Scanning or development/fixing issue

[Filmandfile]

Hi, do we think this is a developing issue or scanning? I’ve tried camera scanning over 2 different light sources with the same result, can’t see the banding on the neg. It was hand processed in a Patterson tank which has worked fine for the last 8 rolls. I have whacked up dehaze on the example to exagerate the problem.

Thanks
Ben

 

[brbo]

"Scanning" the negative turned 90deg produces the same pattern?

 

[koraks]

do we think this is a developing issue or scanning?

This is virtually guaranteed to be a digital artifact.
Do @brbo's test to verify.

 

[Filmandfile]

Hi, yep have tried that on both light sources, it’s strange cos I’ve scanned ten or so rolls recently with no problem

 

[koraks]

have tried that on both light sources,

So what was the outcome?

 

[Filmandfile]

So what was the outcome?

The same

 

[koraks]

OK, that's odd, then it must be in the film after all. Was this expired film? What kind of camera did you expose it in? How long before exposing the film did you take it out of the plastic foil/wrapper? Was the film refrigerated and if so, how long was it allowed to come to temperature before it was opened? How long did it sit between exposure and development? Are frames on both ends of the film roll similarly affected?

Wait, one more thing to check regarding the digitization process - can you post a photo of the film holder & mask you're using?

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

It may be that you resolution is too low or the compression on the jpeg conversion process is too high causing banding. Probably the latter.

 

[koraks]

This is not a resolution/compression artifact.

This is what a posterization problem would look like due to low bit depth:

Note that the banding follows the gradients of the original image.

JPEG compression artifacts would look like this:

Note the typical multi-pixel 'blocks' and loss of fine detail.

Neither of these defect modes involves a vertical banding as shown in #1.

 

[Filmandfile]

Hi apologies for the late reply, we put the negs through the noritsu at work and the results were the same. It was fresh film and they were taken on a Hasselblad 503cw. I’m presuming it was in my hand developing

 

[koraks]

I’m presuming it was in my hand developing

I find that hard to match with the pattern. Did transporting the film in the camera require more force than usual? The pattern is vaguely reminiscent of stretch marks that rarely pop up. I wonder if the pitch matches with one of the fine rollers in that particular film back.

 

[Filmandfile]

Hey, nope felt like it went through as normal, also the lines would run the other direction if that was the case wouldn’t they?

 

[koraks]

Pressure marks due to improper loading or excess force tend to be perpendicular to the film length. They're more commonly (still quite rarely) seen on 35mm if it's loaded on the take-up spool inside-out.

Do you have any more frames that are affected in a similar way?

 

[Filmandfile]

Pressure marks due to improper loading or excess force tend to be perpendicular to the film length. They're more commonly (still quite rarely) seen on 35mm if it's loaded on the take-up spool inside-out.

Do you have any more frames that are affected in a similar way?

 

[Filmandfile]

There’s a couple more from the same roll

 

[koraks]

And only this roll has been affected so far, right?
The second example looks very similar indeed, but somewhat less pronounced, although it's kind of subtle to begin with.

I do know that something seems to be occurring in the digital part of your process that leaves artifacts, but this may be something as simple as sensor dust:

These blobs occur on both images in the same spot. And for all we know now, they're not related to the banding issue.

Can you show a Noritsu scan of one or both of these frames, please?

 

[Filmandfile]

 

[Filmandfile]

These are the noritsu scans, yeah I thought the OBs were the camera or source as not on noritsu

 

[Filmandfile]

These are the noritsu scans, yeah I thought the OBs were the camera or source as not on noritsu

*blobs

 

[koraks]

Quite remarkable. Well, the only thing I can correlate this is the narrow rollers in the Hasselblad film back, so I remain with a very cautious hypothesis that this has to do with excess strain on the film during frame-to-frame transport.

 

[brbo]

I can't imagine stress marks on film in Hasselblad film back at all, let alone oriented in this way.

 

[koraks]

I agree it's not much of a hypothesis, but it's the only thing I can come up with. I don't see how this would result from a processing error. It doesn't look like backing paper offset issues. It's not a scanning artifact, evidently. For a light fogging problem, it's far too regular.

The only other category I could think of is a production problem in the film itself. It might be useful to contact either Alaris or Eastman Kodak directly (the former is the place to start) and provide them with samples of this defect. However, AFAIK, Kodak/Alaris isn't quite as effective in responding to such question as, say, Harman.

 

[brbo]

Although streaking or whatever this is is too regular I'd still try rewashing film thoroughly and paying attention that the last stabilizer/final-rinse solution is in good shape. Maybe even hang film horizontally to dry. Probably won't change the results, but that is basically everything you can do at this point...

 

[koraks]

It's worth a shot.

I'd also like to see a photograph of the engayives to get a feeling for the overall contrast. Its possible that underdevelopment plays a role here, emphasizing minor emulsion variations.

 

[Filmandfile]

I’ve just run another roll from the same pack, through the same camera, have developed and looks fine but will post results when dry and scanned, it’s Kodak gold by the way.