Any idea what went wrong with these negs?

m1ckDELTA · May 14, 2015

I can't tell whether it's light leaks in the camera, fogging from loading the reels (I use a bag but maybe a leak), not enough developer in the tank, or all of the above. Any opinions would be much appreciated.

https://flic.kr/p/sRW244

https://flic.kr/p/sRHqpE

https://flic.kr/p/sRW244

https://flic.kr/p/szsHKp

https://flic.kr/p/rUV6tS

Cheers,

Mick

Ricardo Miranda · May 14, 2015

Mick.

You asked the right question, but then present us with screenshots of your PC.
To judge a negative, one has to look at one, not scans of it.

Put a strip of the film with the problems you found out in a lightbox or against a window and take a shot of the negative itself.

Xmas · May 14, 2015

Hi

Ricardo is not being nasty as we need to see the film as a negative as well as the rebates.
Otherwise you will gets lots of possible answers.

Noel

darkosaric · May 14, 2015

Hi,

Also please tell us more details: camera, lens, developer, fixer, fresh or not chemicals, time, temperature, film type and how old ...

summicron1 · May 14, 2015

the weird stuff in the corners and that bright line on the edge, and the arc thing along the right side, look like camera issues to me -- were these by any chance shot in a Holga or something with poor internal reflection control?

darkosaric · May 14, 2015

Olympus mju II zoom version had some similar issues with light leaks like that.

ic-racer · May 14, 2015

Those are not very good scans. They look like prints and I can't even tell the film format or see any edge markings.

Down Under · May 14, 2015

How old is your film? I've had similar results (not many, fortunately) in the past, when processing really ancient B&W film. Other marks look like creases. May be due to incorrectly loading your processing tank. I had similar results from my old Nikkor stainless steel tanks, which were always a bu**er to load, eventually I gave up on them and went to Jobos with their truly superb autoloading. From that day, not one crease. As others have said, show us some good images of your negs, and we may be able to help more.

m1ckDELTA · May 14, 2015

summicron1 said:
the weird stuff in the corners and that bright line on the edge, and the arc thing along the right side, look like camera issues to me -- were these by any chance shot in a Holga or something with poor internal reflection control?

Thanks for the insight. The camera is an old Oly Stylus I was testing for just such problems. In the bin it goes.

m1ckDELTA · May 14, 2015

darkosaric said:
Olympus mju II zoom version had some similar issues with light leaks like that.

Wow, you called it. Thanks.

m1ckDELTA · May 14, 2015

Xmas said:
Hi

Ricardo is not being nasty as we need to see the film as a negative as well as the rebates.
Otherwise you will gets lots of possible answers.

Noel

Yes, actually, he is. Otherwise you wouldn't have felt the need to mention it. Funny how that works.

m1ckDELTA · May 14, 2015

Ricardo Miranda said:
Mick.

... To judge a negative, one has to look at one, not scans of it...

I'll send you a negative in the mail. Go ahead and post your address so I can send it out first thing in the morning.

m1ckDELTA · May 14, 2015

ic-racer said:
Those are not very good scans. They look like prints and I can't even tell the film format or see any edge markings.

Evidently good enough for one knowledgeable person to determine the exact make of camera. However, my scans suck for you so I will kill myself now. Thanks for the insight.

m1ckDELTA · May 14, 2015

ozmoose said:
How old is your film? I've had similar results (not many, fortunately) in the past, when processing really ancient B&W film. Other marks look like creases. May be due to incorrectly loading your processing tank. I had similar results from my old Nikkor stainless steel tanks, which were always a bu**er to load, eventually I gave up on them and went to Jobos with their truly superb autoloading. From that day, not one crease. As others have said, show us some good images of your negs, and we may be able to help more.

Thanks for the reply. I normally use stainless steel tanks but decided to try the Paterson plastic ones with the plastic auto loading reels since it was a test roll. The process of loading the reels didn't "feel" right to me. I'll stick with stainless steel from now on.

Xmas · May 15, 2015

m1ckDELTA said:
I'll send you a negative in the mail. Go ahead and post your address so I can send it out first thing in the morning.

Well you can tell by looking at the negative in transmission light and reflected light more than from a positive scan or print.
You need to try both normally even if you have a scanner.
A flat bed scan without a 35mm holder is best if you want web advice.
Eg if you can see a positive image in reflected light you have underexposed...
Or if you use the zone system you need a trace of silver in zone 1 above base fog at the least.

m1ckDELTA · May 15, 2015

Xmas said:
Well you can tell by looking at the negative in transmission light and reflected light more than from a positive scan or print.
You need to try both normally even if you have a scanner.
A flat bed scan without a 35mm holder is best if you want web advice.
Eg if you can see a positive image in reflected light you have underexposed...
Or if you use the zone system you need a trace of silver in zone 1 above base fog at the least.

Kinda sorta bigger problems than exposure on these. Here are some better exposed shots for you.
https://flic.kr/p/oiYHbg
https://flic.kr/p/oAv8Fi
https://flic.kr/p/ouY2ng

As I have come to understand dedicated film scanners are considered superior to flatbed scanners. The XA/10M may not be a Hassy but according to http://www.filmscanner.info it is second only to the Hassy (and 1/20th of the cost). Admittedly, there is a large gap between the two but below $13,000 there is only the XA/10M.

That said, the scans I posted were from the XA's second lowest setting for the sake of saving on file size. Even at such a low resolution, however, the scans clearly illustrated the issues I was concerned about; to the degree that someone was able to discern the model of camera used to take the photos. Very impressive. Since this is not the "Hybrid" portion of APUG I'll leave it at that. It is puzzling and a bit disappointing, however, that I recieved no reponses on the hybrid forum to this question.

The Oly was a bargain buy and meant to serve as a an easy to use film camera I could hand off to a curious friend. I've already tossed it into the trash.

Thanks to everyone for the responses, seriously, even the slightly snarky one; at least it keeps you off the streets.

pdeeh · May 15, 2015

It's always nice when a new member makes the effort to be pleasant.

Welcome to APUG

m1ckDELTA · May 15, 2015

pdeeh said:
It's always nice when a new member makes the effort to be pleasant.

Welcome to APUG

If you'll notice, those who responded politely received an equally polite "Thank you". Funny how that works. It's actually more of an effort for me to nip the unpleasantness of others in the bud but I know these things have to be dealt with expediently and so I do; online and offline. Unpleasant people tend to prey on people who let them get away with being unpleasant, I on the other hand, take them to task and so they tend to go away and stay away. Thanks for the welcome.

Bob Carnie · May 15, 2015

these marks look like light leaks in the process stage.. maybe the lid had issues..

I have seen this when a Jobo lid had a leak issue... the light streaks down on the film during process in a funny way.

so my guess would be the tank and lid itself was faulty or some kind of leak during process

Ricardo Miranda · May 15, 2015

m1ckDELTA said:
I'll send you a negative in the mail. Go ahead and post your address so I can send it out first thing in the morning.

Kid,
You obviously didn't understood what I said.

You only had to pick up your Pentax DSLR or any digi device, a film strip with a white sheet behind and take a shot of it against a light source.
Something like this:

Your scans show some damage that can happen when film is inserted in the scanner or when putting film in or out of a development tank.
As you now said it was the first time you used a Peterson tank, I'm almost sure the white marks on the right corners of your "bad neg 02" are from removing wet film from the tank spiral.
But, I wanted to be sure and that's why I asked for a pic of the negatives.

Now, you can get down from your high horse.

Ricardo Miranda · May 15, 2015

P.S. Nest time you have a problem with a negative, have a look at this: http://micro.magnet.fsu.edu/primer/photomicrography/bwprocessingerrors.html
There are also similar pages for colour negatives and slides.
Hope this might help you in the future.

Yesterday, I spent half an hour looking for a PDF file I have or had showcasing all possible defects on negatives.
I couldn't find, but I found the above to be closer.

When I saw you answer this morning, I thought you didn't deserve even a comment.
But, I'm a nice person and I like to help others.
So, here you have it.

m1ckDELTA · May 15, 2015

Bob Carnie said:
these marks look like light leaks in the process stage.. maybe the lid had issues..

I have seen this when a Jobo lid had a leak issue... the light streaks down on the film during process in a funny way.

so my guess would be the tank and lid itself was faulty or some kind of leak during process

Bob, thanks for the reply. I noticed some chemicals leaking from the tank lid and thought it simply an annoyance but maybe it was a sign of something more serious. Using the steel tanks my negs have all turned out fine save for the usual challenges of re-learning film photography. The steel tanks have never leaked, either. At least I tried something different. It's back to the steel tanks for me, however.

A perfect storm between camera problems and tank problems it seems.

Thanks again. Cheers.

Bob Carnie · May 15, 2015

Does sound like your plastic tanks.. stick with the stainless .

m1ckDELTA said:
Bob, thanks for the reply. I noticed some chemicals leaking from the tank lid and thought it simply an annoyance but maybe it was a sign of something more serious. Using the steel tanks my negs have all turned out fine save for the usual challenges of re-learning film photography. The steel tanks have never leaked, either. At least I tried something different. It's back to the steel tanks for me, however.

A perfect storm between camera problems and tank problems it seems.

Thanks again. Cheers.

Xmas · May 15, 2015

m1ckDELTA said:
If you'll notice, those who responded politely received an equally polite "Thank you". Funny how that works. It's actually more of an effort for me to nip the unpleasantness of others in the bud but I know these things have to be dealt with expediently and so I do; online and offline. Unpleasant people tend to prey on people who let them get away with being unpleasant, I on the other hand, take them to task and so they tend to go away and stay away. Thanks for the welcome.

Hi Mick
I have detected a possible reason why the hybrid people did not help you.
And I'll not trouble to continue to try either.
Slightly Smarkey

m1ckDELTA · May 15, 2015

Xmas said:
Hi Mick
I have detected a possible reason why the hybrid people did not help you.
And I'll not trouble to continue to try either.
Slightly Smarkey

???

EDIT:

Did you just pretty much say, "Nanny nanny boo boo."??? You really did didn't you?

If my calculations are correct, you posted this at about 1:30 am in the UK. Piss drunk no doubt.

Any idea what went wrong with these negs?

Attachments

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency