Dark bars on images from Rolleiflex T. Pressure plate issue?

[tjkayiti]

Hello,
I've noticed some darkened bars on the left and right side and center of some of my images from a test roll through a Rolleiflex T I picked up. The lens is definitely a bit dusty and has some minor debris but didn't seem all that bad. So I figured I'd shoot a test roll before attempting to take the lens groups out to clean. I DSLR scan with the Valoi 120 holder and don't mask the holder or the light box, however I scanned a roll from my Mamiya TLR at the same time, the same way and didn't notice these artifacts at all. It also seems like the problem was on the negative, though it is faint and hard to tell. They also didn't seem noticeable on shots at wider apertures. Upon inspection of the camera, it kind of seems like they line up with the grooves of the pressure plate (it is set to 6x6) but I'm not sure. Could that be the issue? Has anyone seen similar issues? Could it be normal for the tessar lens?

Added images where it's most noticeable (don't know how to compress them properly below 2mb)
Added negative as well (fresh film)

Thank you

 

[MattKing]

Welcome to Photrio.
Those look to me like the result of a lenshood that is impinging slightly on the field of view - vignetting.

 

[AgX]

It is beyond my imagination how this "bars" could be caused by the lens or the pressure plate.

Can you tell us details on how these two film were processed?

 

[AgX]

Those look to me like the result of a lenshood that is impinging slightly on the field of view.

Even if he had used a rectangular lens hood that was too small, this still could not explain the two inner bars.

 

[MattKing]

With respect to lenshood vignetting, you are more likely to encounter it with smaller apertures - which is one of the clues.

 

[tjkayiti]

With respect to lenshood vignetting, you are more likely to encounter it with smaller apertures - which is one of the clues.

That makes sense, however I don't have a lens hood for this camera.

 

[tjkayiti]

It is beyond my imagination how this "bars" could be caused by the lens or the pressure plate.

Can you tell us details on how these two film were processed?

Roll was processed by a lab, along with the roll from the Mamiya. C-41 but couldn't tell you anything else. Never had an issue like this with any other rolls from this lab.
I don't think it would be due to the lens either, but the pressure plate is the only thing that looked like it could cause this, as the 4 grooves kind of line up with the dark areas. The film wasn't mishandled to my knowledge, so not sure what else it could be.

 

[Steven Lee]

I do not see this on the negative. I downloaded the image you've attached, inverted and cranked up the contrast - nope. But I think you have answered your own question.

You should not be camera-scanning without masking the negative. If you don't cover all four edges - all bets are off. You are exposing yourself now to all kinds of random reflections and light piping. Stray light may be bouncing off the slightly curved film surface into the film holder edge, and then back onto film, for example. The fact that your 6x7 negatives didn't show this just means you got less lucky with 6x6.

Also, when I tried Valoi my impression was quite negative. Its geometry (at the bottom facing the light source) is poorly designed and the material is more reflective than needed, it can cast both shadows and reflections onto the film surface.

IMO you have two elephants in the room to consider, before blaming the camera:

• Poor technique - not masking film
• Poorly designed film holder

 

[tjkayiti]

I do not see this on the negative. I downloaded the image you've attached, inverted and cranked up the contrast - nope. But I think you have answered your own question.

You should not be camera-scanning without masking the negative. If you don't cover all four edges - all bets are off. You are exposing yourself now to all kinds of random reflections and light piping. Stray light may be bouncing off the slightly curved film surface into the film holder edge, and then back onto film, for example. The fact that your 6x7 negatives didn't show this just means you got less lucky with 6x6.

Also, when I tried Valoi my impression was quite negative. Its geometry (at the bottom facing the light source) is poorly designed and the material is more reflective than needed, it can cast both shadows and reflections onto the film surface.

IMO you have two elephants in the room to consider, before blaming the camera:

• Poor technique - not masking film
• Poorly designed film holder

Thanks for the response! I agree that my scanning technique should be better, however the photos from the Mamiya were 6x6 as well. Also I had another picture of the negative and idk if its me but I see the lines...
I will definitely rescan (with masking) and shoot another roll when I find the time, but just wanted to put it out there in case someone had seen this issue with Rolleiflexes before.

 

[jonathanchli]

Those "alternating light and dark bands" look like flicker created by your light box and the shutter speed of you DSLR.

Flicker-Free Lights, and Why They are Important to You

This B&H Explora article discusses the benefits of flicker-free lighting.

www.bhphotovideo.com

 

[rulnacco]

Those "alternating light and dark bands" look like flicker created by your light box and the shutter speed of you DSLR.

Hmmm, this sounds quite possible--AC cycles at 50-60 Hz, which causes the brightness of (most) light sources to cycle similarly. Causes me all kinds of problems when shooting basketball, where you're trying to freeze action with high shutter speeds.

Can you shoot with lower shutter speeds, at least 1/60 of a second so you get a whole cycle? 1/30 might be even better, should smooth out variations in brightness over the field, I'd believe.

 

[Tel]

Hmmm, this sounds quite possible--AC cycles at 50-60 Hz, which causes the brightness of (most) light sources to cycle similarly. Causes me all kinds of problems when shooting basketball, where you're trying to freeze action with high shutter speeds.

Can you shoot with lower shutter speeds, at least 1/60 of a second so you get a whole cycle? 1/30 might be even better, should smooth out variations in brightness over the field, I'd believe.

Good call! We used to see this often when I worked in broadcast TV--we called them "hum bars" and they were caused by out-of-synch frame rates, as you describe. Usually when trying to grab film (24 fps) to video (30fps). And the quick and dirty solution (but it didn't always work perfectly) was to change the projection speed of the film to some multiple or fraction of 30. (I think--it was 40 years ago!) Less problematic, I suppose, when you'e not capturing motion....

One of the benefits of tungsten lighting was lack of flicker.

 

[Tomro]

Thanks for the response! I agree that my scanning technique should be better, however the photos from the Mamiya were 6x6 as well. Also I had another picture of the negative and idk if its me but I see the lines...
I will definitely rescan (with masking) and shoot another roll when I find the time, but just wanted to put it out there in case someone had seen this issue with Rolleiflexes before.

View attachment 314418

I had similar bars on my Rolleiflex T, IIRC. Would love to hear what s causing them. I always used a scanner to scan (v850), so the light source should not have been an issue

 

[tjkayiti]

Those "alternating light and dark bands" look like flicker created by your light box and the shutter speed of you DSLR.

Flicker-Free Lights, and Why They are Important to You

This B&H Explora article discusses the benefits of flicker-free lighting.

www.bhphotovideo.com

Hmmm, this sounds quite possible--AC cycles at 50-60 Hz, which causes the brightness of (most) light sources to cycle similarly. Causes me all kinds of problems when shooting basketball, where you're trying to freeze action with high shutter speeds.

Can you shoot with lower shutter speeds, at least 1/60 of a second so you get a whole cycle? 1/30 might be even better, should smooth out variations in brightness over the field, I'd believe.

Thanks for the tip! My DSLR was in aperture priority at f6.3 and shot at 1/125 for that negative, so I will try again at with slower shutter speeds. The light box (Raleno 116) seemed fine for all my 35mm and other 6x6 negatives though.

 

[tjkayiti]

I had similar bars on my Rolleiflex T, IIRC. Would love to hear what s causing them. I always used a scanner to scan (v850), so the light source should not have been an issue

I never had issues with my scanning setup so I figured it might be the camera as well. I'm assuming you never resolved the issue?

 

[Tomro]

Unfortunately, I didn’t

 

[gone]

The film rails are out of the image area, yes? I don't see how it could be the camera. I've owned numerous Rolleiflex T cameras, as well as lots of different Rolleiflex models, and never saw anything like the op is experiencing. All I can think of is that the film is buckling a little in the camera and light is getting away from the image area.

I'd shoot another roll and have it developed elsewhere. Or do it yourself, just to see if this is a persistent issue or one-off. My hunch is that it's a processing issue, but TLRs are sometimes affected by film loading and film advance issues too. Still, unless something turns up that's obviously wrong, another roll of film is called for.