Gast
Hello forum members,
I’ve now developed a few rolls of CHM 400 film in 35mm format and I’ve noticed that they seem to attract dust like a magnet. I’ve never had dust problems like this before; enlarging the prints was extremely frustrating, because as soon as I’d removed one speck of dust, the next one would already be sticking to somewhere else.
Even whilst drying, these films tended to attract dust from the ambient air, which is of course particularly annoying because it is almost impossible to remove.
My guess is that this effect is related to the base material, which causes static build-up.
This surprises me only insofar as this problem has never occurred with the original Ilford films.
So I’m now asking, firstly, what can generally be done about it, and secondly, whether the CHM comes from the same machines as the HP5, or whether Ilford might be using a different base material for third-party production?
Regards
Thomas G.
MirkoBoeddecker
Thomas,
Could it be that you enlarged the ‘other’ films in the summer and are now using the CHM 400 in the winter?
The dryness of the air is actually quite relevant in this context.
Otherwise, I’d recommend a camel hair brush.
Ilford used to change the base material as often as one changes their underwear – depending on whatever was cheapest at the time. For the last few years, however, as far as I know, everything has been made of polyester, just like the CHM 400.
Best regards,
Mirko
FrankJBeckmann
Hi,
So far, I haven’t noticed any difference compared to the original Ilford product; I’ll have to check that again. I haven’t had any dust problems of that sort so far. But perhaps that’s because I use Mirasol as a wetting agent, which claims to have an antistatic effect. Whether that’s really the reason, or whether it’s just marketing and I don’t have a dust problem for other reasons, I don’t know. At any rate, I’m no cleaning fanatic and always have to force myself to dust when the problem becomes noticeable.
Gast
Thanks for the tips,
well, actually, my lab work doesn’t depend on whether it’s summer or winter :rolleyes:
Seriously though, I should give that tip about the brush a go, because if you use a cloth (as I do), little bits of lint do tend to come off, which then grow from a few millimetres to a few centimetres during the enlargement. But, as I said, the film seems to like them very much too.
By the way, could it be that polyester is more sensitive to static electricity than acetate or Estar?
Regards
Thomas G.
cfb_de
Hello Thomas,
"Estar" is a polyester backing. Strictly speaking, even "polyester" backings aren’t actually polyester in the true sense of the word, but rather polyethylene terephthalate.
"Polyester" is a generic term here, much like "foam mattress" or "plastic bag".
The drying problem (on which I’d like to back up Mirko’s assumption) is easily solved: go into the bathroom, take a shower, create some mist, hang the film up. By the next morning, it’ll be dust-free, flat and dry.
It’s not without reason that I’ve described this method here several times before. It works even with the Efkes that expired in 2004. They turn out wonderfully flat, regardless of whether the emulsion instructions come from near Hamburg or Samobor.
I’m deliberately not getting annoyed about the current R50 batch. I’ll be ordering a replenishment of >50 sheets in May, provided we get clear confirmation from Berlin.
Best regards,
Franz
PhilippReichmuth
I’m deliberately not getting my hopes up about the current R50 batch. I’ll be ordering a further 50+ units in May, provided we get clear confirmation from Berlin.
It was about CHM, not CHS, and about dust-free drying, not development parameters.
Is this now going to be a sort of
‘ceterum censeo’?
Philipp
piu58
It’s worth giving the lab a quick wipe with a damp cloth before you start working on the photos. That raises the humidity a little. A camel-hair brush is also good, as it traps the dust. Still, there are days – especially when the wind is blowing from the east – when it’s difficult.
Gast
Mirko, on that note:
Could you perhaps replace this packaging material (shredded waste paper) – which is certainly very cheap but creates a lot of dust – with something that doesn’t create as much dust but is just as cheap when you’re putting your parcels together?
You might even save a penny or two on postage, as the shredded paper is quite heavy. The dust sticks to all the bottles and packaging and is really a bit of a nuisance.
By the way: the R50 is great... :rolleyes:
Regards, Frank.
Gast
“I’m deliberately not getting my hopes up about the current batch of R50s. I’ll be ordering a further 50 or more in May, provided we get clear guidance from Berlin.”
Most people reading this won’t give a damn. It’s just getting on my nerves.
Regards
Ronald
Gast
I’ll be ordering a further 50 or more in May, provided we get a clear statement from Berlin.
That’s really interesting information. After all, we’re talking about almost 5% of global annual demand here! :rolleyes:
cfb_de
2.5%, to be precise :)
Gast
I’m deliberately not getting excited about the current R50 batch. I’ll be ordering a replenishment of over 50 units in May, provided we get clear confirmation from Berlin.
Best regards,
Franz
[right][post="7239"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right]
Franz, I don’t quite understand that. Could you explain it in more detail?
Muah-hah-hah-hahahaha!
FWOH
Gast
2.5%, to be precise
The decline in overall demand (caused by massive uncertainty among end consumers) has already been taken into account.
