C41 120 developing mess up, photographer or developer?

[quickbrownfox]

Hey all, after spending ages convincing my mrs to let a photographer shoot some film at my wedding (and then finding one who was willing to do it) , Ive struck a bit of a bump.

One film roll i got back from my local photostore (who I beleive use a machine for processing) the first 3 and the last 3 photos are ruined in some way. Some look kind of solarised, and if it was just the first part of the roll i would have guessed that the photog let it unspool a bit accidently. But as it is both ends of the roll that are affected can anyone else give me an opinion as to possible errors during developing? Im not familar with commercial 120 processing.

The film was a fresh opened box of portra 400, out of date by a couple of months. The other 3 rolls came out fine.

http://imgur.com/a/QQKai

thanks

 

[Athiril]

I've never seen that kind of affect from loosely spooled film, which I've gotten a lot of. Worst I've gotten is light leaks.

It looks like a processing problem. AFAIK the only thing you can do to try and fix it is rebleaching and refixing and crossing your fingers.

 

[mauro35]

I´ve had very similar problem with the first frames (usually two or three) when my c41 film was machine processed by a commercial lab. I have always wondered what the cause could be, but could not find a clue. Interested to hear what people here think.

 

[quickbrownfox]

Im pretty disappointed, and my mrs is not very happy. I dont think I'll be able to convince my next wife to have film shot at my next wedding. Its weird, the effect is different on each end. One end solarized and the other end colour shifted eventually to black. Even the writing on the edge of the film is faded to nothing.

 

[TheToadMen]

I have no clue. The only thing I can think of is that someone opened a machine when he shouldn't have, thus solarizing the film inside during developing?

 

[Stephen Frizza]

I believe its a processing fault. I saw something extremely similar occur in a Noritsu V50 roller transport machine in 1999 when a fellow I was working with didn't tape both sides of a leader card. Film bunched around the 8th crossover which leads to the dryer section and the processor needed to be opened to clear the problem it caused damage to other films in the machine and resulted in similar defects to what you show here with some frames of films.

 

[quickbrownfox]

Thanks steve, I didnt want to accuse either party without a second opinion. The photog recommended dip and dunk and ive used vision image in the past but I felt better supporting my regular guy who apart from some dirty films ive never had trouble with in the past. He is a super passionate dude, but I cant say the same for his staff. I might mail and see what he reckons.

 

[CatLABS]

This is a light leak after shooting (during loading or during processing).

 

[Jaf-Photo]

I think that your lab should have volunteered information on what happened to the film.

Unless the photographer fumbled when loading an unloading the camera.

 

[snapguy]

Did you say

Did you by any chance say "lomo" to the guy when you handed him the film for processing? Your grandkids will think the photos are extremely cool.

 

[quickbrownfox]

I normally would have blamed the photog but the errors on both ends of the film seemed to preclude that for me, I didnt see how it was possible to ruin both the first and the last parts of the roll and I was there while he unloaded, he certainly never dropped the film or anything.
And no, lol, I didnt ask for the lomo treatment, I tried to stop myself but even accidentally blurted out to the girl that took them to take care of them as they were wedding shots. Haha she kinda nodded smiled but like it made any difference to her! I think I will ask them to print them out for free maybe. For the grandkids of course.

 

[alexfoto]

-Its not fault of the photographer, solariazation effect have only to do with developing process and happen when light leak occur on the stage of developer.

 

[LFLee]

I think the accidental effect is pretty cool though....

These 'accident' are the surprise of shooting film, no? but is important to identify the problem too.

 

[mauro35]

I imagined that somebody would see the effect as cool, and actually it is an interesting result, but it´s not the type of thing you want to get if you have a specific image in mind when you take your photographs. I honestly have to disagree with the concept of "surprise" when using film. I like to have it all under control as far as I reasonably can.

 

[Jaf-Photo]

I normally would have blamed the photog but the errors on both ends of the film seemed to preclude that for me, I didnt see how it was possible to ruin both the first and the last parts of the roll and I was there while he unloaded, he certainly never dropped the film or anything.
And no, lol, I didnt ask for the lomo treatment, I tried to stop myself but even accidentally blurted out to the girl that took them to take care of them as they were wedding shots. Haha she kinda nodded smiled but like it made any difference to her! I think I will ask them to print them out for free maybe. For the grandkids of course.

Well, this is why I only use a pro lab these days. (Only for E6, mind you.) Other firms returned negs with all sorts of problems. Colour cast, excessive grain, scratches, drying marks, you name it.

So, I brought all developing in-house, except for E6, as I simply can‘t equal a professional developer there.