 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| PhotoKB HomeDiscussion Groups Digital Photography Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot CamerasFilm Photography 35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther EquipmentPhoto Technique Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique GeneralGeneral Photo Topics General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK PhotographyDirectoryPhoto Clubs |
Photo Forum / Film Photography / Darkroom / July 2004Water spots?
I'm having the odd water spot with C-41 film. They aren't so bad you notice them on the film but they show up in the prints. When you then go back and really look at the negative the spots are there. This is the stablizer I'm using: Formaldehyde, 37% 3.0ml Photoflo 200 0.8ml Water to make 1.0L Can I just do a distilled water wash after this? Or maybe I should do one before? I'm already making up the statblizer with distilled water. The film is squeeged between my gloved fingers. Thanks Nick ... >film is squeeged between my gloved fingers. > > Thanks > Nick ... jul1204 from Lloyd Erlick, Where's my soapbox? It's too hot to rant right now ... but ... touching the film, especially the coated surface, is an invitation to problems. I suggest a rinse in distilled water in place of the finger-squeegee (with gloves?? -- well, it makes me say ugh. But I don't do C41 so I could be wrong.) Formaldehyde is a gas, so it will disappear anyway, although a distilled rinse might take it away sooner (too soon??). Wetting agent will not completely disappear easily, either, so I doubt the stabilizer step would be compromised by a distilled rinse. If these are films that are hung in a dust free place to dry, apply the final distilled rinse by sluicing it down both sides of the hanging films, instead of squeegee-ing. I do not use the C41 process, so take my comments accordingly. A long time ago I experimented with Ilford's XP films (did Microsoft have to pay them to use that letter combination?), and I found I simply could not escape minute specks on my negatives from a local lab. Several labs, in fact, including the one operated by a very conscientious fellow I've dealt with for years. I couldn't justify getting into C41 myself, so I dropped it. Could this be the problem? regards, --le  Signature________________________________ Lloyd Erlick Portraits, Toronto. voice: 416-686-0326 email: portrait@heylloyd.com net: www.heylloyd.com ________________________________ > A long time ago I experimented with Ilford's XP films (did > Microsoft have to pay them to use that letter combination?), [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > with for years. I couldn't justify getting into C41 myself, > so I dropped it. Could this be the problem? These aren't specks. I think the C-41 process is actually designed to be squeeged. Both to cut down on chemical carry over and for the final wipe. The prints are showing white lines. At first I was sure the paper was damaged but it's the water marks. If they were B&W I think the prints would be fine but they really show up in colour prints. At least I know the paper is good-) I think I'll try spraying the film with distilled water. Can't hurt too much. Maybe resoak the cut negatives. Nick >... I think the C-41 process is actually designed to >be squeeged. Both to cut down on chemical carry over and for the final wipe. >... jul1204 from Lloyd Erlick, That would make sense, since it's usually carried out in a machine. I could never get color neg to work for me. But that's largely because of my personal proclivities. My color perception is less than perfect, so my motivation is slight. I had the same problems with black and white from a lab when I first started. It didn't take too many overpriced, screwed lab jobs to convince me to buy a tank and an enlarger. There were bugs to work out there, too! regards, --le Signature________________________________ Lloyd Erlick Portraits, Toronto. voice: 416-686-0326 email: portrait@heylloyd.com net: www.heylloyd.com ________________________________ >>... I think the C-41 process is actually designed to >>be squeeged. Both to cut down on chemical carry over and for the final wipe. [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > lab jobs to convince me to buy a tank and an enlarger. There > were bugs to work out there, too! I tried colour printing just to prove it was too hard for mere mortals. Turned out to be much simpler. If I don't screw up the exposure I can just focus set the timer and my standard filters and print. All the prints from a tank of film without changing anything. In a way normal printing is so simple it's relaxing. Now if I can just get the negatives spot free-) Nick > > A long time ago I experimented with Ilford's XP films (did > > Microsoft have to pay them to use that letter combination?), [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > Nick Lines sound much more like scratches than anything else. Water spots come from a deposit of minerals from the water during drying. They take the form of rings and are usually visible as white and rather powdery looking on the dried film. Since the stabilizer contains a wetting agent, and since you are squeegeeing water spots are unlikely. Fine scratches in either emulsion or support will result in white lines on the prints since the scratches look black on the film. If the film must be squeegeed to control the amount of stabilizer in the emulsion then some other method of squeegeeing should be tried. The scratches may be hard to see on the negative. Real water spots can often be removed from B&W film by treating it in fresh Acetic acid stop bath but that is likely to have a deleterious effect on color film. If you are not using distilled and filtered water for the rinse bath that would be a place to start. Signature--- Richard Knoppow Los Angeles, CA, USA dickburk@ix.netcom.com > Lines sound much more like scratches than anything else. > Water spots come from a deposit of minerals from the water > during drying. They take the form of rings and are usually > visible as white and rather powdery looking on the dried The lines are random. Yesterday I was so irrated I wiped my dry finger over the negative and the white stuff disappeared. The stuff is dense enough it blocks the light getting to the paper. I've got very faint white marks on the negatives. > Real water spots can often be removed from B&W film by > treating it in fresh Acetic acid stop bath but that is > likely to have a deleterious effect on color film. > If you are not using distilled and filtered water for the > rinse bath that would be a place to start. The stablizer is distilled water. The wash water isn't. The marks are very faint easy enough to miss. Thanks Nick > The lines are random. Yesterday I was so irrated I wiped my dry finger > over the negative and the white stuff disappeared. The stuff is dense enough > it blocks the light getting to the paper. I've got very faint white marks on > the negatives. <snip> > The stablizer is distilled water. The wash water isn't. The marks are very > faint easy enough to miss. Suggestion -- could the marks be powder (these days, usually corn starch) from the gloves you're using? SignatureI may be a scwewy wabbit, but I'm not going to Alcatwaz! -- E. J. Fudd, 1954 Donald Qualls, aka The Silent Observer Lathe Building Pages http://silent1.home.netcom.com/HomebuiltLathe.htm Speedway 7x12 Lathe Pages http://silent1.home.netcom.com/my7x12.htm Opinions expressed are my own -- take them for what they're worth and don't expect them to be perfect. >> The lines are random. Yesterday I was so irrated I wiped my dry finger >> over the negative and the white stuff disappeared. The stuff is dense enough [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Suggestion -- could the marks be powder (these days, usually corn > starch) from the gloves you're using? The gloves don't say anything and I do wash them but I guess it's possible. Might explain why it's so random. I'll try washing them some more. Thanks Nick > > Lines sound much more like scratches than anything else. > > Water spots come from a deposit of minerals from the water [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > Thanks > Nick Perhaps a rinse in distilled or filtered water before the stabilizer would fix this. I am surprized that anything in the wash would remain after the stabilizer but its possible. If the stabilizer is re-used perhaps filtering it would help. The usual water spots will not come off so easily, generally they must be removed using an acid bath, something you don't want to do with color film. Signature--- Richard Knoppow Los Angeles, CA, USA dickburk@ix.netcom.com > Perhaps a rinse in distilled or filtered water before the > stabilizer would fix this. I am surprized that anything in > the wash would remain after the stabilizer but its possible. > If the stabilizer is re-used perhaps filtering it would > help. I'm suprised to. I thought when I solved water spots on B&W negatives that was it but they never caused such obvious printing problems. I'm using the stabilizer one shot. The only info I could find was in the Britsh Journal of Photography annual and that said not to reuse it. Thanks Nick |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.