Blank roll

[ivenhoe]

I bought some chemistry and mixed D76 and simple acid fixer by myself. And then I developed a short test roll from a Fomapan 400 bulk roll (never tried this one before). The film came out completely blank except for the film leader. Before development I checked the chemistry by cutting the piece of film and developing it under the light, it went black in about 4-5 min in stock solution. Then I tested the fixer, a cut of film went blank in about 40-50 sec. So I developed that roll at 20 C (8 min in stock solution and 3 min in the fixer with a short tap water stop-bath).
I checked the camera shutter as well, there is no problem with it. So what can be wrong with it?

PS. The formula for the fixer I used:
1. 700 ml hot water
2. 250 gr Sodium Thiosulphate.
3. 25 gr Sodium Sulfate.
4. 20 ml 70% acetic acid.
5. Add water to 1 l.

 

[MattKing]

I can't tell - is there any edge printing on the negatives?

 

[jimjm]

There don't appear to be any edge markings on your film, so that rules out a camera issue. This is what you would see if you accidentally used fixer before the developer.
Are you sure the fixer formula you used is reliable?
I'd try developing a clip of unexposed film in the tank (don't expose to light) and follow through with the rest of the steps as normal. If your chems are good and you still see no edge markings, it may be a problem with your film.

 

[ivenhoe]

I can't tell - is there any edge printing on the negatives?

No, but I'm not sure if Fomapan bulk roll should have it or not.

 

[Vaughn]

Looks like you accidently switched the fix for the developer. The film did not develop, period. We know due to the lack of edge marking (frame numbers), and the film is well fixed.

I assume the leader was also blank....

Whoops -- missed that the leader is black-- so must be a film w/o frame numbers...odd.

What I see here, then, is film not sufficient connected to the take-up reel at the start of the roll and it did not advance in the camera -- all your images could be in that one dark exposed frame after the leader. Usually one figures this out by somehow being able to still use the camera past the normal amount of frames (12, 24, 36).

Also with most 35mm cameras if the lever used to rewind the film does not rotate as you advance the film, the film leader did not get connected to the take-up reel.

 

[ivenhoe]

Looks like you accidently switched the fix for the developer. The film did not develop, period. We know due to the lack of edge marking (frame numbers), and the film is well fixed..

But in this case the film leader should've been blank as well, right?

 

[Donald Qualls]

Yep, if you poured the fixer first, you'd have blank leader, no edge print, as well as no images.

If the leader is black, edge print or no, it's been developed -- so the film didn't advance in the camera. That's either a loading error, or a camera failure.

This is confirmed by the partial frame visible between clear sprockets just after the leader fogging -- that's every image you shot on the roll, all in one compact 24x36 mm space. It's solid black because it's overexposed by a factor of about 30.

With almost all 35mm cameras, you can see the rewind knob or crank revolve when you advance the film. If that's no happening, you may have a loading problem (film not correctly caught on the takeup spool) or you've got one of the rare cameras that declutch the rewind knob/crank until you actually push the rewind release. Of course, many cameras with electric film advance also use electric rewind, and don't have a crank -- but many/most of those are "drop-in" loading; as long as the film lies across the takeup spool, they'll automatically catch it. The last couple generations of point & shoot cameras did this.

 

[ivenhoe]

Yep, if you poured the fixer first, you'd have blank leader, no edge print, as well as no images.

If the leader is black, edge print or no, it's been developed -- so the film didn't advance in the camera. That's either a loading error, or a camera failure.

This is confirmed by the partial frame visible between clear sprockets just after the leader fogging -- that's every image you shot on the roll, all in one compact 24x36 mm space. It's solid black because it's overexposed by a factor of about 30.

With almost all 35mm cameras, you can see the rewind knob or crank revolve when you advance the film. If that's no happening, you may have a loading problem (film not correctly caught on the takeup spool) or you've got one of the rare cameras that declutch the rewind knob/crank until you actually push the rewind release. Of course, many cameras with electric film advance also use electric rewind, and don't have a crank -- but many/most of those are "drop-in" loading; as long as the film lies across the takeup spool, they'll automatically catch it. The last couple generations of point & shoot cameras did this.

Yes, it sounds the most reasonable version, because the camera was an old Soviet Zorki 1 (copy of Leica II), which worked perfectly, but loading the film can be a pain in the ass. The only thing that makes me wonder is that I cut about 1 m of the roll (about 20-22 pictures) and I shot exactly 20-22 pictures until I felt I couldn't advance the shutter anymore.

 

[pentaxuser]

I wonder why Foma does have any edge markings I presume it is a cost thing. It's a real pity that there are no edge markings when it comes to solving negative problems.

pentaxuser

 

[ivenhoe]

I've developed another piece of film, and at least I've got some images on it, which proves that it probably was the loading error. And yes, it doesn't have any edge markings.

 

[Donald Qualls]

It is an additional manufacturing operation to imprint edge markings, and with bulk film, there's little gained by having them other than stock identification (I always wondered why they'd bother with frame markings on a bulk roll -- almost no one can roll exactly 36 exposures and a perfect leader, so by the time you've loaded half the bulk roll, you're half a roll off on the frame numbers). In today's market, if the machine that applied the edge markings broke down, they might just leave it down rather than spend the money (and shut down production) to fix it.

Anyway, glad to see it wasn't something worse than a loading error. I guarantee, everyone who shoots 35mm, 120, or sheet film has made one at some point. For instance, ask me how I know the antihalation backing on 1990s vintage 320TXP sheet film had five stops of attenuation...

 

[MattKing]

It is an additional manufacturing operation to imprint edge markings, and with bulk film, there's little gained by having them other than stock identification (I always wondered why they'd bother with frame markings on a bulk ro

The numbers (or at least some sort of individual frame indicators) definitely help out the photographer, even if the frame numbers themselves don't give an easily understood indication of where the roll starts.
I certainly would never want to try to do exposure tests or anything else that requires you keep close track with un-numbered film.
Seventeen (to pick an example) isn't a bad frame number to start with, as long as the next frames go 18, 19, 20 etc., and after the last number 00 is the next to appear.
As long as you don't throw into the mix one of those cameras that wind to the end and then wind back into the cassette, one frame at a time.

 

[AgX]

Behind the black leader there is something that looks like an oblique positioned exposed frame.

To me it looks like a user error at camera stage:

My idea thus is:
-) the film was not positioned correctly at loading, thus the oblique frame
-) after exposure of first frame the perforations were torn and the film not transported any further
-) the OP did not realize this
-) at processing he threw away the part of the leader with the torn sprockets holes
EDIT:
-) or the holes did not even tear, but the leader just slipped

Bottom-loading cameras are good to induce such error.

 

[ivenhoe]

Thank you guys, that was a loading mistake. I developed another roll of film in the same chechimals and it came out pretty well. I'm glad I didn't mess up the formulas at least.

 

[jimjm]

Glad to hear you found the problem!
All of us make these errors from time to time, but if photography was too easy it wouldn't be as much fun.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Looks like you accidently switched the fix for the developer. The film did not develop, period. We know due to the lack of edge marking (frame numbers), and the film is well fixed.

I assume the leader was also blank....

Whoops -- missed that the leader is black-- so must be a film w/o frame numbers...odd.

What I see here, then, is film not sufficient connected to the take-up reel at the start of the roll and it did not advance in the camera -- all your images could be in that one dark exposed frame after the leader. Usually one figures this out by somehow being able to still use the camera past the normal amount of frames (12, 24, 36).

Also with most 35mm cameras if the lever used to rewind the film does not rotate as you advance the film, the film leader did not get connected to the take-up reel.

wouldn't the film leader then be blank too?

 

[AgX]

There is a piece of the film strip completely blackened.
The rest of the leader seemingly cut-off before putting the film on the reel.

 

[ProfessorC1983]

This happened to me for the first time yesterday -- albeit a completely blank roll, no black anywhere, no frame numbers etc. I'm certain I didn't pour the fixer in first since I don't even open the bottle until the developer is in. As best I can tell, I must've accidentally mixed a double dose of solution A of Pyrocat-HD with no solution B, since the bottle weights are now different, and the mix was much pinker than I'm used to (which of course I disregarded at the time). Thankfully it's not an issue of contaminated developer since the next roll came out perfectly fine. So I can check off the "blank roll" box on my home-developing BINGO card. Live and learn!

 

[Wallendo]

FOMA sells their film under many house brand names and no longer marks most of their films. I suspect this is the same reason the use generic backing paper for 120, and generic cartridges for 35mm and just glue a paper label on top.

 

[Donald Qualls]

FOMA sells their film under many house brand names and no longer marks most of their films. I suspect this is the same reason the use generic backing paper for 120, and generic cartridges for 35mm and just glue a paper label on top.

I wonder, has anyone confirmed whether Ultrafine Extreme is Foma or Kentmere?

 

[Doremus Scudder]

Film blank but leader developed = film did not transport through the camera or the shutter is not opening. If your shutter is fine, then maybe the film didn't get firmly attached to the take-up spool.

Doremus

 

[pentaxuser]

FOMA sells their film under many house brand names and no longer marks most of their films. I suspect this is the same reason the use generic backing paper for 120,

If Foma has never had the backing paper issue that dogged Kodak and I don't recall any mention of such a problem with Foma 120 then maybe someone should tell Kodak to contact Foma about getting hold of this generic paper? It could be the way to go?

pentaxuser

 

[MattKing]

If Foma has never had the backing paper issue that dogged Kodak and I don't recall any mention of such a problem with Foma 120 then maybe someone should tell Kodak to contact Foma about getting hold of this generic paper? It could be the way to go?

pentaxuser

As long as Kodak also stopped making colour film, and switched all their black and white emulsions to Foma ones too, that might solve the problem.
The wrapper offset problem is a problem of interaction between paper, ink and film emulsion. Each component plays a part.
Harman is, of course, also dealing with interaction problems - in their case mottling.

 

[Donald Qualls]

If Foma has never had the backing paper issue that dogged Kodak

I don't see much likelihood of Kodak switching to a generic backing -- that would give up one of their important differentiations, that of seeing "Kodak" go past the red window every time you wind your old folder or box camera, or seeing it on the start and end tapes.

And I don't know that Foma has never had the problem, though I, like you, have never heard of it. I've used Foma 120 in the 2003-2008 time frame, and then again this year. I don't see any change in the backing, other than a couple rolls that I had left in cameras that had white with black print instead of the black with white print on the current rolls.

 

[Agulliver]

I can confirm that Fomapan bulk rolls do not have any edge markings. No manufacture name, no frame numbers, no film designation or code. Probably a cost saving measure and because they offer Fomapan to several businesses who sell it under other names. Makes sense that rather than do runs with Fomapan edge markings for their own product, Arista EDU for Freestyle and other names for various brands....they just don't use edge markings.

It does look like a processing error, most likely accidentally fixing before developing.