Strange, large dots with Kodak Plus-X and Kodak XTOL 1+1

randerson07 · Mar 24, 2009

my dots are only on the one frame, I just checked them all. I gently rubbed it with my fingers and didnt really feel anything. Ive got a few more rolls of plus X to shoot and one has been through an xray machine, twice. Ill report back after i shoot some if theres more of this.

Thomas Bertilsson · Mar 24, 2009

Good luck...

When I had processing problems a few weeks back, I found that going back to basics really help. I tried all sorts of things, but that made my process more complicated, and that's the last thing I needed. Here's what I did:

1. No presoak. Neither Kodak or Ilford recommends it. (Try finding it in their literature).
2. Lower the film reels into a tank pre-filled with developer (in a darkroom, of course) instead of the other way around.
3. Agitate every minute by inversion, twice. I bang the tank on the counter top hard before I set the tank down to rest.
4. Stop and fix as usual.
5. Follow the directions on the Kodak PhotoFlo container - exactly. Dilute with distilled water at 1:200.

All my film problems are gone... :smile:

I used to do all sorts of minimal agitation things with Rodinal, Pyrocat, and HC-110. That gave me a lot of head ache, so I quit it all. I may try agitating every second minute some time, if I have danger of blocked up highlights.

Good luck!

- Thomas

BobNewYork · Mar 24, 2009

I suspect condensation. I always store refrigerated film and paper in ziploc bags and then let the bag come to room temp. I've never trusted the plastic cannisters to be airtight once opened. I even put my shooting gear in tied-off plastic garbage bags before coming in from the cold - or going out of the air conditioning. (Rusted a Gossen meter once coming inside from minus 15 shooting and figured it can't be good for any electronics)

It's a thought.

Bob H

zeitgeistler · Mar 24, 2009

Photo Engineer said:
That might help, as the two frames you did post have identical spot patterns. If they differ, the differences might tell us something.

PE

Anscojohn said:
Was the film allowed to reach room temperature before the film canisters were opened for processing the film?

I took them out of my fridge, went to the darkroom, mixed chemicals and prepared stuff which usually takes about 2-3 hours. Is that enough? I checked the temperature of the canister inside with my fingers and temperature seemed OK to me.

LisaU said:
Could it be in the drying process? I found a few of those kinds of density spots on my film awhile back. The only thing I could contribute it to was that it was drying unevenly and too slowly. The areas of the emulsion that held a drop of water was for some reason making the density of the emulsion shift or something as it dried. I use one drop of photoflo and distilled water but maybe there was not enough circulation in my drying cabinet ( I don't turn it on.) Now I gently, very gently) swipe my negs with a non lint cloth so that there are no drops and it drys evenly and I have had no problem since. It doesn't make sense to me but it seems to work.

As far as I can say, the film rins off very smoothly. I don't have any kind of water marks (usually, the scanner shows them very nicely). Now, I use Amaloco wetting agent with distilled water which solved all my previous problems. I've had some dots in the middle of the film too when I was using a squeegee. Also, waiting for half an hour before starting the heating helps the film to let the water rin off and get sort of dry on the surface.

randerson07 said:
my dots are only on the one frame, I just checked them all. I gently rubbed it with my fingers and didnt really feel anything. Ive got a few more rolls of plus X to shoot and one has been through an xray machine, twice. Ill report back after i shoot some if theres more of this.

Then we seem to have the same issue. I've checked my negatives and they're pretty much perfectly clean on both sides.

Thomas Bertilsson said:
Good luck...

When I had processing problems a few weeks back, I found that going back to basics really help. I tried all sorts of things, but that made my process more complicated, and that's the last thing I needed. Here's what I did:

1. No presoak. Neither Kodak or Ilford recommends it. (Try finding it in their literature).
2. Lower the film reels into a tank pre-filled with developer (in a darkroom, of course) instead of the other way around.
3. Agitate every minute by inversion, twice. I bang the tank on the counter top hard before I set the tank down to rest.
4. Stop and fix as usual.
5. Follow the directions on the Kodak PhotoFlo container - exactly. Dilute with distilled water at 1:200.

All my film problems are gone... I used to do all sorts of minimal agitation things with Rodinal, Pyrocat, and HC-110. That gave me a lot of head ache, so I quit it all. I may try agitating every second minute some time, if I have danger of blocked up highlights.

Good luck!

- Thomas

I know, neither Kodak nor Ilford suggest presoaking (except for sheet film) but it does make sense in my case. I agitate every 30 seconds for 5 seconds - just like the XTOL datasheet suggests. So my development workflow is pretty much the default suggested by Kodak. The only thing I've altered is fixing which I do for 10 mins instead of 5.
I guess I should try lowering the film in the filled tank - might help, though I don't see how. But there's a lot of things I can't quite see through when it comes to processing film. ;-)

BobNewYork said:
I suspect condensation. I always store refrigerated film and paper in ziploc bags and then let the bag come to room temp. I've never trusted the plastic cannisters to be airtight once opened. I even put my shooting gear in tied-off plastic garbage bags before coming in from the cold - or going out of the air conditioning. (Rusted a Gossen meter once coming inside from minus 15 shooting and figured it can't be good for any electronics)

It's a thought.

Bob H

Yes. That's what has been worrying me too. But I just recently processed a roll of Tri-X that was in my fridge for 1-2 months and it was fine. I had the same dot problem with 120 roll film too last summer.

Photo Engineer · Mar 24, 2009

Dear all;

From the earliest manuals, Kodak has suggested using a presoak. I have just looked up my first developing book published by Kodak in the 40s and there it is with a photo of the film going into a presoak. I have used one for years, and it really does improve things in drum processing and tank processing.

PE

Photo Engineer · Mar 24, 2009

Well, it reminds me of fine water drops such as condensate forming on cold film, but the pattern is too regular in my mind to really be that. I'm not sure what to make of this problem, but it does not appear to be improper development such as airbells or agitation. Sorry.

PE

Arvee · Mar 24, 2009

More of a similar discussion here:

http://photo.net/black-and-white-photo-film-processing-forum/00SEVM

-F.

Anscojohn · Mar 24, 2009

Photo Engineer said:
Well, it reminds me of fine water drops such as condensate forming on cold film, but the pattern is too regular in my mind to really be that. I'm not sure what to make of this problem, but it does not appear to be improper development such as airbells or agitation. Sorry.

PE

******
Well, PE, you have made me feel a bit better. If YOU are stumped, man, I don't feel quite so stupid. :smile:

BobNewYork · Mar 24, 2009

Photo Engineer said:
Well, it reminds me of fine water drops such as condensate forming on cold film, but the pattern is too regular in my mind to really be that. I'm not sure what to make of this problem, but it does not appear to be improper development such as airbells or agitation. Sorry.

PE

I think in the original post image 2 is an enlarged crop of image 1 - my first reaction was the dots are he same on both images, and I thought "pressure plate" but on looking again 2 is a bigger images 1 & 2 are from the same neg.

I'm still on condensation. I believe the 35mm containers are fine when new and unopened, because they're full of preservative, (that sweet smell). Once opened air replaces the preservative. They do look like condensation marks to me.

Bob H

zeitgeistler · Mar 24, 2009

So you think it's the storage in the freezer (hence condensation)? Does in such a case presoaking help?

Sorry, I forgot to add that the second and forth scan are crops from the one above.

What bugs me is this (quote from http://photo.net/black-and-white-photo-film-processing-forum/00SEVM)

Very interesting. Just to see, I shot a quick roll of Plus-X in 135 yesterday. Guess what? I have the dark round stains on some frames. Straightforward processing: D-76 1+1 for 8'30" at 20 C., water stop, fixer (Ilford Rapid Fixer) for 4 minutes-ish, wash under tap 2 min., wash with Hypo 2 min., wash under tap, wetting agent, hang to dry. As I said, I never have these problems with any other film, processed the exact way (developer and times varying, obviously.)

I suppose he didn't freeze the film prior development as they were a test roll.

This is all pretty weird... I think I'll stop shooting Plus-X which is quite sad as it's exactly how I think a B/W film should look like (minus the spots ;-).

BobNewYork · Mar 24, 2009

I'm not honestly sure. The droplets will likely have evaporated by the time the film's on the reel and deposited a residue on the film. A pre-soak would probably help if the residue remained on the film surface; but that same water will soften the emulsion at that spot and enable any particulate residue to embed itself in the emulsion. I'd put anything you intend to refrigerate in a sealed polythene bag and open that bag only after everything has come to temperature. I've been very wary of condensation since "The Gossen Incident". I even had a cell phone that was "water damaged" and I know for a fact that it had never even been drizzled on.

What I do could well be overkill, (including "bagging" my equipment) but it makes intuitive sense to me and even if it's BS - I feel better about it. And, as I keep telling my wife - "It's all about me" (Her lawyer's calling now!!)

Bob H

BobNewYork · Mar 24, 2009

See what PE says. My approach is theoretical - he has a lot more scientific fact behind his opinions.

Bob H

Photo Engineer · Mar 24, 2009

BobNewYork said:
I think in the original post image 2 is an enlarged crop of image 1 - my first reaction was the dots are he same on both images, and I thought "pressure plate" but on looking again 2 is a bigger images 1 & 2 are from the same neg.

I'm still on condensation. I believe the 35mm containers are fine when new and unopened, because they're full of preservative, (that sweet smell). Once opened air replaces the preservative. They do look like condensation marks to me.

Bob H

Picture #2 is an enlarged version of #1, but #3 is a different frame but with exactly (as far as I can tell) the same dot pattern. This is confusing to me, but it does rule out airbells or air bubbles. It does not rule out something on the camera transport mechanism, and it probably rules out a coating defect due to proximity. Repeating coating defects would be at a repeated distance, several frames apart depending on frame size.

I'm still stumped.

PE

zeitgeistler · Mar 24, 2009

BobNewYork said:
I'm not honestly sure. The droplets will likely have evaporated by the time the film's on the reel and deposited a residue on the film. A pre-soak would probably help if the residue remained on the film surface; but that same water will soften the emulsion at that spot and enable any particulate residue to embed itself in the emulsion. I'd put anything you intend to refrigerate in a sealed polythene bag and open that bag only after everything has come to temperature. I've been very wary of condensation since "The Gossen Incident". I even had a cell phone that was "water damaged" and I know for a fact that it had never even been drizzled on.

What I do could well be overkill, (including "bagging" my equipment) but it makes intuitive sense to me and even if it's BS - I feel better about it. And, as I keep telling my wife - "It's all about me" (Her lawyer's calling now!!)

Bob H

I've been thinking and your idea that some residue sort of blocking the development process does make a lot of sense. I just hope that presoaking does at least soften that effect somehow for the 5 rolls that are waiting in my fridge. As a result of all of this I'll stop freezing exposed film until I can get hold of some 100% sealed bag.

I'm going to develop the films tomorrow and post scans if you guys are interested. Just one thing: If I presoak, how much should I decrease development time? How long should I presoak the film generally? Never done so before and those 4 rolls are quite important to me.

Thanks so much for all the input!

hmb · Mar 24, 2009

Dead Link Removed
I want to add that I suddenly started having this problem. With different films, after mixing new chemicals, being ABSOLUTELY sure I was not creating air bubbles.
I am quite sure (although this image I will post looks like uneven dev or air bubbles) it is in fact something to do with drying. I have always used our well water but now wondering if some of the softening chem have been changed/adjusted. It looks as if my negs have been sprayed with Rainex or something as they dry. Many fat droplets of water which don't seem to flow off, they just sit there and as the neg dries this water droplets take forever...Just sitting there.
Frustrated to say the least as I have ruined a few rolls I would have rather not.
Here is the most severe of the first batch.

zeitgeistler · Mar 24, 2009

hmb said:
I want to add that I suddenly started having this problem. With different films, after mixing new chemicals, being ABSOLUTELY sure I was not creating air bubbles.
I am quite sure (although this image I will post looks like uneven dev or air bubbles) it is in fact something to do with drying. I have always used our well water but now wondering if some of the softening chem have been changed/adjusted. It looks as if my negs have been sprayed with Rainex or something as they dry. Many fat droplets of water which don't seem to flow off, they just sit there and as the neg dries this water droplets take forever...Just sitting there.
Frustrated to say the least as I have ruined a few rolls I would have rather not.
Here is the most severe of the first batch.
need to figure how to upload image.

I've had strange fat droplet of water (as you say) when I squeegeed my film (despite of using wetting agent). Ever since I've stopped doing so, they're gone and the film runs off perfectly smooth. I must add that I always use distilled water for wetting agent (I even mix XTOL in distilled water).

hmb · Mar 24, 2009

yes but the spots I see on your film is same as what I have been getting. And last night I sat and watched, the negs after rinse had no spots and as they dried the spots formed exactly where the water drops were hanging on. They can not be removed as I could with a normal here or there water spot from drying (ones which were not so perfectly round)

zeitgeistler · Mar 24, 2009

I guess I'll do the same tomorrow. Maybe check the areas where I usually get the spots (at the beginning of the film) before putting the film in wetting agent. Can you see the spots? Because mine seem to be in the emulsion (meaning the parts are developed differently).

Ian David · Mar 24, 2009

Re the suggestions of drying marks - it is not unusual for these to show up as areas of different density in the emulsion, but my personal experience of drying marks is that they are generally areas of increased density on the neg (and minus density on the print). The OP's marks seem to be the other way around...

Photo Engineer said:
Picture #2 is an enlarged version of #1, but #3 is a different frame but with exactly (as far as I can tell) the same dot pattern. This is confusing to me, but it does rule out airbells or air bubbles.

PE - I am not sure that the dot pattern is the same - I think it is a different arrangement on each frame.

Photo Engineer · Mar 24, 2009

Ian;

I think you are right. They don't repeat exactly, but rather undergo a repeating sinusoidal pattern as if something was moving across the frame and depositing drops while moving back and forth very slightly. So a lengthwise trail of back and forth deposition. I looked at nearly every one of the many prints posted here and feel that I may have been wrong in saying that the pattern repeated.

Now, I can't be sure.

In any event, I'm still stumped. That is a lot of "something" that struck the film at some point.

PE

Anscojohn · Mar 24, 2009

Photo Engineer said:
Ian;

I think you are right. They don't repeat exactly, but rather undergo a repeating sinusoidal pattern as if something was moving across the frame and depositing drops while moving back and forth very slightly. So a lengthwise trail of back and forth deposition. I looked at nearly every one of the many prints posted here and feel that I may have been wrong in saying that the pattern repeated.

Now, I can't be sure.

In any event, I'm still stumped. That is a lot of "something" that struck the film at some point.

PE

Zeitgeistler mentioned he allowed his film to warm up whilst mixing up his chemistry, which takes a couple of hours. Question 1) Is that enough time for frozen film to come to room temperature? Question 2) We were taught to let our chemistry "rest" overnight before using it: could freshly-mixed powdered chemistry be the problem--either developer or fixer.

Photo Engineer · Mar 24, 2009

Well, firstoff, no company recommends re-freezing film after exposure.

That said, I have done it when properly sealed. However, the new plastic capped cannisters are not air/moisture tight to freeze anyhow even with fresh film, only the 120 sealed foil/plastic containers are air tight, so this is another problematic area to start with. So, you have to take rather strong measures to protect film when either refrigerated or frozen.

There is no strict guideline on thawing materials as it depends on ambient humidity and temperature when sealing them, ambient when thawing and cold/frozen temperature. It also depends on the mass of the film so a 36 exp roll of 35mm thaws or warms faster than a 24 exposure roll, and a 120 warms faster than a 220 roll.

To be absolutely safe, I usually thaw overnight. That would be 8 - 12 hours. That will not save a roll of film that gets condensate on it, but a tightly wrapped or wound roll will generally not get condensate on it.

PE

hmb · Mar 24, 2009

to keep it simple...trying to find variables, or something done different to cause this? I can't find it except my water...since i have been lazy and not used distilled water but rather my well water it is the only variable which in my opinion could have changed (in my situation regarding the same type of spots)
and I will develop another roll tonight and watch those water spots as they dry!
oh, and as far as condensation on the film or anything of the sorts... now I am thinking that although all of these rolls I have had suddenly had issues with are of different film types they all arrived from B&H in the same shipment???

zeitgeistler · Mar 25, 2009

hmb said:
to keep it simple...trying to find variables, or something done different to cause this? I can't find it except my water...since i have been lazy and not used distilled water but rather my well water it is the only variable which in my opinion could have changed (in my situation regarding the same type of spots)
and I will develop another roll tonight and watch those water spots as they dry!
oh, and as far as condensation on the film or anything of the sorts... now I am thinking that although all of these rolls I have had suddenly had issues with are of different film types they all arrived from B&H in the same shipment???

I've had spots on my 120 rolls of Plus-X too and they were from a different dealer. Also, a friend of mine had those spots recently too, so it must be a general thing.

Concerning mixing chemicals: As far as I can remember, the D76 datasheet recommends resting after mixing; the XTOL datasheet doesn't so I assuemed that the developer is ready to be used right after mixing.

Concerning pre-soaking:

Some people prefer to soak their film in water before developing it. Today, it is generally not
recommended. It may be useful however when normal development times would be less than five
minutes -- it helps even out development and enables better control over agitation. If you use the
method pre-soak the film for two minuets, discard the water and pour in the developer. Then
extend the indicated development time by about 50%.

Do you agree? Any other recommendations?

BobNewYork · Mar 25, 2009

I'd always thought that pre-soaking helped prevent uneven development in the classic sense of those irregular bands of uneven density. These spots are from something else entirely. I don't think drying marks because that would add neg density in those areas and result in lighter marks on the print. Seems to me that something has inhibited development in these areas.

Bob H

Strange, large dots with Kodak Plus-X and Kodak XTOL 1+1

Latest Gallery

A

totocalcio

A

Untitled

H

Jerome Leaves

H

Jerome

H

Sedona Tree

Recent Classifieds

Forum statistics

randerson07

Thomas Bertilsson

BobNewYork

zeitgeistler

Photo Engineer

Photo Engineer

Arvee

Anscojohn

BobNewYork

zeitgeistler

BobNewYork

BobNewYork

Photo Engineer

zeitgeistler

hmb

zeitgeistler

hmb

zeitgeistler

Ian David

Photo Engineer

Anscojohn

Photo Engineer

hmb

zeitgeistler

BobNewYork

Strange, large dots with Kodak Plus-X and Kodak XTOL 1+1

A totocalcio

A Untitled

H Jerome Leaves

H Jerome

H Sedona Tree

Forum statistics

A

totocalcio

A

Untitled

H

Jerome Leaves

H

Jerome

H

Sedona Tree