Processing Film

greenspun.com : LUSENET : B&W Photo - Film & Processing : One Thread

I am new to developing (about 6 months)my own B&W film. I have successfully processed about 10 rolls. However, I have had major problems trying to process my last 7 rolls. The films have been Ilford 100 and 400 ASA and Agfa Plus 5 (i think it was called). All the rolls have turned out sort of dense and foggy and very dark . I tried printing from one negative and it was grainy and washed out. (it was so dense that I thought the light of the enlarger had blown.) The reason I ended up losing 7 (apart from my stupidity) is when I saw the first two were bad, I thought it might have been the developer mix (it was new Agfa developer developing agfa film). I threw it out, bought Ilford developer and did 2 more. Again, no good - same results. I took the negatives to someone who teaches photography and he said it looked like I let light into the darkroom when I was unrolling the film for processing. So I figured that was my mistake. I made sure I was in a totally dark room and loaded my last 3 films and processed - same results. I have shown them to 3 people and no one knows what could have gone wrong. It was 3 different batches of developer, 2 different types of film. The fixer was also a new batch. I paid careful attention to the temperatures at mixing. Does anyone have any ideas?

-- Joanne de Boehmler (joanne@artistic-expression.com), June 05, 2000

Answers

Sorry to ask such a dumb question but this happened to me when I started so, well...is there any chance that you forgot to dilute once you had a stock solution? I remember with Ilford I made a stock solution (1:7 I believe?), then developed for 1:31 times--I got results much like what you speak of here...

-- shawn (shawngibson_prophoto@yahoo.com), June 05, 2000.

Thanks Shawn for your response. I do not understand what you mean though. I diluted the developer according to the package directions, which I think was 1:25 for the Agfa and 1:9 for the Ilford, and then I poured enough to cover the two spools that were in the cannister and went through the processing. That is how I handled the previous films that came out okay. Am I missing a step?

-- Joanne de Boehmler (joanne@artistic-expression.com), June 05, 2000.

Well by a stock solution I just meant that, say you want to use only a small amount (to develop a roll or two) at a high dilution--it's harder to be consistent when measuring such small quantities, so the manufactiurers will sometimes give you a 'stock solution' recommendation, so you can mix a fairly large amount with water, then dilute it further just before you go to use it.

But it doesn't sound like that was your problem (though I'm not familiar with the dilutions/developers you mentioned). What does the leader of the rolls look like? is there any difference in density between the leader and the frames themselves?

-- shawn (shawngibson_prophoto@yahoo.com), June 05, 2000.


A couple of things come to mind. First, how about standardizing on one brand and type of film, and that manufacturer's recommended developer, rather than trying to chase things around. If you are going to be doing outdoor work, how about a 100 to 125 ASA film. For lower light, stay with the 400.

Next, how about your meter? Is it an in-the-camera meter, or a separate hand held one? Are the batteries fresh, and is the meter calibrated? (Fairly easy to do over the counter at a good repair facility or camera shop who knows their stuff)

While you are there, have your shutter tested too.

Take a look at one of the rolls that is all dense and ugly. Does it look like it has a foggy, hazy black area all around the sharp edge of the frame? Or is the frame edge still sharp? If it is foggy, it probably means overexposure -- light meter or shutter need attention. If it is sharp it probably means over development -- too strong a dilution of the developer, too high a temperature or too vigorous agitation or a combination.

Probably best to start over with only one brand and type of film and developer and keep everything constant. Use the manufacturer's recommendations for everything first. Then change one thing at a time and keep good records of what you do. Shoot a "slate" or clipboard with all the information about film, exposure etc. If you start tossing things out at random, you may solve the problem but you won't really know which it really was.

-- Tony Brent (ajbrent@mich.com), June 05, 2000.


Thanks Tony. First, I usually use Ilford or Agfa, depending on what's on special at the time of buying. I have been using them for a long time (longer than I have been learning to develop my own) and have never had a problem. And since learning to develop on my own, I usually use Ilford developer. I use the 100 ASA film for outdoors and I use the the 400 for indoors/lower light and sports. I have had no problems at all before these last 7 rolls. My meter is in the camera and I do not think anything is wrong with it. In between these 7 B&W films that I have messed up, I also took 4 colour, which I got developed at a photography store, and they were fine. My batteries were fresh.

The frame edge of the negatives is still sharp. The whole film, including the lead-in edges, and area outside the actual exposed area (where the socket holes are), is a dark sort of creamy brown colour with what looks like a fine grain of sand over everything when you look at it through a lupe.

As I mentioned above, I usually use Ilford developer to process my film, but because I had some agfa film and needed new developer, decided to try the agfa developer. When I saw the results, I thought that I did something wrong with the Agfa developer, threw it out and went out and got what I was accustomed to using, which was the Ilford. But again, same results. I then thought I might have let light into the room when I was putting the films into the cannister, so I used another room that I was pretty sure was 100% a dark room! and processed with Ilford again. Same results. I have used the manufacturer's recommendations for everything. I double checked the temperatures before mixing. I can see that below the darkness and graininess the photographs still look like they should print, but when I tried printing it looked like grains of fine sand over the photograph.

-- Joanne de Boehmler (joanne@artistic-expression.com), June 05, 2000.



"The frame edge of the negatives is still sharp. The whole film, including the lead-in edges, and area outside the actual exposed area (where the socket holes are), is a dark sort of creamy brown colour with what looks like a fine grain of sand over everything when you look at it through a lupe."

Here lies the clues... but, alas, I do not know the answer! Someone will! All traditional B&W films that I have used (including Ilford FP4, HP5, PanF and the Delta's - which I guess is the one you using by saying you use 100 speed film outdoors) have a grey film base (in varying degrees) Sounds like some sort of contamination in your chemicals... Did the developer and fixer mix up clear? The area around the sprocket holes is un-exposed. Are the frame numbers readable?

-- Nigel Smith (nlandgl@eisa.net.au), June 05, 2000.


Hi, the frame numbers are quite readable - dark (darker than the negative colour) and clearly readable. all the subjects are very dense and grainy - one photo for example that has someone smiling, the white teeth look like they were coloured in with a black pen, the skin tone is a dense grainy sort of speckled black and white. The only chemical that was not fresh was the stop bath, but i read that if you look at it under the safe light and it did not have a purple tinge, it was okay. And I checked it under the light and it did not look purple to me. If the stop was exhausted, could that have affected the film in this way. It's really hard to explain. I think I will visit a lab and take my negatives and get the advice of one of their specilists. I have successfully processed and developed in the past and this is now 7 films in a row with the same results, so something is contaminated as you said. i will take a roll of junk, use new stop bath, as that is the only chemical that was not totally fresh and try once more. And I will also visit a lab. I will post my results here for any who might be interested. It will take me a few days to go through with these plans. thanks for your response.

-- Joanne de Boehmler (joanne@artisic-expression.com), June 05, 2000.

Very strange. It almost sounds like a bad batch of film. Are you bulk loading, or using factory film?

Just for something entirely different -- has there been any work done on your plumbing recently that might have stirred up old gunk in the pipes? I can't figure out what the "sand" might be.

It does definitely sound like some kind of fogging problem. Either there is still some light in the room when you load the reels, or those several rolls were exposed to heat, chemicals or radiation of some kind that your others weren't.

Can you shoot another test roll from that batch and take it to the teacher's darkroom and try with his chemicals? That might be a check on where the problem is coming from.

-- Tony Brent (ajbrent@mich.com), June 06, 2000.


I don't exhausted stop bath would cause the problem... that would just mean your fixer ended up more contaminated than is would/should. Using no stop bath what-so-ever won't do anything either other than maybe lower the chance of the fixer working properly I think.. never tried this, but I only use a water rinse as stop bath. Your plan of fault finding sounds good.

Tony has a good point.. how do you wash the negs? and have you tried re-washing them... is the muck on the negs or part of them? Actually I think we're asking more questions than answering :)

-- Nigel Smith (nlandgl@eisa.net.au), June 07, 2000.


Sounds like either a camera back/shutter problem, shot at the wrong iso(exposure compensation wrong) or developer not diluted from stock. Dark grainy negs. Over-exposure/overdeveloped. James

-- james (james_mickelson@hotmail.com), June 10, 2000.


Thanks to all who tried to help me solve my problem with my film processing. I took the negatives to a very experienced printer at a lab here in Toronto and he has solved my problem. I must give his company credit - Silver Shack - for saving all my negatives. He has advised that the Fixer was bad. To just throw it out. It was brand new, so I did not suspect that it could have been bad. He fixed one set of strips to show me that they could be saved and gave me the rest to see about, with the following instructions: I need Rapid Fix and Kodak PHoto Flo. Mix the Rapid Fix, no hardner, 1:4 as per info, fix all strips for 2 mins., or until base clears up (laying them out in a tray a few at a time). Then wash film for 10 minutes, changing the water almost every minute for the 10 minutes and being very careful with the handling of the negatives. Then use photo flo as per instructions and hang to dry very carefully, using a bent paper clip through the sprockets to avoid damaging the negative. This can be done in an old large bowl or bucket. I give all this detail, hoping it will be of benefit to someone else. Thanks again for your comments and suggestions.

-- Joanne de Boehmler (joanne@artistic-expression.com), June 11, 2000.

I'm in Toronto too...do you know if the Silver Shack has rental abilities for fibre (16x20 and larger)? I've heard great things about them...

-- shawn (shawngibson_prophoto@yahoo.ca), June 12, 2000.

Hi Shawn - I don't know, but they have a webpage, so you can check it aout and give them a call - www.silvershack.com

-- Joanne de Boehmler (joanne@artistic-expression.com), June 12, 2000.

Thanks Joanne. ps I'm glad you figured the problem out...have fun

-- shawn (shawngibson_prophoto@yahoo.com), June 12, 2000.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ