mark_goode Posted July 17, 2007 Share #1 Posted July 17, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) Having happily contracted the "Leica M virus" nearly two years ago, I am now advancing in the illness and am seeking to personally develop my black and white film. (Actually I'm having a grand time!). Based on my lack of experience I chose to start with Diafine. It seemed simple enough until I looked at the results of my first batch of film (see attached). Clearly I've missed something. After loading the film into the development canister, these are the steps I take: 1) Pour Diafine A into the canister for four minutes. Per the instructions, gently agitate for 5 seconds after pouring into canister, then gently agitate for 5 seconds each minute. The agitation method I follow is the one recommended by Henry Horenstein in his textbook "Photography" - gently invert the canister twice, "swish" the liquid around by moving the canister clockwise once then anti-clockwise, and finally knock the canister on its side to remove any bubbles that may have formed on the film. 2) Empty the Diafine A back into its container 3) Pour Diafine B into the canister for four minutes. Follow the same agitation schedule as for Diafine A.. 4) Empty the Diafine B back into its container 5) Wash the film under the tap with fresh water for 30 seconds (the film is still in the light tight canister) 6) Empty the water from the canister 7) Pour properly diluted Adorama Black and White Fixer into the canister for 2 minutes. Agitate for half that time 8) Pour fixer back into the its container 9) Pour properly diluted Sprint Fixer Stopper into canister for 2 minutes. Agitate for half that time 10) Pour fixer stopper back into its container 11) Open canister and remove reel holding film 12) Place under running water for 30 seconds 13) Remove film from reel and wash in cold water with a bit of dish washing soap ("Dawn" - American brand) 14) Attach film to hangers 15) Squeegee 16) Let dry And voila! You can see the results in the attached image. All the chemicals are stored in the same room at room temperature (about 75 degrees F). Your advice is deeply appreciated. Mark Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/29174-diafine-development-assistance-request/?do=findComment&comment=308008'>More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted July 17, 2007 Posted July 17, 2007 Hi mark_goode, Take a look here Diafine development assistance request. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
jonathan_r Posted July 17, 2007 Share #2 Posted July 17, 2007 Mark, looks to me like that is 'solarised', partial reversal of the tonal scale. You can achieve this appearance after scanning by pulling the curves about. Assuming you haven't done this, I'm focussing on your procedure as described. I don't know what Sprint Fixer Stopper is, but it sounds like it might be a conventional stop bath, in which case it should come between the development and the fixer, its purpose being to turn the alkaline environment of the developer into the acid one required for fixing. However, although it would be redundant used after the fixer, I can't think why using it at that stage should have caused solarisation, or indeed why it should have any harmful effect at all. Hummm - I'll be interested to see what others say. Was the film base completely clear after the fixing, or still milky in places? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonathan_r Posted July 17, 2007 Share #3 Posted July 17, 2007 Mark, I've just looked up the Sprint product range. Did you use the Block Stop Bath or the Archive Fixer Remover? The usual cause of solarisation is premature exposure to light, before fixing is complete. Are you sure you didn't sneak a quick look (most of us do!), perhaps a shade too soon? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark_goode Posted July 17, 2007 Author Share #4 Posted July 17, 2007 Hi Jonathan, Thanks for the feedback. Let me respond: As you suspected, I did not perform any adjustments during the scan. I used the same scanning procedure (VueScan - Hamrick.com) on this film (Tri-X) as I have on other rolls of the same film. A bit more background might help: The first roll of film I developed was T-Max 100 (exposed at ISO 200). I followed the instructions on the Diafine box. Their steps 4 and 5 reads: "4. Drain and rinse in plain water for about 30 seconds. The use of an acid stop-bath is NOT recommended. 5. Fix, wash, and dry in the usual manner." So I did exactly that and did NOT use a stop fixer. The results I got were exactly the same as the attached image on my first post. I then consulted Horenstein's book and noticed that he advises the use of a fixer stopper after emptying the fixer. I concluded that I missed a step in the "fix, wash, and dry in the usual manner" direction on the Diafine box. So I added the fixer stopper step to my process. The results were the same as before: solarization. I've checked the negatives with a loupe and I can see the solarization so its not my scanner creating the problem. But to your last question regarding the film base I can't say. I didn't examine the film because given my lack of experience I assumed that I couldn't open the canister until the "fixing-stop fixing" steps were completed. However, I shot another roll of Tri-X this morning and am ready to develop it pending the advice I receive on this board. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark_goode Posted July 17, 2007 Author Share #5 Posted July 17, 2007 Jonathan, I'm using the Archive Fixer Remover. Re a quick peek: no, I've been patient though it does feel like Xmas morning when I was six! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dfbldwn Posted July 17, 2007 Share #6 Posted July 17, 2007 Mark, This post on flickr.com shows the same problem only two weeks ago. Flickr: Discussing Problems with diafine in Diafine The only recommendation was to test the FIXER. Original poster did subsequently say that the fixer used wasn't fresh. This thread shows that Diafine has not always treated the same poster with such a solarization effect. Flickr: moonsafari's photos tagged with diafine regards, Dave Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonathan_r Posted July 17, 2007 Share #7 Posted July 17, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) I do not use a fixer remover with any film, but instead wash for 20 minutes in running water (wash the film, that is!). I always sneak a look at the last few frames on the reel once the film has been rinsed briefly after fixing, just in case it needs more fixing (e.g. if the fixer is getting old). It's quite safe to open the tank at this stage. At this stage the film base is clear (not milky) but in the case of T-Max looks very purple due to a dye in the film base. The dye comes out during the long wash. I see that Kodak do describe using a hypo clearing agent (fixer remover) for T-Max however, so that can't be the cause. I'm baffled. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fotohuis Posted July 17, 2007 Share #8 Posted July 17, 2007 http://www.fotohuisrovo.nl/documentatie/Diafine_Acu-1_BKA.pdf Step 1 to 6 OK. Diafine B contains a bicarbonate, that's why you have to avoid an acid stop. Step 7): Your used fix should be suitable to use without STOP bath, so most neutral or alkaline odorless fix will not work OK. Further 1 minute clearing time for a Tri-X (so 2 minutes fix time) sounds too short for me and certainly for a Tmax, which is a modern type of emulsion where the iodide will block the fix process much earlier. Regular fix time will be around 4-5 minutes, depending on your clear time. Fix time= clear time x2 for classical emulsions and x3 for modern type emulsions like Delta, Tmax or Acros films. Look at your clearing time by a piece of undeveloped film in your (fresh) fix till it's completely clear. A 2 bath fix for film ??? For baryta paper, yes, could be, film? no! After the fix you need a wash for at least 15 minutes or use the Ilford wash method. Then use a wetting agent. 15) Squeege, not advisable on an emulsion, the chance for scratches (which depends also on the type of emulsion) is rather high. So better not at all. I think your type of fix is not suitable to use after a water stop. Best regards, Robert Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fotohuis Posted July 17, 2007 Share #9 Posted July 17, 2007 >> T-Max looks very purple due to a dye in the film base. The dye comes out during the long wash << Yes and you can shorten the wash cycle by using a H.C.A. Also UV light will get the purple color away. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonathan_r Posted July 17, 2007 Share #10 Posted July 17, 2007 Fotohuis' comments are excellent. Everything is pointing to inadequate fixing, causing solarisation once the film was exposed to light. The Sprint website says that their fixer should be used for 3 minutes, and that's when freshly made up and after a stop bath. If you can't use a stop-bath with Diafine, I don't see why you can't use old fixer (save it) instead of the wash between Diafine part B and fixer proper. That would stop the development, bring the pH down and start the fixing action. Anyone see any problems with that? Or you could switch to a different 2-bath developer like Tetenal's Emofin. I use that with an acetic acid stop bath, no problem. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fotohuis Posted July 17, 2007 Share #11 Posted July 17, 2007 aha, by reading more carefully: >>Pour properly diluted Sprint Fixer Stopper << That's your H.C.A. so after using it you can shorten your wash cycle to 25% which means a 3-4 minutes wash. Conclusion: Your fix time is too short and much too short when using Tmax film. Maybe this type of fix is also not suitable to use without a STOP so then your problem is even much worser and that's why your negatives are not OK. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fotohuis Posted July 17, 2007 Share #12 Posted July 17, 2007 Well there is nothing wrong with a Diafine development, you only can not control the contrast anymore because that is done before with you E.I. of the film. Further Diafine is temperature wide independent (20-28 degrees C.) with very small changes in developing characteristics. This is typical a fix failure, you need an acid type fix suitable for fixing films without STOP or suitable for using in a 2 bath type paper processor. And at least an extra above the minimum fix time because the fix process has to be completly ended. Due to the fact Diafine B is extreme high in pH (almost 14) an acid stop is not recommended. With some films you can get emulsion problems. I normally use always a STOP (1,5-2% citric acid based) and almost all developers are working in a pH range of 9-12. Never had any problems with that for 40 years. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark_goode Posted July 17, 2007 Author Share #13 Posted July 17, 2007 Thanks to everyone for the time you've spent on this problem and your very helpful advice. I'll follow Fotohuis' recommendation when I develop the Tri-X roll I took this morning. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fotohuis Posted July 17, 2007 Share #14 Posted July 17, 2007 I am almost 100% sure it will be OK then. Diafine and Tri-X (400) is one of the best combinations with this 2 bath developer. Best regards from the Netherlands, Robert Fotohuis RoVo (Also Diafine distributor overhere ) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark_goode Posted July 18, 2007 Author Share #15 Posted July 18, 2007 OK, it's time for true confessions . . . After patiently following Robert Fotohuis' recommended procedure when developing my next roll of film I was disappointed to discover that I achieved the same outcome: solarized negatives. I put them in sleeves out of habit. Over dinner and my second glass of wine last evening I mentioned my troubles to my wife. She had seen me returning the dish washing liquid to the kitchen earlier and she said, "You know that's not Dawn soap in the dispenser, don't you? When we ran out of soap I put Murphy's Oil into the dispenser." "What??!!" Murphy's Oil is used to clean wood floors . . . So this morning I developed another roll, this time without the Murphy's Oil (duh). But out of curiosity I looked again at the film I had developed the night before. The "solarization" that I had seen in my loupe the day before was gone. I put a strip of film in the scanner. What?? The negative looked the same: solarized. I checked all of the scanner settings and found it: the scanning software (Vuescan) enables infrared scanning of the film surface by my KonicaMinolta scanner. Hmmmm. I disabled that feature and scanned the negative again. It was perfect. I went over to my trash can and dug out the first roll of film I had developed. Upon close examination I saw that the "solarization" could not be seen through my loupe. I scanned the negatives. Perfect again. So there you have it: I have demonstrated that Murphy's Oil can in fact be used as a wetting agent (if you are dumb enough to try). And, turn off the infrared cleaning feature on your KonicaMinolta before scanning T-Max or Tri-X film developed in Diafine. Attached are a few pics: the one that I previously posted but now scanned correctly sans Murphy's Oil and a couple of more from that roll and another. Thanks again for your help. I have proven once again that when it comes to Diafine, I truly am a newbie. Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/29174-diafine-development-assistance-request/?do=findComment&comment=309178'>More sharing options...
dfbldwn Posted July 18, 2007 Share #16 Posted July 18, 2007 yer a man of prodigious candor. Thanks for the (well-documented) tip about Konica Minolta scanner's infrared channel - Dave Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark_goode Posted July 18, 2007 Author Share #17 Posted July 18, 2007 yer a man of prodigious candor. Thanks for the (well-documented) tip about Konica Minolta scanner's infrared channel - Dave Thanks Dave. Re my candor: confession is good for the soul (;-p) -- Mark Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.