Re: Odd marks on negative -- help needed

["R. C. Lacovara" <lacovara@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

They can also be marks from abnormal pressure in handling the film. This is 
a really long shot... I don't know how you might have done that on 
individual frames. But film is sensitive to funny things, sometimes.

If you find out what it is for sure, I'd love to hear it.

Bob

At 07:48 PM 3/3/01 -0800, you wrote:
>Hi Phil --
>
>Thanks to you and all the others for the information
>and suggestions.
>
>I looked at the offending negatives carefully and there
>is no sign of a deposit on the surfaces; the mark is in
>the emulsion or base. I rewashed one strip of
>negatives, rinsed in distilled water, and rinsed again
>in fresh dilute Photo-Flo (mixed with distilled water
>to only half the concentration Kodak recommends). There
>was absolutely no change in the negative. I'm convinced
>now that the marks are not drying marks.
>
>The marks do indeed look as though some liquid flowed
>across the film and stained it, though. If the marks
>are not static marks (as most but not all of you have
>concluded), what is left? A manufacturing flaw? I'm
>very puzzled. That URL again:
>
>         http://members.cruzio.com/~shomer/stain.jpg
>
>If I process a roll of 35mm HIE in the same chemistry,
>but don't see the marks, would that tell me that the
>problem is a manufacturing flaw in the film?
>
>Oh, and regarding humidity: Santa Cruz, California, is
>at the southern end of the coastal rain forest that
>runs up the West Coast of North America into Canada. At
>this time of year, lack of humidity is NOT a problem
>around here!
>
>____________________________________________________
>Steve Homer    shomer@xxxxxxxxxx   Santa Cruz, CA  USA
>
> > Date: Sat, 3 Mar 2001 12:12:11 -0600
> > From: "phillip geller" <filje@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Subject: Re: Odd marks on negative -- help needed
> >
> > > Steve Homer wrote
> > >
> > > Does it make sense that I would see drying marks on the
> > > 70mm infrared film, but not on TMAX 120 processed in
> > > the same batch of chemistry and hung to dry in the same
> > > location?
> >
> > Yes
> >
> > direct kodak quote for infrared 70 mm
> > The film has a 4-mil (0.101 mm) ESTAR Base with a fast-drying backing.
> > that means it has no back coating.
> >
> > TMAX 120 size films have the capablilty of being retouched. They are made
> > with a coating on the base side that is gelatine.
> >
> > My guess is that this time of year when the humidity level is lower, the
> > water
> > doesn't have as much time to run off the film and drys to fast.
> >
> > In the tmax film, the residual water is diffused throughout the film base
> > by the gelatine layer an is less noticable.
> >
> > That's my theory
> >
> > Phil>
>*
>****
>*******
>******************************************************
>*  To remove yourself from this list, send:          *
>*         UNSUBSCRIBE INFRARED                       *
>*       to                                           *
>*         MAJORDOMO@xxxxx                            *
>*----------------------------------------------------*
>*   For the IR-FAQ, IR-Gallery and heaps of links:   *
>*  http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/mainpage.htm  *
>******************************************************

*
****
*******
******************************************************
*  To remove yourself from this list, send:          *
*         UNSUBSCRIBE INFRARED                       *
*       to                                           *
*         MAJORDOMO@xxxxx                            *
*----------------------------------------------------*
*   For the IR-FAQ, IR-Gallery and heaps of links:   *
*  http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/mainpage.htm  *
******************************************************