Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register ☰
Main Photography Discussion
Cleaning black and white negatives?
Page <<first <prev 3 of 3
Jan 30, 2019 17:50:27   #
nadelewitz Loc: Ithaca NY
 
burkphoto wrote:
I squeegeed thousands of rolls of B&W and Ektachrome over the years. I never had any issues with scratches.

Photo-Flo works without any wiping in some localities, but not all. Local water used to mix it may leave a powdery residue on film where water drops cling. At least, it did in Charlotte.

Here's the key, taught to me by a camera store clerk and master custom printer in 1968: My Yankee squeegee was always cleaned in a few drops of dishwashing liquid and warm water immediately after use, and stored in a quart-size plastic bag, left open, but kept in a drawer. I'd always rinse it, then dip it in Photo-Flo (for B&W) or E-6 Stabilizer (for Ektachrome) before squeegeeing the film. NEVER use a dry squeegee, or a squeegee that has been stored out in the open to gather dust and grit. That's where the whole scratch issue came from. I used that same squeegee for 20 years.

Admittedly, most folks aren't that careful! But I learned from some pretty anal-retentive lab rats over the years. I've always had the attitude that keeping film clean, and cleaning it just before use, eliminates the need for spotting prints or digital files.

At the lab where I spent most of my career, we printed millions of school portraits from film every Fall (prior to film scanning in the early 2000s and digital capture in the mid-2000s). The most important thing we could do was to keep film, printers, film transports, and paper transports clean. It reduced the need to hire spotters to paint out the white spots on thousands of prints, using 000 brushes and difficult to mix color dyes.
I squeegeed thousands of rolls of B&W and Ekta... (show quote)


Lucky you. But how many folks would be as careful/anal as you were taught? Respectfully, what you said doesn't change what I said.

Reply
Jan 30, 2019 18:32:13   #
therwol Loc: USA
 
nadelewitz wrote:
Squeegeeing film is dangerous. A squeegee blade can scratch a soft wet emulsion, by itself or by dragging tiny particles of dirt and whatever along with it.

I haven't looked for years, but there used to be photo-grade sponges available. Soft damp sponge wrapped around the filmstrip and pulling film through is much safer than a squeegee.

Or, if using Photo-Flo, the need for any kind of wiping is eliminated altogether.


I used a squeegee with double sponges on most of my rolls. I actually suspect that some of the debris was sponge particles that came off of the sponge.

Reply
Jan 30, 2019 22:25:14   #
User ID
 
abc1234 wrote:
More of a problem because the film has dyes, not metallic silver.

The dyes are not at the surface where the dirt is.

Reply
 
 
Jan 31, 2019 00:10:15   #
E.L.. Shapiro Loc: Ottawa, Ontario Canada
 
I don't now where all this dirt, gunge and surface damage is coming from. I kept all my negatives and transparencies in proper glassine, polyethylene and even older Kraft paper envelopes that I used to buy from Negafile and Apec- years ago. I have 50 year old film in many sizes and formats that are sill in perfect shape.

If I find the occasional dirty one that was mishandled or not property filed or if someone brings me something for restoration, I have fave a procedure .In the olden days, I would first make a duplicate negative on special duplicating film- long gone! Before I start any procedure, I scan the negate or make a print- dirt and all. If somehow the negative becomes damaged in cleaning, I still have an image that can be digitally restored.

I never encountered negative that did not clean up after a few minutes in 66 degree (F) distilled water and a few drops of Photo Flo. Sometimes a very very gently rubbing with a clean cellulose sponge (immersed in the Photo Flo solution) or a rare old Kodak photo chamois will dislodge stubborn dirt. The only time I use film cleaning solvent is if the material on the film is some kind of tar or gum-like substance. White gas or Naphthalene works well. With color negatives and transparencies, a bath in the final stabilizer from that particular process does the trick rather than the Photo-Flo. All film may be gently squeegee-sponged and allowed to air dry in a clan dust free place.

If film has scratches, I would print them wet in an enlarger in a glass-less negative carrier. With a diffusion or cold light enlarger, minor abrasions will not show.

Reply
Jan 31, 2019 00:15:46   #
chasgroh Loc: Buena Park, CA
 
wishaw wrote:
Scan them and clean up in post processing


Yup...clean 'em as good as you can first. But this is the *only* way to make worthwhile prints from them. Of course some folks think it's cool to leave 'em as is...YMMV...

Reply
Jan 31, 2019 00:26:29   #
rook2c4 Loc: Philadelphia, PA USA
 
Dik wrote:
NO! NO! NO!
The first thing that idiot does is pick up the negative with his fingers in the image area. He's wearing a glove so he won't feel the grit that he's pushing into the emulsion.
Then he takes a dry cloth and scratches both sides of the film at the same time, using whatever abrasive filth happens to be on the film, and cloth.
He then says that if that doesn't work, and picks up a bottle of liquid cleaner...
Could not watch any more of this atrocity.
It made my want to sandpaper his eyeballs!
NO! NO! NO! br The first thing that idiot does is ... (show quote)


What idiot are you talking about? The link is just a Google search with many results.

Reply
Jan 31, 2019 00:35:27   #
therwol Loc: USA
 
E.L.. Shapiro wrote:
I don't now where all this dirt, gunge and surface damage is coming from.


I'm not entirely sure myself. My negatives have been in glassine envelopes for the past 40+ years, and I don't remember so much contamination when I put them away. I was very active in a darkroom and made mostly pristine prints of my negatives, sometimes requiring a little brushing or rarely a spot treatment with alcohol. The amount of contamination varies from roll to roll. I know that PP can do something about this, but I'd like to try cleaning first, and I'm going to soak a few negatives in distilled water with Photo-Flo to see if that works. I'll post some pictures tomorrow, in case anyone wants to know what I've been talking about all this time.

Reply
 
 
Jan 31, 2019 07:36:00   #
Dik
 
rook2c4 wrote:
What idiot are you talking about? The link is just a Google search with many results.


The one in the video at the top of the linked page:

https://www.google.com/search?q=cleaning+negatives&oq=Cleaning+Negatives&aqs=chrome.0.0j69i61j0l4.11029j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

Reply
Jan 31, 2019 15:58:50   #
therwol Loc: USA
 
Okay, this is what I'm talking about. Taken in 1969. Lots of crud on the negative. (Download to see it better.) I've determined that crud on the film side isn't terribly hard to remove with a bit of alcohol and a PEC pad. Crud on the emulsion side is cemented in place and very hard to remove with simple cleaning. I'm going to find an unimportant negative and experiment with soaking in distilled water with Photo-Flo and then a gentle wipe. I don't have time to do it today. By the way, I scanned the negative with an Epson V800 flatbed scanner at 3200 dpi. I'm scanning all of my negatives this way, and my goal is to pick the most special pictures and copy them with my Nikon D800 and 55mm f/2.8 macro lens. I've already determined through experimentation that this captures significantly more detail than this $730 scanner, and I want to start with clean negatives if possible.

My mother, by the way.


(Download)

Reply
Page <<first <prev 3 of 3
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
Home | Latest Digest | Back to Top | All Sections
Contact us | Privacy policy | Terms of use | DMCA
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.