Hasselblad Frame Spacing

[E76]

I currently own two backs for my Hasselblad, both of which were manufactured in '98. The older back takes full advantage of the roll, and leaves a nice, wide space between each frame. The newer one, however, starts at the very beginning of the roll (very close to the tape), and leaves a small space between each frame (not unlike that of 35mm spacing). This, of course, leaves a lot of space at the end of the roll, more than enough to fit in another frame.

Is this normal? Could this be caused by the film I'm using (Fujicolor Pro in the older one, Arista.EDU Ultra in the newer one), or do I have a maladjusted back? :confused:

 

[Kevin Caulfield]

I'm not sure why your newer one would start at the very beginning of the roll, as presumably you are winding on to frame number 1 before shooting? I have several backs and the spacing between frames varies between them. When the spacing is too close you could well require servicing.

 

[E76]

I am winding on to frame one before shooting. Hopefully I don't need servicing, as I don't have the money at the moment.

I'm going to try a roll of Kodak TMAX next to see if the problem persists.

 

[david b]

So you are rolling the film till you hit the arrow.

Then putting the insert into the shell, and winding until it stops at 1

Right?

 

[E76]

Correct.

 

[mikebarger]

try running the arrow about 90 degrees past the mark, may improve spacing.

Mike

 

[Q.G.]

The back indeed needs adjusting. It's not a Big Job.

But try the work-around suggested while saving up for it.

 

[arigram]

Ilford films are to be winded up to the filled oblong point and not to the arrow as other films. I guess it could be the same with some other films, but I can't be certain as I usually use Ilford.

 

[Q.G.]

Ilford films are to be winded up to the filled oblong point and not to the arrow as other films. I guess it could be the same with some other films, but I can't be certain as I usually use Ilford.

The Ilford Problem was solved long ago already. Ilford promised not to use off-spec spools anymore.
So unless you have really, really old Ilford film, no worries about Ilford!

 

[Arvee]

Until frame 1 and frame 2 overlap, I wouldn't give it a second thought. The workaround is a simple solution if the position of images bothers you. It's not a problem with the back as long at the frames don't overlap. Both my backs start about an inch from film end, just for a comparison, and have about 3/16" between frames. And they are A12 backs about the same vintage as yours.

Could also be that the 'tight' back hasn't seen much use and is stiff from dried lube. I had to have one of mine serviced by David Odess because the previous owner hadn't used that back but one time in 10 years! It had an overlap problem. If, perhaps, you use the tight back all the time it may loosen up and space better.

-Fred

 

[E76]

I can deal with the closeness in spacing, it's just how close the roll began to the tape that worried me. In fact, I lost a part of the first frame because of that.

I'm going to continue using the back to see if it does, in fact, "loosen up" (never thought lubricants could be the problem!) and I will try Mike's workaround.

Thanks for all the help, guys!

 

[Q.G.]

I can deal with the closeness in spacing, it's just how close the roll began to the tape that worried me. In fact, I lost a part of the first frame because of that.

I'm going to continue using the back to see if it does, in fact, "loosen up" (never thought lubricants could be the problem!) and I will try Mike's workaround.

Start saving up anyway.
Inside the magazine is an easily accesible, simple eccentric disc, held in place by a single screw. That thingy regulates the distance between the start mark and the first exposed frame.
It will need adjusting.

As mentioned before, it is not a big job.
The side cover will have to come off (three screws), the screw that holds the thing must be loosened a bit, the thing turned into the right position, the screw tightened again (and locked with locktite), and the cover can go on again.
Takes only a little bit longer than writing this.

 

[jordanstarr]

For what it's worth, I just sent in my 500cm and 2 a-12 backs in for servicing as my body jammed hard enough to break internal mechanisms and since I was dealing with the odd frame overlap, I sent it all in for servicing.
When I got everything back the body was smooth as butter, but one of my backs was still overlapping (I sent it back and they did more work on it) and the other was producing odd spacing (some tight, some far apart, but none were overlapping). I called and asked if this was a cause for concern. They told me to not send it back unless it was overlapping because "it happens". I'm not sure if it's one of those situations where they lie to you to avoid doing more work under their repair warranty, but I've put through a few more rolls and there's not overlapping although the spacing is different between frames.

...I'm not sure this helps or not, but it's my experience. So far so good. I'm in a similar dilemma, but I think the bottom line is to start saving up some money incase you need the repair. Or at least think about QC's advice and doing it yourself. You can probably find a Hasselblad back repair manual on the net somewhere. If you can't I think I have one somewhere I can email to you if you send me a PM.

 

[Q.G.]

Or at least think about QC's advice and doing it yourself.

I would only advice doing it yourself if you are confident enough to do so, know what you are doing (a good manual will help) and are willing to accept 'defeat', and pay for someone else to do it when you fail.

Mind you, the eccentric i mentioned only (!) regulates the distance between start mark and first frame.
It does not control the spacing between frames. There's something else inside the magazine that does that.

Adjusting that is also not a Big Job. But remember that you need to check what you do, i.e. run film through it, and mark each and every single frame (release camera; wind camera/film; slide in; take magazine off; slide out; pencil along the edges; slide in; magazine on the camera again for the next frame).
A tedious process, and perhaps something the repair shop did not want to do (or not too often)?

It is normal though for the frame spacing not to be absolutely even.
As long as there is enough space between the frames to cut and leave a rebate next to the adjoining frames, and as long as the spacing isn't that wide that the 12 frames will not fit on the roll completely, spacing is deemed to be o.k.

 

[mikebarger]

If you decide to send it out, David Odess has done very nice work on my gear.

http://www.david-odess.com/

Mike

 

[E76]

Hmm, $80 is a lot less than I thought it would be, but as I student I must save all I can. The procedure as described sounds easy enough, but I'd never forgive myself if I somehow managed to screw up.

Thanks for all the advice guys.

 

[PHOTOTONE]

Unless the back is overlaping frames, I would just wind a little past the arrow before you put the film insert into the shell, then wind on to frame 1. This should solve your problem with zero dollar outlay.

 

[Anscojohn]

, or do I have a maladjusted back? :confused:[/QUOTE]


*******
I thought this only happened to Kievaholics!!

 

[Q.G.]

I thought this only happened to Kievaholics!!

Why, no! Of course not.

Though there is a difference:
One of these brand's backs are maladjusted by the factory itself. They also make it hard to get them properly adjusted (which is why they themselves do not even bother - they know it would be a waste of time) by filling them up with components that are no good to begin with.
Some of the other brand's backs get maladjusted over 3 or 4 decades of hard use.

 

[Anscojohn]

[Some of the other brand's backs get maladjusted over 3 or 4 decades of hard use.
[/QUOTE]

*******
Awww shucks!