Author Topic: More C41 problems (Read 2692 times)

Indofunk · « **on:** July 12, 2016, 02:13:18 PM »

Before I start, I know what the solution to this problem is: "Dump chems and mix a new batch!" And yes, that will work perfectly well, but where's the fun in that?

Basically, I'm getting a lot of white spots on the negatives using this old, heavily-used C41 developer. (No, white spots on the positives, therefore dark spots on the negatives.) Here's a 100% crop of what I'm talking about. I think you can click on it to make it truly 100% sized:

You can see there are a couple of big schmutzes, but mostly it's little tiny pinprick schmutzes all over the negs. I'm wondering where these are coming from and whether I can continue to use the developer a couple more times if I do something to avoid this problem. For the record, I mixed this batch of Unicolor C41 on 3/25 (the full liter), and have used it on 18 rolls so far. Granted, that's long past the recommended storage time (I think 1 month) and roll count (8 rolls according to Unicolor). But the developer still develops for sure, and clip tests come out fine to the naked eye, so I'm wondering if either leaving it in there longer, or agitating more/less, or rinsing more (I always over-rinse ... after blixing I put it through multiple changes of water for up to 20 minutes), or even straining the dev might help.

Or, "dump and mix fresh"

jharr · « **Reply #1 on:** July 12, 2016, 04:42:16 PM »

I get these kind of aberrations with c-41 also. Mine is much older than yours and has had probably 25+ rolls through it. Still going strong, but yes I spend some time with the healing brush in PS. Oddly, I just developed some 4x5 sheets at room temp a la Reinhold and used the digital ICE on the scanner and that really did a good job with the dust. Now the negs were very thin, so I got some banding in the dark expanses (subject against a black background), but I didn't have to dust spot at all. So that might be a solution for you. See if the ICE helps.

Terry · « **Reply #2 on:** July 12, 2016, 05:00:25 PM »

I got some of these a couple of batches ago and when I looked at the developer I saw lots of little flecks of sediment in the bottom. I just mixed a new batch but for a moment there I thought about straining it through a coffee filter or something like that. Didn't try it but it might work.

imagesfrugales · « **Reply #3 on:** July 12, 2016, 07:02:45 PM »

I once had exactly the same prob with bw and color film, I almost became desperated. Masses of white spots on the positive looking like yours. At the end the fixer was to blame, I use devided bleach and fix. Bought new fixer (other brand), prob gone! Filtering the old fix didn't help at all, the precipitation appeared again with every use. Even the concentrate was kaput, mixing a new working solution was no solutuion. I guess your bleachfix is kaput.

The bleach alone may be used again and again and again and ....... I use mine since years. Regenerate with oxygene. Yeah, shake it baby!

Indofunk · « **Reply #4 on:** July 12, 2016, 09:09:19 PM »

Hm, I don't think it's the fixer, because it happened with both my "normally" developed rolls (using blix) and with my bleach bypass roll (using Ilford rapidfix). I know there's another recent thread complaining about rapidfix, but as Jay Z would say, 99 problems but little white spots aint one

Indofunk · « **Reply #5 on:** July 12, 2016, 09:10:50 PM »

I do like the idea of separate bleach and fix, though, so I'll look into that separately. What fixer do you use, or do you mix up your own?

Francois · « **Reply #6 on:** July 12, 2016, 09:29:36 PM »

If you want to check if it's fixin' but not bleachin' you can always check to see if there are traces of silver left on the film by checking for opacity.

imagesfrugales · « **Reply #7 on:** July 12, 2016, 09:40:18 PM »

I use bw fix also for color film, called Agfa Fix-Ag.

"Or, "dump and mix fresh"" +1

imagesfrugales · « **Reply #8 on:** July 12, 2016, 09:43:48 PM »

Francois, in my case it wasn't non-sufficient fixing but a precipitate of fixer ingredients. Removing the unused silver was OK.

Indofunk · « **Reply #9 on:** July 12, 2016, 09:45:09 PM »

Quote from: jharr on July 12, 2016, 04:42:16 PM

I get these kind of aberrations with c-41 also. Mine is much older than yours and has had probably 25+ rolls through it. Still going strong, but yes I spend some time with the healing brush in PS. Oddly, I just developed some 4x5 sheets at room temp a la Reinhold and used the digital ICE on the scanner and that really did a good job with the dust. Now the negs were very thin, so I got some banding in the dark expanses (subject against a black background), but I didn't have to dust spot at all. So that might be a solution for you. See if the ICE helps.

This is probably a subject for a different thread, but I've never been satisfied with Digital ICE on my V500. It comes out looking really fake, like a "blur" filter in Photoshop. There aren't really any settings in ICE other than professional mode or quick mode (I, of course, being a consummate professional, would never think to use quick mode

), so I don't know what else it could be...

imagesfrugales · « **Reply #10 on:** July 12, 2016, 10:21:56 PM »

Quality of IR dust removal may depend on the used software. Vuescan works quite nice for me, but since some time (new fixer, wiping the film with paper tissue after last rinse) I have so clean negs that I hardly need it anymore.

Francois · « **Reply #11 on:** July 12, 2016, 10:44:26 PM »

I know I've always found Epson Scan to be OK. But most real photo retouchers go over the bad blends with the healing tool set using content aware replace.
One trick I found that works not too bad is to make a copy of the background layer in photoshop, apply to the background the dust and scratches filter and then use the eraser on the copied layer to remove the scratches. This is very fast and pretty simple way to do things.

Indofunk · « **Reply #12 on:** July 12, 2016, 11:35:57 PM »

Quote from: Francois on July 12, 2016, 10:44:26 PM

One trick I found that works not too bad is to make a copy of the background layer in photoshop, apply to the background the dust and scratches filter and then use the eraser on the copied layer to remove the scratches. This is very fast and pretty simple way to do things.

Ok, now that is brilliant. Thanks!

jharr · « **Reply #13 on:** July 13, 2016, 05:06:40 AM »

Yeah, I take back the ICE suggestion. I have scanned the same negative 5 times and have yet to get a decent result. It looks all compressed and horrible. I will give Francois' suggestion a shot.

Oh, and here's a flower foul since the only pic in this thread is of 'shmutz'.

Speed-Graphic-Vericolor-2 by James Harr, on Flickr

Indofunk · « **Reply #14 on:** July 13, 2016, 06:18:59 AM »

I call misuse of a flower foul!! That is reserved for a post where there are too many big words that people can't, or don't want to, understand. To punish you for your misuse of a flower foul, I am penalizing you with a "junk foul". Let this serve as a lesson to you.

It even has a schmutz in it! So there!

jharr · « **Reply #15 on:** July 13, 2016, 03:55:41 PM »

But your junk foul isn't even developed in C-41, diverging even further from the topic (b/w schmutz notwithstanding). Just for that I'm pronouncing a "Topic Deviation Foul"!

Pentaxk1000-Ektachrome-012 by James Harr, on Flickr

imagesfrugales · « **Reply #16 on:** July 13, 2016, 07:06:00 PM »

back on-topic :-P developed in homebrewed c-41 at room temp. 100%-crop

Indofunk · « **Reply #17 on:** July 15, 2016, 08:29:48 PM »

Ok, so the takeaway from this thread so far is that I should try filtering the dev and/or the blix, of which I will try the dev first. However, I seem to recall somewhere in the murky depths of my memory that I've filtered old C41 dev through a coffee filter and it immediately died. Luckily I do clip tests every (

) time now so this won't happen to me again!

And if I still get little white spots I have Francois' suggestion to fall back on

Anything else I can try?

Francois · « **Reply #18 on:** July 15, 2016, 08:42:43 PM »

Does the floating stuff produce a sediment when left untouched?
If so, you can always decant the content of the bottle using a glass rod like we learned in chemistry class.
That would prevent the liquid from coming into contact with a filter and potentially altering the chemistry.

Indofunk · « **Reply #19 on:** July 15, 2016, 09:14:35 PM »

In my case, I don't see any precipitate. Of course, at this point my dev is a pretty murky brown

Francois · « **Reply #20 on:** July 15, 2016, 10:55:14 PM »

You could always try and shine a flashlight through it. It can't possibly be any more brown than the Hudson!

Indofunk · « **Reply #21 on:** July 16, 2016, 01:55:55 AM »

Quote from: Francois on July 15, 2016, 10:55:14 PM

You could always try and shine a flashlight through it. It can't possibly be any more brown than the Hudson!

Crude oil isn't darker than the Hudson

Francois · « **Reply #22 on:** July 16, 2016, 02:48:39 PM »

Oof! That is dark.
I know I've used some coca cola brown pq universal but this is a new level of brown.

Terry · « **Reply #23 on:** July 16, 2016, 07:10:19 PM »

This thread reminds me of something that happened to me years ago. I got a roll of film back from a lab and it had sparkles (tiny white spots) on the print. I questioned this--thinking the lab had dirty developer--and was told that it was caused by exposure to excessive heat. The film had spent some time in a hot office, so I took that as a valid explanation. But now I think they were lying and their developer was really dirty...

Could heat exposure cause sparkles?

Indofunk · « **Reply #24 on:** July 16, 2016, 07:38:31 PM »

If I'm out in the heat all day without a hat and don't drink any water, I definitely start to see sparkles

Terry · « **Reply #25 on:** July 16, 2016, 07:47:01 PM »

But are you telling the truth?

?

Francois · « **Reply #26 on:** July 16, 2016, 10:01:41 PM »

Quote from: Terry on July 16, 2016, 07:10:19 PM

Could heat exposure cause sparkles?

Nah, not sparkles but more of a weird color shift.

Terry · « **Reply #27 on:** July 16, 2016, 10:19:46 PM »

Thanks Francois. I couldn't imagine that anything other than schmutz in the bath could cause little sparkly pinpricks in the print. It's a motion picture lab that I'd used for years--sad that they chose to lie rather than apologize.

Francois · « **Reply #28 on:** July 17, 2016, 02:21:20 PM »

I find that many labs simply opt for lying than anything else.
I've done business with two labs who did take that route.
One gave me firework pictures against a bright blue sky

The other told me that the film I had bought from Costco had been heat damaged and convinced me to throw away a pack of something like eight rolls... And I now realize that all this time they had been stretching the chemistry beyond what their printer could fix...

Terry · « **Reply #29 on:** July 17, 2016, 06:35:38 PM »

That, along with encouragement from FWers, is what finally convinced me to do my own C-41. I can't lie to myself about the reasons a roll didn't come out right!