karsten
Hello,
Over the last few days, I’ve been having a bit of a go with an old Kiev 60 camera (6x6 medium format, a Pentacon Six clone from Ukraine) – unfortunately, not everything is working as it should – and when developing the film, I kept finding lots of tiny, sharp black dots on the film (visible with a magnifying glass). Unfortunately, I haven’t yet figured out where these nasty little dots are coming from; on rare occasions, I’ve even found small white spots that look as though the emulsion has been scraped off.
So I’d like to describe how I develop the film and hope for a tip as to what might be causing this:
The test film was the Maco UP 120 100, which is an Efke 100.
Loading the film into the Jobo canister
Developing in freshly prepared APH09 1+40 (13–14 mins at 20°C)
Stopping in 2% acetic acid (1 min)
Fixing with Adofix + Tetenal hot additive (5 mins)
Rinse with tap water in a film washer (a large container that fills with tap water and then empties automatically) (20 mins, ~40 water changes)
wetting agent bath (distilled water, Mirasol)
hang up the film and let it drain
apart from the developer, all the baths are at room temperature, i.e. straight from the cold tap or at room temperature; I prepared the APH09 and then brought it to the correct temperature in a water bath.
I’ve been conducting 35mm film development this way for years, including the Efke 100, without any problems, but in ATM49!
And that’s why I also tried it with the 120 film in ATM49, and it looked good – just a few of those little dots, I’d say normal.
But surely it must work with the APH09 too?!
So I prepared the developer in distilled water and filtered it, but no improvement.
A filter (Paterson) in front of the washing machine, still no improvement.
Carefully wiped the film while hanging it with a damp leather cloth, still no better.
So, I’m at a loss and hoping for some advice,
Best regards, Karsten.
Robert
I’d try rinsing the white specks on the negative with tap water first. The acetic acid might be a bit too harsh (pH level compared to the developer).
As for the black specks on the negative, I think they’re a sign of dirty sheets or holes in the shutter.
karsten
Hi Robert,
It’s a good idea to rinse with just water or a weaker solution (1% vinegar instead of 2%). The white spots are definitely flaking, and the black ones might be an emulsion that’s stuck on? I’ll give it a go! As for the black spots, they aren’t holes in the shutter, because I find them on unexposed film too, and the shutters are clean – I’ve paid particular attention to that.
Thanks for now, Karsten.
ravebenni
Hi Karsten,
Have you ever performed any exposure in the Kiev camera you’re using before? What do the black spots look like under a magnifying glass? Is there any fading there, as if there were a light leak?
Do you know who the previous owner of the camera was?
It might sound a bit odd, but if a roll of film has been ruined along its entire length with dot-like ‘exposures’ in a camera from Ukraine, I have a strong suspicion: radioactivity.
In any case, radiation affects photographic materials in a similar way to light. However, I’m not sure whether this would actually result in sharp little dots appearing on the film.
At least I once saw a film about the Chernobyl disaster in which a clip from a narrow-gauge film was shown where lightning-like ‘exposures’ had been caused by the increased radiation. Those dots didn’t look particularly sharp, though.
If you really don’t know where the camera came from, I’d advise you to check it out. I’m sure none of us has a Geiger-Müller counter at home. But if you load a piece of film – it could even be 35mm – in the dark, leave the camera for about a day, then take it out in the dark and develop it, you’ll see whether there are spots or not.
If your suspicions are confirmed, you’d have a real problem on your hands.
Maybe I’m a bit mad, but it’s possible.
Anyway, I’ve got a Kiev 6C myself that I got straight from Ukraine. The shutter on that one doesn’t work properly.
Hopefully I’m not right... :(
Good luck
Benjamin
orwograph
A bold theory...
But even if the camera had been ‘evacuated’ directly from Pripyat, I cannot imagine that the radioactive particles clinging to it would still have enough energy, 22 years after the disaster, to provide the necessary exposure for the film in this way. As far as I know, what caused the flashes of light in the documentary footage was nothing less than the film capturing the open reactor – in other words, the most concentrated source of radiation one can imagine in peacetime. I cannot imagine that any radioactive fine dust in the cracks of the camera possesses _that_ much energy. Nevertheless, one could always hold a Geiger counter up to it – every secondary school should have one in its physics collection – and then one could rule that out for sure.
Peter.
cfb_de
Hello Peter,
I see it much the same way. Although my training as a radiation protection specialist didn’t focus on photography, as a chemist with sufficient expertise in physics, I’ll take the liberty of offering a very simple answer: Benjamin is talking a load of rubbish.
Exposure on film is proof of the successful interaction between radiation and matter. Which radiation is required for which matter depends on the relevant energy levels. That is why modern X-ray machines at airports do not affect film. The radiation is too strong (wrong wavelength) for classic redox chemistry in the emulsion and not yet intense enough to excite lower orbitals.
This is precisely why X-ray images have been exposed from the rear for decades: this handy ‘contrast sheet’ behind the film fluoresces in the green/blue range and provides exposure to the film. The actual X-ray image can hardly be reproduced on film at dose rates tolerable to humans.
Anyone who obtains defined black spots on the negative caused by radioactivity is definitely doing something wrong. One possible source of error would be contamination of the shutters with americium dust. However, not even the Russians have put such contaminated cameras into circulation.
In their experiment, Rohleder et al. were only able to demonstrate an effect on the film after several days using a Kodak Aero-Ektar that was known to emit alpha radiation. Without a camera or shutter in between. The experimental setup was as follows: the lens was placed flat on a sheet of film. To exclude so-called ‘actinic radiation’ (aka ‘light’), the film was packed in a black LDPE bag 75 µm thick. The main source of error in the experiment was the failure to compensate for natural radioactivity.
Best regards,
Franz
ravebenni
I didn’t claim to know anything about it or have any experience with it,
and as the replies from orwograph and cfb_de can presumably be verified through experimentation, my idea is clearly not the source of the problem.
Benjamin
orwograph
I’ve had another thought: could it be that bits or fibres of the backing paper have stuck to the film? That could happen if the film was stored in damp conditions and the backing paper sticks slightly to the gelatin layer on the reverse side. This is particularly likely if the paper is fibrous in texture, which cannot be ruled out with Croatian films (I have no experience with Efke 120s).
I had this problem recently with an old Orwo NP20 roll film that had been lying around undeveloped for decades. Even as I was spooling it, I noticed that the backing paper was peeling away from the film with a slight crackling sound. After development: lots of tiny black dots, which were also very slightly noticeable to the touch (rough). So I wet the film again under the shower and carefully rubbed both sides of the film thoroughly with clean, wet fingers (not with my nails, of course!). The result: all the black dots were gone after drying it again.
Of course, there is a risk of damaging the emulsion. But that didn’t happen in my case. If your pictures are ruined by all the dots anyway, give it another go under running water... I’m looking forward to your reply.
Peter.
