Bad development or X-Ray Damaged

MikeBamboo · Apr 23, 2013

I developed 4 rolls in my tank last night and they all came back with these wavy lines. Have any of you seen this before?
It's Tri-X 400. This roll had the worse lines, the others were smaller.

Brian C. Miller · Apr 23, 2013

First, was your film x-rayed? I.e., you were traveling, you went through an airport or two or dozen, and now you're developing the results. If not, then probably that's not from an x-ray machine.

The pattern doesn't look like x-ray damage, and it doesn't look like a development light leak. I can't imagine a camera doing that. It looks like something horrible happened at Kodak.

(Oh, BTW, welcome to the forum!!)

AgX · Apr 23, 2013

Looks like X-ray scanning to me.

MikeBamboo · Apr 23, 2013

I did go on a trip recently, I had my film in my checked luggage, but I was under the impression that anything below 800ISO would be fine. I guess not

BrianShaw · Apr 23, 2013

A CT scanner may have been used on your checked baggage. (I can't say for sure, though.)

For the past decade (or more) there have been advisories against inlcuding film in your checked baggage. You may have just learned a sad lesson by personal experience.

MikeBamboo · Apr 23, 2013

I thought maybe it was my error when putting the film in the reels, maybe I got a glimpse of light, but for the damage to have happened to the entire rolls seems very odd to me. Also there are edge markings throughout the roll. I'm so confused by this.

Peltigera · Apr 23, 2013

The wavy effect can be best explained by something happening to the film while it was tightly rolled. If the x-rays came at the film obliquely from one end, any effect would wave once the film was unrolled.

dnk512 · Apr 23, 2013

Some images on the net do look like your sample... search with:
x-ray damage film image

or see
http://www.kodak.com/global/en/service/tib/tib5201.shtml#SEC43

Thomas Bertilsson · Apr 23, 2013

Sorry this happened to you.
Don't ever put your film in checked luggage. Always put it in your carry-on.
You learned a very sad lesson, I'm afraid. Sucks.

MikeBamboo · Apr 23, 2013

Thanks everyone for your help. Looks like I may have to throw out the 16 rolls of film I have
Bah, you live and learn. Thanks everyone.

Thomas Bertilsson · Apr 23, 2013

MikeBamboo said:
Thanks everyone for your help. Looks like I may have to throw out the 16 rolls of film I have
Bah, you live and learn. Thanks everyone.

Process them anyway. You never know. There might be something useful on them.

polyglot · Apr 23, 2013

I wouldn't chuck them. As you can see, there's a plane of x-rays that's passed obliquely through your roll, exposed some of it and missed some of it. You may have some rolls that it missed entirely.

Film of 800ISO and slower is OK for carry-on x-rays, not checked-baggage inspection.

cjbecker · Apr 23, 2013

Replying so I can see later on my computer. Sorry for the worthless post.

polyglot · Apr 24, 2013

cjbecker said:
Replying so I can see later on my computer. Sorry for the worthless post.

That's what "follow thread" is for.

NB23 · Apr 24, 2013

Xray this bad? I feel very sorry for you!

250swb · Apr 24, 2013

It is a very even wavy band on the film. I would have thought to create such a precise pattern the chances of the X ray machine being exactly square to the film (laterally or tranversely) as it scanned would be very small at best. But other than a leprechaun with a torch inside your camera I can't think what might have caused such a wavy line.

Steve

MartinP · Apr 24, 2013

Isn't there some sort of "Artistic" (with an upper-case "A") possibility here?

A large piece of photo-paper, carefully (or the opposite) arranged strips of damaged negs laid on top, a light-source -- and an impressive Artist's Statement pronouncing the ultimate, naturally random results showing the tenuous and delicate nature of our organised existence. Should do the job nicely. And when you get the multiple thousands in your bank-account, I'm in for 10%

mfohl · Apr 25, 2013

250swb said:
It is a very even wavy band on the film. I would have thought to create such a precise pattern the chances of the X ray machine being exactly square to the film (laterally or tranversely) as it scanned would be very small at best. But other than a leprechaun with a torch inside your camera I can't think what might have caused such a wavy line.

Steve

Hmmm. I would have thought that Xray exposure of a negative would result in light marks on the print, rather than dark marks. Am I missing something?

Tnx,

-- Mark

polyglot · Apr 25, 2013

250swb said:
It is a very even wavy band on the film. I would have thought to create such a precise pattern the chances of the X ray machine being exactly square to the film (laterally or tranversely) as it scanned would be very small at best. But other than a leprechaun with a torch inside your camera I can't think what might have caused such a wavy line.

Steve

The very evenness indicates that it was X-Rays. X-Rays travel in very straight lines and you can see here that they swept through a plane. When you intersect a plane with a cylinder and then unroll the cylinder, you get a nice sine-wave as pictured. The plane was clearly oblique to the roll of film: the approx 6mm wobble against the ~20mm diameter of a roll of 120 indicates that the X-ray plane was tilted about 15 degrees from cutting directly across the axis of the roll (in which case there would have been a straight line).

mfohl said:
Hmmm. I would have thought that Xray exposure of a negative would result in light marks on the print, rather than dark marks. Am I missing something?

These marks are dark on the negative (additional exposure) and therefore white on a print (which doesn't exist at this point). I'm not sure you're missing anything except that the roll of film in the picture is not a print?

MikeBamboo: was there a roll loaded in your camera that went through the scanner? That will be very interesting to see because you should get different patterns for the two parts of the roll on each spool, plus a third pattern for the straight film across the gate.

Thomas Bertilsson · Apr 25, 2013

I kind of second the notion that the negatives could be used creatively. Develop them all and see if anything else stuck on the film. If not, use the beautiful wave pattern to pre-expose paper or something. Could be very interesting. Or not. But at least you could have some fun with them.

MikeBamboo · Apr 25, 2013

polyglot said:
The very evenness indicates that it was X-Rays. X-Rays travel in very straight lines and you can see here that they swept through a plane. When you intersect a plane with a cylinder and then unroll the cylinder, you get a nice sine-wave as pictured. The plane was clearly oblique to the roll of film: the approx 6mm wobble against the ~20mm diameter of a roll of 120 indicates that the X-ray plane was tilted about 15 degrees from cutting directly across the axis of the roll (in which case there would have been a straight line).

These marks are dark on the negative (additional exposure) and therefore white on a print (which doesn't exist at this point). I'm not sure you're missing anything except that the roll of film in the picture is not a print?

MikeBamboo: was there a roll loaded in your camera that went through the scanner? That will be very interesting to see because you should get different patterns for the two parts of the roll on each spool, plus a third pattern for the straight film across the gate.

All my camera equipment went through the carry on scanner, unfortunately or fortunately I didnt have anything loaded in the camera.

All my unused film was in my checked bag. All my used film went through the carry on scanner and developed fine.

BrianShaw · Apr 25, 2013

MikeBamboo said:
All my unused film was in my checked bag. All my used film went through the carry on scanner and developed fine.

Well there y'go, Mike... you inadvertantly and independently validated all of thte research on this topic! In the future... no film in checked bags and you'll be OK (except in the rarest of occasions).

AgX · Apr 25, 2013

polyglot said:
MikeBamboo: was there a roll loaded in your camera that went through the scanner? That will be very interesting to see because you should get different patterns for the two parts of the roll on each spool, plus a third pattern for the straight film across the gate.

Why not make a virtue from that all.

And call it Airportography...

Mainecoonmaniac · Apr 25, 2013

My ASA 400 Arista EDU film went through an TSA's xray machine it it was fine. I lost my Leatherman though. They saw it on the Xray machine and took it. Oh well....

BrianShaw · Apr 25, 2013

Mainecoonmaniac said:
My ASA 400 Arista EDU film went through an TSA's xray machine it it was fine. I lost my Leatherman though. They saw it on the Xray machine and took it. Oh well....

A friend of mine lost the little 1.5 inch screwdriver from her eyeglass repair kit too!

Another friend (now former friend) was escorted by TSA to the street for having some darts in his carry-on bag. I suspect he said something like, "I'll not give up my darts unless you prythem out of my cold, dead hands".

Bad development or X-Ray Damaged

Attachments

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency