Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
05-05-2010, 12:53 AM   #1
Veteran Member
Jimfear's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Uppsala, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 576
What is this about?! (Film/developing question)

Hi

I recently developed two rolls of Ilford PanF+ in Tetenal Neofin Blue, both rolls at the same time. On one of the rolls I got a really strange effect that I don't like very much. In shadow areas of bokeh there are really harsh edges between shades, kind of like a digital picture with not enough bit depth.

Does anyone know how this happened? Or if it is something wrong with the film, the other roll developed at the same time is fine.


See foreground bokeh?!




Thankful for all and any input.

05-05-2010, 09:21 AM   #2
Veteran Member
titrisol's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: In the most populated state... state of denial
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,098
Quite strange, it looks solarized ... maybe poorly fixed?
Is the roll milky? if so fix it again for a couple of minutes and should be fine
05-05-2010, 10:32 AM   #3
Inactive Account




Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Brisbane, QLD, AUS
Posts: 3,262
Is it a scanned neg and do you have ICE turned on? If so, turn it off for BW film. (Although, judging by the scratches, it's off.)

But yeah, other than that, fix the fixer.

Also, oo! A kitty!
05-05-2010, 10:52 AM   #4
Veteran Member
Nesster's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: NJ USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 13,047
Is it this way, on the same edge, for the entire roll? If so, maybe you poured too little fixer in the tank. (Go ahead, ask me how I know about that, only I poured in too little developer...)



05-05-2010, 01:02 PM   #5
Site Supporter
Sluggo's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Ames, Iowa
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 601
> "like a digital picture with not enough bit depth"

Go with that thought. If the negatives look okay to the naked eye (not way too dense or too thin), then my guess is that the problem is in the scan step. Probably the analog gain setting is quite a bit off for some reason, so the raw scan data is shifted toward white, and then during level adjustment step (which is perhaps automatic?) there isn't enough bit depth left to recover the detail, at least in the brighter parts of the picture, so you get isobars.

Not that I can begin to guess the underlying cause, but my next steps would be (1) try different scan software if you have anything available, and if that doesn't make a difference (2) scan on a friend's hardware and see if it looks any better. I bet you a nickel the negative doesn't really have the defect we see here.
05-05-2010, 02:33 PM   #6
Site Supporter
GeneV's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Albuquerque NM
Photos: Albums
Posts: 9,775
Normally, when ICE is on it does not remove the dirt, but does make the negative look solarized. However, it does so on the whole negative. That looks like a fixing problem to me where the film did not clear. Really, you need to look at the negative and see if this area is cloudy.
05-05-2010, 04:46 PM   #7
Veteran Member
Nesster's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: NJ USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 13,047
In my experience, ICE will make the dark areas block up and lumpy; this doesn't look like that.
05-06-2010, 12:12 AM   #8
Veteran Member
Jimfear's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Uppsala, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 576
Original Poster
Thanks for all the input!

If a poorly fixed negative looks something like this it could very well be it. I noticed my fixer was on it's last re-run before I change it. The film in itself does not look milky but I noticed that this roll had less contrast in the pictures than the other roll I developed, which is strange as it was in the same tank with the same chemicals. I'll try to fix it again with fresh fixer. If it helps I'll be the happiest guy on the planet!


QuoteOriginally posted by Nesster Quote
Is it this way, on the same edge, for the entire roll? If so, maybe you poured too little fixer in the tank. (Go ahead, ask me how I know about that, only I poured in too little developer...)
I had enough chemicals, this appears a little here and there on the roll. Mostly in bokeh areas. Btw I have also been a little overly optimistic with developing a 120 roll once...


QuoteOriginally posted by Sluggo Quote
> "like a digital picture with not enough bit depth"

Go with that thought. If the negatives look okay to the naked eye (not way too dense or too thin), then my guess is that the problem is in the scan step. Probably the analog gain setting is quite a bit off for some reason, so the raw scan data is shifted toward white, and then during level adjustment step (which is perhaps automatic?) there isn't enough bit depth left to recover the detail, at least in the brighter parts of the picture, so you get isobars.
This was my initial though also, already a bit grumpy for thinking I'd have to re-do the scans I was not very pleased to find this:



05-06-2010, 12:50 AM   #9
Veteran Member
Jimfear's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Uppsala, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 576
Original Poster
Well I tried to fix it again and I'm sorry to report that there was no change at all. Whatever it is, it's there permanently.
05-06-2010, 02:24 AM   #10
Pentaxian
Lowell Goudge's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 15,400
Is it possible that you did not agitate the developer enough when processing. It almost seems like the developer was locally depleted creating the harsh edges.

I have not tried much B&W development lately as I sold my darkroom when I went digital, maybe a mistake but too late now.
05-06-2010, 04:05 AM   #11
Veteran Member
Nesster's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: NJ USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 13,047
Hm, maybe that's a lens effect, and you should patent/copyright whatever it is that's going on in your lens, this could be big with the Holga crowd

I'd discount development as it is localized on the negative - front bokeh - and not around the edges or randomly smeared. Looks like you're getting flare in that area as well


By the way, do you think this sort of bokeh (I presume from a K-x) in b&w would look like yours?
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/31601-takumar-...ml#post1032784
05-06-2010, 05:07 AM   #12
Veteran Member
Jimfear's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Uppsala, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 576
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Lowell Goudge Quote
Is it possible that you did not agitate the developer enough when processing. It almost seems like the developer was locally depleted creating the harsh edges.

I have not tried much B&W development lately as I sold my darkroom when I went digital, maybe a mistake but too late now.
As Nesster said, it is not random and that would count out something with the developer.


QuoteOriginally posted by Nesster Quote
Hm, maybe that's a lens effect, and you should patent/copyright whatever it is that's going on in your lens, this could be big with the Holga crowd

I'd discount development as it is localized on the negative - front bokeh - and not around the edges or randomly smeared. Looks like you're getting flare in that area as well


By the way, do you think this sort of bokeh (I presume from a K-x) in b&w would look like yours?
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/31601-takumar-...ml#post1032784
Haha, something for the Lomography crew for sure. I got this effect in shots using different lenses, and I haven't seen it before so if not all my lenses decided it's time to start acting funny at the same time this is probably not to do with the lens.

That shot you link to, I think it would be different from what I'm getting. In my shots the shades are very uniform until they brake into another uniform shade. No nice transitions between them.

Oh well, I'll have to wait and see what happens next time I shoot a roll. Very strange phenomenon anyway, never seen it before and never want to see it again!
05-06-2010, 05:25 AM   #13
Site Supporter
Sluggo's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Ames, Iowa
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 601
QuoteOriginally posted by Jimfear Quote
This was my initial though also, already a bit grumpy for thinking I'd have to re-do the scans I was not very pleased to find this...
Guess I owe you a nickel. Hmph.
05-06-2010, 05:54 AM   #14
Site Supporter
GeneV's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Albuquerque NM
Photos: Albums
Posts: 9,775
On the bright side, at least it did not harm the kitty.
05-06-2010, 06:54 AM   #15
Pentaxian
Digitalis's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Adelaide.
Posts: 8,795
also be mindful of temperature variations, and sometimes the developer used can have an adverse effect on image quality. Illford films have this annoying tendency to clump/block up in certain parts of the tonal range why I use T-Max or Fuji ACROS for most of my work.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
rolls, time
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Developing B/W film with C-41 ftpaddict Pentax Film SLR Discussion 21 05-27-2014 06:47 PM
Stupid 120 film developing question - paper back removal. ytterbium Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 10 04-11-2012 01:17 PM
1 hour film developing irishwhite Film Processing, Scanning, and Darkroom 9 06-15-2010 08:45 AM
Film chemical/developing question/problem JahJahwarrior Pentax Film SLR Discussion 13 10-29-2008 05:55 PM
cost of film developing Gooshin Pentax Film SLR Discussion 16 08-25-2008 04:47 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:32 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top