Exposure Question

[asteroid_death]

Two separate rolls of expired Kodak 800. I knew I was gambling shooting expired film but I wasn't expecting the weird purple streak. Like I said this is two separate rolls. I may have used the same camera (can't remember) but it doesn't look like light leak to me. Anyone seen anything like this before?

 

[ic-racer]

You can still get fresh film.

 

[Old-N-Feeble]

Expired film can do that? I've never heard of such a thing. It looks like a processing problem to me.

 

[snapguy]

Basis

It is called the Intransigence Of Mechanical Objects (which is the basis for a lot of Laurel and Hardy comedy). Machinery hates us and is going to get us.

 

[asteroid_death]

Well I just moved to a new city and there happens to be an old school camera shop down the street. I've been taking some 'test rolls' there to see if they do good work. All my b&w comes out great but the color is hit or miss. So far I've only taken two color rolls there, both expired kodak.

This is off the same roll; no streak. It has to be the film, camera, development, or scanner, and it's definitely not the scanner.

 

[Old-N-Feeble]

I've never seen a camera malfunction do that... it looks too smooth. Scanner... I dunno. I still say it's processing error.

 

[Newt_on_Swings]

Id say light leak. Are the streaks only in photos that you have shot outside in sunlight? Or right after you have been in sunlight with the camera?

 

[John Koehrer]

Assuming 35mm film and it's running the length of the film. Processing problemo. Maybe marginally insufficient solution levels.

If it's 8X10 with a motor drive, it's just bad Karma.

 

[MattKing]

Light leak - what camera was it?

 

[asteroid_death]

Id say light leak. Are the streaks only in photos that you have shot outside in sunlight? Or right after you have been in sunlight with the camera?

It's an OM1.


I'm doubtful that it's light leak since the majority of the 2nd roll was underexposed (which I expected) and the streak is more pronounced. It's actually less pronounced in the shots under better lighting. Also, light leak would show up in my b&w too, and I haven't had any issues with that.

I am leaning towards a development error since the streak is noticeable on two separate rolls, unless the batch of expired kodak I dug up all have the exact same 'flaw'.



I'm going to take a roll of Fuji in next to see what I get back. If it is a developer error he won't be getting my portra.

 

[asteroid_death]

Also, I'm not that familiar with how the c41 machines work but it almost looks like the machine had some kind of light leak onto the film. Could that happen?

 

[Old-N-Feeble]

Also, I'm not that familiar with how the c41 machines work but it almost looks like the machine had some kind of light leak onto the film. Could that happen?

Maybe but very doubtful. As another pointed out it was probably low levels in one or more of the processing tanks. BTW, don't expect your lab to admit to a mistake.

 

[Newt_on_Swings]

Ok maybe film was x-rayed heavily?

https://www.kodak.com/global/en/service/tib/tib5201.shtml

If you scroll down you can see different examples of banding from X-rays.

 

[Old-N-Feeble]

Ok maybe film was x-rayed heavily?

https://www.kodak.com/global/en/service/tib/tib5201.shtml

If you scroll down you can see different examples of banding from X-rays.

I wouldn't have thought so but after seeing Kodak's examples... I dunno.

 

[asteroid_death]

Think I figured it out! Scanner calibration was going on and off and for some reason causing that streak. I am using Vuescan (which I think sucks) and it doesn't automatically calibrate when I start the program. I have to do it manually every time I want to scan. If anyone knows of a better scan prog for 35mm let me know. I am using a dimage scan dual IV, saving up for a plustek next.




Thanks for the replies.

 

[pentaxuser]

In recent months I wonder how many film, processing, light leaks etc we have pondered over that have turned out out to be scanner problems

There's seem to be a very strong case for examining a negative under a decent loupe and maybe getting a print done first.

pentaxuser

 

[Newt_on_Swings]

In recent months I wonder how many film, processing, light leaks etc we have pondered over that have turned out out to be scanner problems

There's seem to be a very strong case for examining a negative under a decent loupe and maybe getting a print done first.

pentaxuser

This. I think from now on this should be the first thing asked. Did you look at it with a loupe on a light table? Did you make a print? Is any of this in the FAQ section? Like a simple flow chart to trouble shoot these problems would help much I think.