Yes? You don't see the lighter stripes coming down from the top? I thought that people who recognize this could tell me this.Welcome aboard @WalSto!
Can you please upload a clear photograph of the actual negative? It's hard/impossible to make out what's going wrong based on a contrast-corrected scan.
Yes 35mmAssuming that's 35 mm, those are either surge marks from the perforations, or bromide drag (which shows a pattern at perforations because there's less of it there). But I agree with Koraks, we'll be more confident if we can see a good photo of the negative, including the non-image area (and ideally part of the two adjacent frames).
Assuming that's 35 mm, those are either surge marks from the perforations, or bromide drag (which shows a pattern at perforations because there's less of it there). But I agree with Koraks, we'll be more confident if we can see a good photo of the negative, including the non-image area (and ideally part of the two adjacent frames).
You don't see the lighter stripes coming down from the top?
That cannot be concluded at this point. It's one possible factor. My first impression is that it may be, but if it is, it's not the only problem you have.Aha, so a developing problem?
Right, thanks so much. Can you post a photo of the negatives held to the light at an oblique angle? I'd like to be able to see the color of the film on the emulsion side (this is the non-shiny side).
My first guess is that excessive density in the sky created troubles with the scan. Now the question is whether the density in the sky is indeed excessive and if so, why this is the case.
I am pretty sure it is surge marks after consulting other photographers.
Surge marks would not interact in that direction with the frame edge. So the angle is exactly wrong. Bromide drag - maybe, but that'd be very odd since there's no developer activity right above the affected area, and the density is the opposite of what bromide drag would look like.
You'll have to first determine whether the defect is in the negative itself. That's not clear at this point and your latest illustration suggests it actually isn't:
View attachment 400610
But it's hard to be sure at this point.
One possible cause is insufficient fixing, hence my question above to have another look at the negative.
On overexposed frames the combined factors of agitation technique, time, chemistry, reel type, scanning, camera, etc. will conspire to give odd results. I do it all the time with similar result.
Hi All, greetings from Amsterdam, the Netherlands. I came across these forums, interesting!
I have a question. Do some people recognize this?
Thanks!
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?