Issues with Washi I

[Harlequin565]

This is a new one for me...



Washi I in Diafine. I used Diafine because the datasheet for Washi I is very... sparse... so I thought I'd just use it and not worry about precise timing... My first roll of this film so no clue what to expect.

It has the contrast of Washi S, and the "glow" of Washi F and is probably something I'd persevere with if not for these (what appear to be) water marks. My initial guess is that it has dried.... badly.... but I've been using the same process for B&W dev for a long time now and never had a result like this. Anyone have any thoughts as to the cause?

The next roll will go through HC-110 to rule our developer issues.

 

[FishyFish]

Can you see the marks on the surface of the negatives? Drying marks are usually noticeable on the non-emulsion side and can be seen on the surface if you tilt the negs about in light.

 

[Harlequin565]

Good call Nige. Non-emulsion side is clean as a whistle. The marks are definitely "in" the emulsion rather than on it.

 

[dmb]

Looked at info on Washi I, has emulsion on both sides like sheet X-ray film so twice the chance of differential distortion of the emulsion if it does not dry evenly. Using wetting agent in final rinse may help or even using a salad spinner to remove any droplets

 

[Mr Badger]

I haven't a clue what you've done processing wise, I'm more intrigued as to why the cat has a bent spliff in its cigarette holder?

 

[Harlequin565]

Using wetting agent in final rinse may help or even using a salad spinner to remove any droplets

I use a wetting agent as standard, and whilst it's not a salad spinner treatment, it's not far off. Interesting note on the double emulsion though. On physical inspection it certainly doesn't look like it has...

I haven't a clue what you've done processing wise, I'm more intrigued as to why the cat has a bent spliff in it's cigarette holder?

Well that about sums up our Crow. He got his head stuck in a ladder as a kitten if that helps...

 

[Nostromo]

Ok, so I know nothing about film processing, but I do like this effect (although I guess it's not what you were hoping for)

 

[Mr Badger]

Ok, so I know nothing about film processing, but I do like this effect (although I guess it's not what you were hoping for)

The 'serendipity effect' can be another plus point to shooting film rather than digital; however, it's always good to know how it happened, so you can replicate it or avoid it, depending on how satisfied you are with the resulting image/s.

 

[Harlequin565]

I think it's the film.

I ran some Tri-X through my chemistry last week with DD-X and this time, ditched the Diafine and dev'd in DD-X.



Not as pronounced as Diafine (if it's not obvious it's more visible halfway up the RH edge of the frame) so maybe this film needs to be used with the developers in the datasheet, but historically I've had no problems developing in HC110, DD-X or Diafine for other Washi films.

So this is not a film for me. Whilst the effect is "interesting", it's not something I'm after and the contrast on it is a bit heavy for my liking. DD-X is usually very gentle with contrast, but in this case it has still resulted in some unusable negatives.

Ah well. Live & learn...