# Ok. Have just developed my film... but...



## fadingaway1986 (Jun 10, 2006)

One side of it has bubble looking things on it...

I can't see these bubbles on the emulsion so I don't think it is from drying - what could it be?


----------



## fadingaway1986 (Jun 10, 2006)

I should add - the spots appear all along one side of the film - its not anything actually in the photo - as they appear in the sky. (overcast, do not remember seeing any UFO's)

I agitated it: 2 "lifts" every 30 seconds (constant for the first 30 seconds).


they look sort of like light grey spots


----------



## Solarize (Jun 10, 2006)

If you could get a scan that would be useful.

Did you use a stopbath, and if so at what dilution?  The shift between alkalie and acid can cause blisters on the film.

Also, did the temperature of your chemicals fluctuate much? Reticulation perhaps.

What shape/size are the bubbles, how close together/how many of them are there?  A little more info is needed before someone can give a definative answer.  What a bummer though!


----------



## Hertz van Rental (Jun 10, 2006)

If they are little circular patches that look grey or white on the neg then in all probability they are air bells.
When you put dev onto film you usually get air bubbles on the surface which can stop the dev working underneath. The cure is to always give the tank a good hard rap on a solid surface at the start of processing to dislodge them.


----------



## mysteryscribe (Jun 10, 2006)

What hertz said lol
and tap it everytime you invert it to


----------



## fadingaway1986 (Jun 10, 2006)

I give it a good tap everytime I invert it... a couple even

I will try and get a scan of it later... (with just a flat bed)... I have to go to work now

the film was nothing important.

All temps were around 20-25°C


----------



## mysteryscribe (Jun 10, 2006)

Okay try this one, if you used a powder developer, it might not have gotten completely dispersed.  Not a lot of things can spot your film from development to fixer.  After a lot of things can but right out of the tank air bells and residue of something is about all there is.


----------



## fadingaway1986 (Jun 11, 2006)

mysteryscribe - was a liquid developer (Kodak HC110)

will scan it soon


----------



## mysteryscribe (Jun 11, 2006)

I never used that I just cant imagine what it could be.  Are the spots clear or on top of negative material


----------



## fadingaway1986 (Jun 14, 2006)

Ok guys...

Sorry about the HUGE delay in replying...

I took the film to TAFE and asked my teachers - and she said it is uneven agitation...

(Grr - I agitated it heaps)

Basically the circles are lighter than the sky (which is quite darkish on the film)... kind of grey circles.

thanks for all your help... obviously I need more agitation in future... Maybe will up it to every 15 seconds rather than every 30 seconds.


----------



## Hertz van Rental (Jun 15, 2006)

I have never known agitation of any kind to produce circles on film.
Too little agitation results in under-development of the film - evenly, not in patches.
Too much agitation results in overdevelopment.
Too vigorous agitation produces flow marks - light and dark banding along the length of the film.
And that is pretty much it.
If you increase the agitation rate then you will have to reduce development time.
An agitation rate of 5 seconds every 30 seconds is the normal rate.

I'll need to see either a neg or a print to tell you for certain.
It _could_ be lens flare....


----------



## mysteryscribe (Jun 15, 2006)

Glad you said that hertz I didn't want to say it. 

I am thinking contamination of the film.. Ie body oil when loading. Not much else left frankly. Well not common things. I suppose it could ice crystals, if you were in the artic but I assum you arent. Putting film on the reel without washing your hands well will sometime make spots on the negatives. 

However there is a possibility again of good development for a while then agitation and air bells to make a different level of development at a different stage.

Or airbells when it was loaded then shaken out with the first agitation causing uneven development.  Or I might need to just shut up..

I would hate to contradict someone's teacher


----------



## Don Simon (Jun 15, 2006)

mysteryscribe said:
			
		

> I am thinking contamination of the film.. Ie body oil when loading. Not much else left frankly. Well not common things. I suppose it could ice crystals, if you were in the artic but I assum you arent.


 
Could it be something that happened during storage? I.e. maybe if it was frozen but the film container wasn't tight? This is an odd one.


----------



## mysteryscribe (Jun 15, 2006)

I do love a mystery.....


----------



## Don Simon (Jun 15, 2006)

Well I say it was Colonel Mustard in the drawing room.


----------



## fadingaway1986 (Jun 15, 2006)

Hehehe thanks guys. Am about to scan this now....


I don't think its lens flare as I took all different photos (which are crap because I just wanted to develop it) and it turns up on all of them. And it was overcast so there wasn't any sun anyway.

Not frozen. Processed as soon as I finished the roll..

Ok. Will go scan it.


----------



## Don Simon (Jun 15, 2006)

I meant frozen by the people who sold it to you, or possibly the people who sold it to them, although I admit it's unlikely that would be the cause of the problem. Anyway it'll be interesting to see these circles of doom, maybe it'll all make more sense then.


----------



## fadingaway1986 (Jun 15, 2006)

Ok. have scanned it. I don't actually have a film scanner, so I just left the lid open on my flat bed. You can kind of see what I am talking about.

I had to leave it big so you could see... so if you go

http://www.ohsixohsix.com/tpf/Untitled-2.jpg    you should be able to see it


----------



## fadingaway1986 (Jun 15, 2006)

I should add - the circles are in the sky on the first photo - and you can see in the second photo they are only in half of the sky


----------



## fadingaway1986 (Jun 15, 2006)

Oh Ok Zaphod. They were bought from a pretty reputable retailer - and haven't had this problem with the ones I developed at TAFE (bought from the same place at the same time)


----------



## mysteryscribe (Jun 15, 2006)

Airbells our first guess. Bubble gets trapped against the film. What your instuctor said was improper agitation not that it wasn't enough. You have to get a good tap to dislodge them.

Sorry but that was the most likely problem from the beginning.


----------



## fadingaway1986 (Jun 15, 2006)

I gave it a couple of good taps after each agitation.


----------



## mysteryscribe (Jun 15, 2006)

Wait for a second opinion but i'm pretty sure that's what it is. Nothing else will cause those pin prick clear spots. AT least nothing I know of. And it has the classic look of one.

Like I said wait for a second opinion though, somebody might know more than me. Hell everybody knows more than me.  I usually drop my tank from about five inches every time I invert it.  It looks like those were there from when you poured in the chemicals.  The first aggitation probably knocked them loose.


----------



## Hertz van Rental (Jun 17, 2006)

Definitely air bells. Nothing else produces circles of that type and size.
It is not unknown to get them even after tapping the tank. There is a lot of air disolved in water so developer will always contain some - and a lot more gets mixed in when you pour it into the tank.
(Fill a glass with water from the tap (faucet) and put it to one side for 24 hours. Then have a look.)
Water also has a quite strong surface tension so bubbles form readily and in huge amounts on the film surface initially. A lot float off naturally. A lot more will shift with agitation. Rapping the tank normally dislodges the rest - but there are always some tenacious ones. You have to give the tank a good, hard, sharp rap to shift the lot.
The usual procedure is:
Pour the dev into the tank.
Start the first agitation cycle - agitate constantly for the first 30 seconds.
At the end of the 30 seconds bang the tank down on the table hard once or twice.
Then after 30 seconds agitate for 5 seconds. Then for 5 secs every 30 secs for the duration.
There is no need to rap the tank again.

Some people recommend pre-soaking the film in water before processing. But I have always found this to give uneven development and you can still get troubles with air bells, so I never bother with it.


----------



## fadingaway1986 (Jun 17, 2006)

thanks Hertz.

tell me, if I were to put more developer in - would that help prevent it? (I am thinking therefore the bubbles all rise - and they would get to the top of the developer where there is no film - seeing as this obviously happened along the top of the developer)


----------



## mysteryscribe (Jun 17, 2006)

The developer should be above the film thats all that matters.  

since I completely fill a small tank and it is covered I invert my film not just aggitate.  I bang it after every inversion.  Those tiny little fill hole covers are never air tight, at least not on my tanks.  I would rather drop it in the slop sink than to have those nasty little bubbles.


----------



## fadingaway1986 (Jun 17, 2006)

but if it were further above the film, then the bubbles would sit higher, would they not?

and therefore - they wouldn't touch the film.

I do invert the tank. and tap it after every invertion


----------



## mysteryscribe (Jun 17, 2006)

as long as they sit above the film they wont touch it.  But it couldn't hurt.  I develop large format negtatives in two ounces of chemicals.  You just have to keep the bubbles away from the film and they get there from being trapped against it as the tank fills.  Hertz will most likely tell you it is the surface tension of the film that holds them or something more scientific than I do.  The truth is they aren't usually a problem if your chemical level is above the film or if you keep the chemicals moving.  Just dislodge them with a sharp rap.  Don't be afraid to hit the tank vigorously.  

I would avoid using a nine pound hammer though.  No matter how frusttrated you get.


----------



## fadingaway1986 (Jun 17, 2006)

I always give it a good bang on the counter (much to my dad's disgust when he is trying to watch tv. hehe)...


I might try putting an extra hundred mls of developer in next time and see if its better.

Cheaper to waste developer than film.


----------



## mysteryscribe (Jun 17, 2006)

absolutely.... to be honest if you are banging it a good one after you fill it and you just swish it around you shouldn't have had that but I guess sometimes they are nastier than others.  You might try soaking the film in water a few minutes first.  Bang it to.  If the surface of the film is wet it might tend to prevent the bubbles from sticking.  They should all float to the top and burst harmlessly.

I like the smaller tanks that you can fill completely then invert rather than swish.


----------



## JamesD (Jun 17, 2006)

When I develop film, it's typically one roll at a time.  I soak it, with agitation, in plain water for about 30-45 seconds, then I fill the tank with just the recommended amount (375ml in a plastic tank as printed on the bottom) of developer.  Then, to avoid the noise, and avoid cracking my tank, I smack it _hard_, bottom flat, onto the rag-rug on my tile bathroom floor.  Then I begin regular agitation, 5 inversions every 30 seconds.

The only time I've ever had problems was when I tried agitating by sliding the tank vigorously across the countertop because I wanted to see how it would work, producing uneven development, particularly with the dev flowing through the sprocket holes near the surface of the dev, but also along the length of the film in a rather uneven fashion.  And, only one time, I got air bells, which if I recall correctly, was the one time I didn't presoak the film.

I suppose everyone has different experiences here.  I probably have the least of all, so, take it for what it's worth.


----------



## Hertz van Rental (Jun 18, 2006)

I have always slid the tank around on the table to agitate as I don't like having chemicals dribble down my arms - and tanks always leak.
The results you describe are flow patterns and are caused by setting up currents in the dev. In effect you are making the developer rotate in the tank. Rather like stirring a cup of tea.
The method I use, and have always taught sudents to use, is the Kodak 'figure of 8'. You slide the tank around in a figure 8 movement covering a distance of 12-18 inches. Each complete circuit should take about 2 seconds. You do it for a count of 5.
By reversing the movement each cycle you stop the liquid in the tank from rotating so you don't get flow patterns.
Works for me.


----------



## mysteryscribe (Jun 18, 2006)

I always invert the tank... I love the smell of fixer on my shirt...  works for me but not for my wife...


----------



## JamesD (Jun 18, 2006)

Hertz van Rental said:
			
		

> I have always slid the tank around on the table to agitate as I don't like having chemicals dribble down my arms - and tanks always leak.
> The results you describe are flow patterns and are caused by setting up currents in the dev. In effect you are making the developer rotate in the tank. Rather like stirring a cup of tea.
> The method I use, and have always taught sudents to use, is the Kodak 'figure of 8'. You slide the tank around in a figure 8 movement covering a distance of 12-18 inches. Each complete circuit should take about 2 seconds. You do it for a count of 5.
> By reversing the movement each cycle you stop the liquid in the tank from rotating so you don't get flow patterns.
> Works for me.



I might have to try that some time.  I was using a back-and-forth motion with the tank, in a slight arc.  As for leaky tanks... yes.  I've found that a light touch on the outer lid keeps leakage to a minimum, and holding the tank a little low, wearing a glove, and wiping the outside of the tank with a towel keeps the mess down.

But basically, Murphey's third law of developing film applies as universally as any other of his laws:  waterproof tanks aren't.


----------



## Hertz van Rental (Jun 18, 2006)

Back and forth in a slight arc usually causes the liquid in the tank to rotate in one direction - which is why you got flow marks.

The main reason I don't like inversion as a method is because of the liquid loss. It is quite possible to lose enough dev during the processing so that the level falls below the edge of the film. I had it happen once and I wouldn't recommend it.


----------



## bigfatbadger (Jun 18, 2006)

I usually put more in than I need, to account for some loss, but then I probably get less films per developer than hertz


----------



## mysteryscribe (Jun 18, 2006)

Im whid the badger on this one.  I love the satisfaction of inversion.  I bit of chemicals be damned.


----------



## Don Simon (Jun 19, 2006)

Anyone mind if I hijack the thread? Hertz, you mentioned that too vigorous agitation creates banding... a roll of Delta 400 I developed today has one big stripe running through the negs where the centre is noticeably yellow, the effect of which is that prints appear lighter in the middle than on the top and bottom. Would that be the result of too much or too harsh agitation? I don't think it's chemicals left on the film since I spent more time rinsing this roll than usual, after developing and especially in the final rinse. On the other hand I didn't use any wetting agent or anything... just develop, rinse, fix, several rinses.


----------

