a try anyway I guess.

Edit: actually, the more I look at it the more it looks like the film was in contact with itself so it may be underdeveloped as well but I'd still refix it to clear the film.

[SLVR]

I'll try refixing it tonight. Im not sure if the film would have been in contact with itself though. it spooled up fine? If this is the case it could explain a bunch. as far as fixing goes, i end up fixing for 5 min using ilford rapid fixer. 5 min should be more than enough but just to be safe i always go with 5 min.

Ive been poking around and the film touching looks oddly close to what i have. Could be the problem. I'll refix tonight and then check out how underdeveloped the images actually are.

[gregor]

to me it looks underdeveloped and insufficiently cleared when fixing. I usually pre-soak Fomapan and agitate it a bit more. At the public lab I sometimes develop and print at there are a few people shooting either Fomapan or arista.edu who have had similar, but not the same, issues: it was a clearing issue only and not clearing plus underdevelopment.

You can re-fix and that may clear the negs better, but from your samples it looks like a full clearing will indicate underdevelopment. If the shots are in fact underdeveloped and really important to you, you can intensify them by toning in selenium.

Good luck. Fomapan is a decent film and certainly a cost-wise alternative when film prices are escalating.

[LT]

echo Gregor. There is definitely underdeveloped image here (see my orig post) and if the reel had risen, the fix would have suffered the same fate hence the uncleared silver (white) on the negs.

The only trouble with the Se. intensification is that you would have to only apply it to the underdeveloped line, and it would be nigh-on impossible to match this to the well dev'd and fixed portion of the neg.

I'd put it down to a bad try, and use a rubber band to secure the reels down on the central spindle next time.

[Francois]

That's a bit why I never did full inversion agitation...

[Urban Hafner]

That's a bit why I never did full inversion agitation...

And that's why I always fill up my tank even if less developer would be possible

[SLVR]

so i refixed, and it removed the white marks completly. Im guessing that the incomplete fix was the problem. However, I think you guys are still trying to blame the level of developer being too low in the tank or that the reel was not fully submerged. This isnt the case. Here I posted up some frames in the weekend thread.





These are all from the same roll.

My guess is that somewhere the roll touched. My level of developer was the exact same that i usually do and my methods i used were exact to previous rolls of foma that ive done.

The neg cleared up but you can see that it is a little underdeveloped in the white parts of the frame. I can scan later and post them up. But to the naked eye, you cant see much of a difference on the film itself.

[SLVR]

as far as underdevelopment, greg and leon, im curious what makes you think that it was underdeveloped? Maybe there is something you are seeing that i am not? The thickness of the neg looks good to me. Perhaps the scanner was adjusting itself for the white splotches and making the whites in the frame grey?

[Pete_R]

I'm wondering if the film only touched after development so I would be asking about your agitation techniques during the stop bath (if you use one) and at the begining of fixing, or, the way you empty and fill the tank. Because something must have made the film touch during processing. If it hadn't loaded properly and was touching from the begining then  surely there would have been obvious under development.

[SLVR]

My agitation is very gentle. Ive seen people at the lomography store showing people how to develop black and white and it just looks like they are shaking up a can of pop.

During my inversions i aim to bearly hear the liquid sloshing around, not sure if this is correct. But it makes sense to me that adding air into the liquid just gives it the opportunity to stick to the film even after knocking it after the inversion.

My stop bath is just a rinse. Fill the tank up, dump it out for a couple minutes.