Marks on prints - images added.

F

fixedimage

Suspended / Banned
Messages
902
Edit My Images
No
When I do prints in the darkroom I occasionally get light orangey brown marks on the prints, it rarely goes onto the image area, usually just on the border.

What am I doing to cause this?

I'm scanning some prints just now so I'll post an image in a wee bit.
 
Last edited:
Sorry for the delay with pics, here are a few examples of the marks I'm getting, I'm pretty sure it's quite often where I've held the print with the tongs so maybe some kind of contamination? I changed from wooden to plastic tongs last night though and was still getting marks.
Also, sometimes the edges of the paper are marked, like right around the perimeter of the paper.

IMG_0005.jpg


IMG_0002.jpg


IMG.jpg


Like I say, rarely invades the image area so it's not the end of the world but would be good to know where I'm going wrong.
 
Is the paper fresh or old? This is almost like the edge effects you get agitating in too small a tray, but the colour is unusual, especially given the tone of the images. Incidentally, the first image there is a corker :thumbs:
 
Thanks.
Paper is pretty fresh but I am using it in trays that it only just fits in, mainly due to space being at a premium in my darkroom.
 
Thinking about it, I'm not sure I've ever experienced this with paper, only negs in very small trays. I dev my prints in trays that are only 1 size up from the paper and I've never experienced anything like this
 
My first thought was the paper not being fresh, but you say it is.

In view of what you say about the paper just fitting into the trays, I suspect the edges of the paper might be getting insufficiently immersed in the fixer.

The other thing is that those yellow marks are typical of what can appear even years later from insufficient washing at the washing stage.
 
I try to not skimp on the amount of chemistry I use do I'd hope the paper was getting properly immersed.

I might be able to make space for a larger dev tray then use the smaller ones for stop and fix.

I noticed that my dev is looking pretty manky after the last session so I'll get that changed, see if there's any difference.

Think iv been washing long enough, marks seem to there before any washing though, maybe longer washing would wash the marks out? Infact, I should try n figure out where they become visible, that might help with diagnosis eh?
 
looks like too much temperature change between the chemicals, are you using them at a similar temp.
Or it could be your chemicals are getting exhausted, probably not the dev as you look like you are still getting deep blacks in our prints.
 
Chemicals should all be the same temp as they get stored together. Would a temp differential at the point of mixing cause any problems?
 
fixedimage said:
When I do prints in the darkroom I occasionally get light orangey brown marks on the prints, it rarely goes onto the image area, usually just on the border.

What am I doing to cause this?

I'm scanning some prints just now so I'll post an image in a wee bit.
Click to expand...

I assume yu are processing the picture side down not up, and washing well after fixing

Looks like they are in the chemicals picture side up.
 
JSER said:
I assume yu are processing the picture side down not up, and washing well after fixing

Looks like they are in the chemicals picture side up.
Click to expand...

No, i process picture side up, always have done. (never processed in small trays before though as always used large college or open access darkrooms.)

If it's as simple as turning them over I'll kick myself!
 
I can't see why you'd want to develop with the picture side down - how do you judge when the print is developed? I've never done that or heard of it being done like that.
 
I think this is why I print picture side up BUT given that I use RC paper there's not so much of that keeping an eye on stages of development and whipping it out when it reaches the right point.
 
LOL. Well all the darkroom printing advice will advocate leaving the print in the developer until it achieves full development and can go no further- at which point it should look neither under or over-developed. If you can achieve that level of exposure accuracy though with any level of consistency at all you'll be a better man than I Gunga Din. :D
 
I dunno, I'm not claiming to be a darkroom whizz by any means but I usually just chuck it in and agitate till it doesn't seem to be developing anymore then stop and fix.

I was under the impression that RC paper couldn't over develop, general dev time will be about a minute so you could leave it in for 1 min, 5 minutes or 3 hours and it'd all look the same?

Edit: These prints were not left in dev for a long time incase you think that's where the marks are coming from, I don't time my processing but these were around a minute, minute and a half.
 
Last edited:
Well I'm not claiming to be a whizz and I don't do nearly as much as I did years ago. The general idea of resin coated paper is that it's less likely to absorb chemicals into the paper which significantly reduces the washing time at the end.

I'm not aware that it can neither under or over-expose as that's entirely dependent on the amount of exposure it receives on the enlarger baseboard - not enough exposure and it can never fully develop, while too much exposure means a dark print.
 
Last edited:
How are you determining exposure time of the neg - with an enlarger timer or an old fashioned test strip? I tended to prefer the latter method.
 
fixedimage said:
No, i process picture side up, always have done. (never processed in small trays before though as always used large college or open access darkrooms.)

If it's as simple as turning them over I'll kick myself!
Click to expand...

The reason I say is because most of the marks are on the edges, the part that will rise up above the chemicals, if it fits the tray that is not a problem, tray size doesnt matter you just use more chemicals !, place face DOWN and what I used to do was simply agitate for a few secs to remove air then rest the tongs on the middle of the print to keep it submerged.
 
CT said:
How are you determining exposure time of the neg - with an enlarger timer or an old fashioned test strip? I tended to prefer the latter method.
Click to expand...

These are two different things

Test strips work out the exposure "length", how long you need to expose the paper for for a given fstop. I use a Patterson exposure meter

Timers work out the exposure "time" timing the length of the exposure.


Get a Patterson exposure meter, 100% perfect.
 
JSER said:
These are two different things
Click to expand...

Er,...yes - one's a piece pf photographic paper and the other is an electronic device.. ;)
Test strips work out the exposure "length", how long you need to expose the paper for for a given fstop. I use a Patterson exposure meter

Timers work out the exposure "time" timing the length of the exposure.
Click to expand...

:thinking:
 
I use test strips to get exposure length sorted.

I have a timer to run the enlarger for a set and turn it off, I could count but prefer the accuracy of the timer ( maybe slightly ironic given that I don't time my development!).

I know there are timers with probes that'll work out your exposure for you but these seem like overkill.

I'm gonna try fresh chemistry and paper image side down first as this costs me nowt.
 
I don't think even the most skilled pro printer would claim to be able to get 100% accurate exposure with the first attempt regardless of whether a test strip or timer was used.

Where timers do score is that it's far easier to do accurate reprints once you've established a correct exposure for the first print without having to keep your eye on the time with each reprint.
 
For some unknown reason there still appears to be confusion over test strips and timers, or that is how I read it especially from CT's comments above.

1. You place the neg in the carrier and run a "test strip" or more accurately an exposure meter to determine the fstop and length of exposure needed for a given paper, say 20 seconds at f8.

2. When you have determined that you place the paper in on the board and use the "timer" when you turn on the enlarger to make the print.

It has NOTHING to do with one being an electronic device and the other being a piece of paper neither has anothing to do with the other at all.
 
CT said:
I don't think even the most skilled pro printer would claim to be able to get 100% accurate exposure with the first attempt regardless of whether a test strip or timer was used.

Where timers do score is that it's far easier to do accurate reprints once you've established a correct exposure for the first print without having to keep your eye on the time with each reprint.
Click to expand...

You are still using "test strip" and "timer" in the same sentence yet they have nothing to do with each other each has a totally different job.

Replace "timer" with "exposure meter".

And yes I get 100% accurate results with a meter and only roughly accurate ones with test strips.
 
JSER said:
These are two different things

Test strips work out the exposure "length", how long you need to expose the paper for for a given fstop. I use a Patterson exposure meter

Timers work out the exposure "time" timing the length of the exposure.
Click to expand...

LOL. Well you start out talking about a timer working out the exposure, which obviously it doesn't - from which I assume you actually meant a meter and of course they are two different things entirely.
 
Last edited:
I've had the same marks in the past, I've put it down to having the temps wrong, usually far too warm.

If you leave the print in for 3 hours you will develop some base fog, not advisable and I dev my exhibition prints face down just to make sure there is 0 fogging, not saying that there is a problem upwards, but 20x16 fb paper isn't cheap.
 
JSER said:
You are still using "test strip" and "timer" in the same sentence yet they have nothing to do with each other each has a totally different job.
Click to expand...

i make a test strip using the timer ,so yes they have got something to do with each other .
 
oh and i develope picture up and have never had a problem.
to the original poster ,i seem to get those sort of marks on the paper when ive not quite got the exposure on the print right , so i just throw the naff print in a bag to be disposed of before even fixing it ,and they look very similar to your print marks , is it possible that the outside of your prints could have been exposed to some light from the enlarger ?
 
I'm thinking my dev might be at fault, I put it back in the bottle after I used it and having now sat for a couple days there's a manky looking residue at the bottom of the bottle.
Dunno what that is but can't be helping anything I'm sure.
 
but that would depend on how much light contamination Ed ,but i do take your point ,,,
it does look like light has got to the edges all the way round the paper ,wonder if the paper got taken out in the light ?
 
Nah, paper hasn't been out in the light, it's not consistent either, like if every sheet was like that I could see it but it's just this one and that one kind of thing.
 
Just putting this into the mix, they're not tong marks are they? whwn I started processing at home many moons ago I remember getting similar marks if I used the same tongs without washing the developer from them when moving the prints.
 
RaglanSurf said:
Just putting this into the mix, they're not tong marks are they? whwn I started processing at home many moons ago I remember getting similar marks if I used the same tongs without washing the developer from them when moving the prints.
Click to expand...

Could well be. Some of the prints are definitely marked in the right are for this.

Got caught up with other stuff tonight and haven't had a chance to try any of the fixes yet.
 
I made some time to print actually.
I used new developer but the same stop and fix as before
I put the 1st print in image side down and edges seemed to be curling out of the chemicals so turned it over and did the rest image side up
Used 1 pair of plastic tongs (only got one pair plastic, rest are wood but I have ordered some more plastic ones) and put them in water between uses.

I can happily report that so far it seems like my borders are nice and white.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top