# Repeating streaks on negatives



## MBasile

I've developed quite a few rolls of film lately (getting back into film) and they all have these lines coming from the sprocket holes.

Most of the rolls have been Arista Premium 400 shot on two different bodies. I've altered my agitation techniques to make sure I wasn't being too rough. I've also extended the fixing time.

Any other ideas of what this could be? Has anyone seen this before? I find it strange that they are such a straight/strong lines.


----------



## timor

At first it looked like bromide drag, but maybe not, the lines are too regular for it. Just to make sure: which edge of the film was position at the top in developing tank ? If you can remember. On the other hand the lines are too regular. Is the whole film like that ? Every frame ?


----------



## gsgary

Over developing can cause the lines but first i would try re fixing the negatives


----------



## ann

Bromide drag was my first thought as well.


----------



## gsgary

Too much agitation
Molecular Expressions Microscopy Primer: Photomicrography - Black & White Film Processing Errors


----------



## ann

thanks for that link.  Agitation was in the running along with bromide drag, but i was thinking too little.

I plan on using that link for my darkroom folks so thanks again.


----------



## timor

Good link Gary. Should be posted as a sticky as a read for beginners.
Over agitation. So now it will be good for OP to disclose his agitation pattern.
On the other hand I have a question: what about Jobo processors ? They use constant agitation, but I didn't notice any streaks on negs. So, what's up ?


----------



## Derrel

The reason those *streaks are in such straight lines* is the developer is being churned through the perforations in the film...take a look...the streaks are RIGHT in line with each perforation on the side of the film. This is a pretty common developing fault. An easy way to make sure it does not happen is to use the old Bill Pierce "rolling pin" agitation method.


----------



## gsgary

I had these on a roll once and refixed with new fixer and they went


----------



## MBasile

I've tried a few different methods for agitation. Most recently was simply inverting in a gentle motion 4 times at the start of each minute. I've progressively simplified my agitation to avoid it being too aggressive. Perhaps I should invert and twist.


----------



## Gavjenks

It looks exactly like bromide drag.  

Bromide drag happens when you don't agitate ENOUGH when using a developer that is made to be agitates. It can initiate from high density areas of the film and drip down from there (in which case it will be uneven looking), but it can also initiate from the sprocket holes, in which case it will look exactly like this.

*One *solution is simply to agitate a more than whatever you're doing, and thus not give the bromide enough time to drip down your image and pollute stuff. Instead it gets agitated away harmlessly into solution before it builds up enough to drip.

There's not really such a thing as "too much agitation." There are methods where you in fact constantly agitate for the entire development time (like BTZS tubes).  The result of more agitation is going to be not a ruining of your photos, but instead:
* Less shadow detail / higher contrast
* Faster developing times

*Another *solution is to switch to a different developer.  If you don't want the higher contrast that comes from more agitation, but you also don't want bromide drag, then get a developer that is designed specifically for low-agitation, long term "stand" developing or semi-stand developing.  The classic example being *Rodinal*. Or *HC-110* is a little easier to find for sale.  Other options include pyro developers (like *pyrocat HD*), or homemade slow developers like *obsidian aqua*, or coffee-based *caffenol *developer.



> The reason those streaks are in such straight lines is the developer is being churned through the perforations in the film...take a look...the streaks are RIGHT in line with each perforation on the side of the film.


I disagree.  This would not lead to straight lines.  If it was violently squirting through the sprockets, it might lead to uneven development, but it would be in the form of circular or very diffuse elliptical at most "halos" of differential developing, not perfect straight lines.  Straight lines mean drips, not violent squirts. And drips mean bromide drag.

Combined with his statements above that he has been intentionally doing less and less agitation, the opposite (sort of) problem of bromide seems the better fit.


----------



## Josh66

What developer is the OP using?  I don't believe s/he has mentioned it (if it was mentioned, I missed it).


----------



## Gavjenks

O|||||||O said:


> What developer is the OP using?  I don't believe s/he has mentioned it (if it was mentioned, I missed it).


Dunno, but if it is bromide drag, it's not possible that he was using Rodinal, because there's no bromide in Rodinal (or AFAIK any other stand developer). Nor would surge marks make sense, because you barely agitate it.

So probably something typical like D-76 or whatnot.


----------



## Josh66

Gavjenks said:


> [...] if it is bromide drag, it's not possible that he was using Rodinal, because there's no bromide in Rodinal [...]



That's why I wondered.  

Knowing which developer was used would narrow down the possible causes.

(At the least, we would know if bromide drag is even a possibility.)


----------



## MBasile

I am in fact using Rodinal


----------



## Josh66

So that rules out bromide drag and just leaves agitation (I think).


----------



## Josh66

Which dilution did you use, and how were you agitating?


----------



## Derrel

Gavjenks said:


> O|||||||O said:
> 
> 
> 
> What developer is the OP using?  I don't believe s/he has mentioned it (if it was mentioned, I missed it).
> 
> 
> 
> Dunno, but if it is bromide drag, it's not possible that he was using Rodinal, because there's no bromide in Rodinal (or AFAIK any other stand developer). Nor would surge marks make sense, because you barely agitate it.
> 
> So probably something typical like D-76 or whatnot.
Click to expand...


I am amused at how fast you've changed your mind on this...I do not think you've developed much 35mm film...in one post you're POSITIVE that it's bromide drag...and then in less than 10 minutes, you're backpedaling and hedging your bets.

Then you say, "If it's bromide drag it's not possible that he was using Rodinal, because there's no bromide in Rodinal.."


In not too surprising fashion, of course, you "diagnosed" his developer as "*probably something typical like D-76 or whatnot*."

But then, doggone it, the OP came in and said he was actually using Rodinal.

Your diagnostic skills need some honing... You kill me Jar-Jar Gavbenks!!!


----------



## Josh66

I use a ton of Rodinal.  Check out my Flickr stream if you don't believe me - you'll notice that the Rodinal set has nearly twice as many photos as any other developer set.  Not "a lot", but I don't put everything I shoot on Flickr, and I have a lot of private stuff.

The less diluted the developer, the more it matters how you agitate.  1+25 requires very gentle agitation.  A 1+100 stand, on the other hand, I agitate the **** out of it for a solid minute, then don't touch it for an hour.


----------



## DannL

Years ago I recall having the similar marks. In my case it was considered overdevelopment at the perforation holes. I was too aggressive with my rocking and rolling and the developer circulated too much through the holes. I also think that the reel was poorly designed. In the end I replaced the tank with a JOBO and my routine evolved into 3 complete inversions at the beginning, then gently rocking the tank in multiple directions for 30 seconds, then another 3 complete inversions at the end of every 30 second interval. I only use D-76.


----------



## Gavjenks

Naw I havent developed a ton of 35mm, but i have done enough to have gotten bromide drag and it looked exactly like that.

Guess not *shrug*  Surge marks still sounds strange if he is being really gentle though. They are also just so neatly traced out.

*Fixer *is also a possible culprit. If under-agitated, it could seep (evenly and straight in the lack of agitation) through the sprocket holes more quickly than non-hole areas, correctly removing the unexposed halides under the holes, whereas the areas not under the sprocket holes don't get fixed enough, and then the halides fog when you turn on the lights.  Leading to light colored streaks like seen here.  Similar cause as bromide drag, different chemistry.

Even if you're doing low agitation or stand development with your Rodinal, you should be fully agitating during the fixer stage still.  Are you doing that?


----------



## Josh66

Gavjenks said:


> Guess not *shrug*  Surge marks still sounds strange if he is being really gentle though. They are also just so neatly traced out.



Hard to know if what someone says is 'gentle' agitation actually is gentle...

What I consider gentle may not be 'gentle' to you (though, my 'gentle' is pretty damn gentle).

With stand development, I have seen something similar happen - without what I would call 'aggressive' agitation during the first minute, you can have a similar problem.


----------



## Gavjenks

True.


----------



## MBasile

I agitated during development and fixing with more vigor, seemed to do the trick. I'm assuming it was a fixing issue that is now fixed (bad pun).


----------



## Josh66

Are you doing stand development?  Or "regular"?

1+25, 1+50, 1+100...?

The developer is the only step that I really pay attention to how I agitate...  I know it's not good advice or anything, but that's the only part where I'm really careful to pay attention to what I'm doing.  Fixer, I give it 10 seconds of 'aggressive' agitation every minute, for 10 minutes.

Stand developing, to me, is sort of the opposite of "regular" developing.  Instead of being gentle, you have to *really* agitate it in the first minute or you'll get uneven development.  And then, with the 1+25 dilution, you'll get the same thing if you're not gentle enough...

Not saying that I understand it or know why it happens, just sharing my observations.


----------



## timor

There is one more possible thing, a light leaking developing tank.


----------



## gsgary

O|||||||O said:


> I use a ton of Rodinal.  Check out my Flickr stream if you don't believe me - you'll notice that the Rodinal set has nearly twice as many photos as any other developer set.  Not "a lot", but I don't put everything I shoot on Flickr, and I have a lot of private stuff.
> 
> The less diluted the developer, the more it matters how you agitate.  1+25 requires very gentle agitation.  A 1+100 stand, on the other hand, I agitate the **** out of it for a solid minute, then don't touch it for an hour.



Thats strange because this shot is 1+100 5 gentle agitations then put in fridge for 1 hour


----------



## gsgary

MBasile said:


> I agitated during development and fixing with more vigor, seemed to do the trick. I'm assuming it was a fixing issue that is now fixed (bad pun).



What did i tell you


----------



## gsgary

Gavjenks said:


> True.



Not true


----------



## Josh66

gsgary said:


> O|||||||O said:
> 
> 
> 
> I use a ton of Rodinal.  Check out my Flickr stream if you don't believe me - you'll notice that the Rodinal set has nearly twice as many photos as any other developer set.  Not "a lot", but I don't put everything I shoot on Flickr, and I have a lot of private stuff.
> 
> The less diluted the developer, the more it matters how you agitate.  1+25 requires very gentle agitation.  A 1+100 stand, on the other hand, I agitate the **** out of it for a solid minute, then don't touch it for an hour.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thats strange because this shot is 1+100 5 gentle agitations then put in fridge for 1 hour
Click to expand...

Well, I didn't say that it happens every time.  Just that I've seen it happen, and it seemed to be from too little agitation.


----------



## timor

MBasile, what tank are you using ? This whole discussion about agitation starts to be very militiant. According to what was said here I should have bromide drag on every piece of film I developed. LoL. Bromide drag happens sometimes when the conditions are right. If you get it every time the fault is somewhere else, is not your agitation technique. Neither is it the developer fault, bromine for "bromide drag" comes from film emulsion, so no matter which one you use bromides are always there. However borax based developers may just have higher tendency to let the bromide drag to happen. Try to over-stand the second bath while using Stoeckler developer. Garantie there will be streaks. But in your case is a Rodinal, not much headache. 
Internal construction of the tank is important as it controls the flow of the fluids, lazy areas or intense areas of the flow will cause uneven development. Remember the problems wit MOD54 ? The first model loaded with six sheets no matter how agitated was causing streaks on the negatives. Looking like bromide drag, just horizontal. I have MOD54, used with only 4 sheets and middle mount empty works just fine. After this all there is still a possibility of light leaking into developing tank. Looks like bromide drag. It fooled me to, until one day I had oblique streaks but didn't notice that dramatic changes in Earth gravity field to justify that. 
So, maybe for now you change the tank and maybe get some different model. If still you will have identical streaks we gonna have to take a look at the water you are using.


----------



## MBasile

timor said:


> MBasile, what tank are you using ? This whole discussion about agitation starts to be very militiant. According to what was said here I should have bromide drag on every piece of film I developed. LoL. Bromide drag happens sometimes when the conditions are right. If you get it every time the fault is somewhere else, is not your agitation technique. Neither is it the developer fault, bromine for "bromide drag" comes from film emulsion, so no matter which one you use bromides are always there. However borax based developers may just have higher tendency to let the bromide drag to happen. Try to over-stand the second bath while using Stoeckler developer. Garantie there will be streaks. But in your case is a Rodinal, not much headache.
> Internal construction of the tank is important as it controls the flow of the fluids, lazy areas or intense areas of the flow will cause uneven development. Remember the problems wit MOD54 ? The first model loaded with six sheets no matter how agitated was causing streaks on the negatives. Looking like bromide drag, just horizontal. I have MOD54, used with only 4 sheets and middle mount empty works just fine. After this all there is still a possibility of light leaking into developing tank. Looks like bromide drag. It fooled me to, until one day I had oblique streaks but didn't notice that dramatic changes in Earth gravity field to justify that.
> So, maybe for now you change the tank and maybe get some different model. If still you will have identical streaks we gonna have to take a look at the water you are using.



I'm using a stainless tank. Like I said though, the issue has been solved. Thanks everyone!


----------



## timor

I am glad you solved it. Steel tanks have less space between the coils of film so agitation sufficient for plastic tank might be insufficient for steel tank.
Streaks can happen anytime, I just got streaks in today's procedure. But they are not from bromide drag or wrong agitation. Streaks  have different shapes and are of higher density then surrounding emulsion, some frames don't have them and angles are not consistent.T They are not tightly associated with sprockets holes. They were formed on the edge at the bottom of developing tank and that edge was top edge while in camera. My conclusion is: a camera back door light leak. Happens with old cameras with depleted light seals.
Good luck to you in film processing.


----------

