I think I loaded the wrong film in my camera, anyone else done that too?

[MCB18]

Well, to cap off a very bad day, I think I loaded Foto 200 into my camera instead of 42L… The negs are extremely underexposed. Some frames there is barely anything there. Dev is fine based on leader density, it’s fully black and evenly developed. Camera’s meter is good, I checked it against a known good meter. So the only thing I can think of to cause such bad underexposure is that I loaded the wrong film in the camera… and boy that sucks. Am I the only one that’s done this or is this just a me issue.

On an unrelated note, JFC that’s some bad light piping…

 

[Luckless]

So far I haven't loaded one film while thinking it was another film... But I have loaded a film a few times and then managed to mix up which film was in what camera before the roll was finished a few times so far.

My view is that mistakes like that are simply reminders to pay closer attention to details and limit how many cameras I have on the go at any given time. That said, finishing rolls is still hard at times.

 

[Rick A]

The only thing I've done close to that was switching from TriX to K-64 and forgetting to re set the ASA on my camera. I shot some of the most beautiful fall colors extremely under exposed. I was on assignment for a magazine.

 

[loccdor]

One time I took like 7 rolls on an FD lens that should have been set to "A" for automatic aperture but wasn't. So everything got shot wide open while being exposed for stopped down. Now I try to do a dry-fire while looking at the aperture blades before I do anything important after a camera/lens switch...

I'll also cut off a little bit of the film box and put it in the reminder slot or the accessory shoe.

 

[Terrence Brennan]

Yes, and forgotten to pull the darkslide, too!

 

[mshchem]

Me screw up? Never!

 

[Donald Qualls]

I've forgotten what film I had loaded before finishing the roll a few times. That's a 35 mm mistake, though; 120 usually has enough information (text font and warning marks type/size and backing color) to remind me at least what brand it is, and I commonly shoot only one speed at a time in a particular brand (Foma 100 and 400 are the only exception, and Foma 100 pushes so well it almost doesn't matter as long as I remember to write the EI on the backing when I unload).

 

[Pieter12]

Not that long ago, I grabbed what I thought was a bunch of TriX 120 film and put it in my bag. Same yellow foil wrapper, you know. It turned out one of the rolls was TMAX 100. I exposed it at 320 like the rest of the TriX I shot. Didn't realize the mistake until I was sorting rolls to process. Ended up processing it as if it was shot at 400, since I couldn't find a time for TMAX 100 at 320 with Rodinal. Negatives are bit demanding to print, but the prints look fine. Maybe even better than the TriX.

 

[MattKing]

Whenever I buy Kodak 120 B&W film, I take a black felt pen and mark the ends of the outside foil with the code I use for that film.
TMX gets an "X", TMY gets a "Y".
When Plus X was still in my inventory, it got a "PX".
I rarely use Tri-X - I guess "3X" would be good.
When I bulk load 35mm, similar codes go on the masking tape on the plastic storage container - although I have some that have already been marked with a felt pen. I also put similarly marked masking tape on the cassette itself.
I always load 25 exposures in bulk loaded cassettes, and usually mark that on the cassette as well.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Yes, and forgotten to pull the darkslide, too!

I only made one mistake in my life. I had thought that I had made a mistake once, but when I investigated it turned out that I had been correct all the time.

 

[Kino]

Yeah, my favorite mistaken roll I shot was "Notinthecamera 100 ASA"...

It's a common film, but hard to bracket exposures and get anything...

 

[Sirius Glass]

And that is why many of us have one or more of the same camera or very similar camera so we can grab the next camera and load it with the film we really wanted that time.

 

[Pieter12]

With 35mm, it’s easy to rewind the film, remove the cassette and put the right film in. Many MF cameras have interchangeable backs so you can swap out for a back loaded with the right film. LF is a no-brainer. Of course if you don’t know you have loaded the wrong film, all bets are off.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Well, to cap off a very bad day, I think I loaded Foto 200 into my camera instead of 42L… The negs are extremely underexposed. Some frames there is barely anything there. Dev is fine based on leader density, it’s fully black and evenly developed. Camera’s meter is good, I checked it against a known good meter. So the only thing I can think of to cause such bad underexposure is that I loaded the wrong film in the camera… and boy that sucks. Am I the only one that’s done this or is this just a me issue.

On an unrelated note, JFC that’s some bad light piping…

Oh no; I think that happened to all of us at some time or another. With my Hassy , I even managed to put the film in the wrong way and ended up exposing a whole roll of back paper. There is a limit to my intelligence but none to my stupidity.

 

[Donald Qualls]

"Notinthecamera 100 ASA"...

I've shot all the ISO versions of that over the past half century. I can never get it to go into the reel in order to develop it.

 

[Donald Qualls]

Of course if you don’t know you have loaded the wrong film, all bets are off.

Or if you've loaded the film wrong.

Amazing how hard you have to push 1990s vintage Tri-X 320 when you expose from the back of the sheet...

 

[Pieter12]

Or if you've loaded the film wrong.

Amazing how hard you have to push 1990s vintage Tri-X 320 when you expose from the back of the sheet...

At least you can get an image...if you loaded 120 backwards, tough luck.

 

[MCB18]

At least you can get an image...if you loaded 120 backwards, tough luck.

Oof

 

[Ben Hutcherson]

With MF cameras that have a reminder window, I often put a piece of the wrapper that says the film type in the reminder. It's not as slick as a box tab, but then on Kodak and Fuji anymore you only get one tab on the box of 5(and I rarely carry full boxes around anymore). I miss the old Fuji 20 roll boxes that had several tabs you could tear off-they did that for both 35mm and 120 20-roll boxes.

At least on Hasselblad "A" backs, the reminder window springs out in such a way that you can tuck the little piece of mylar back there easily. I also miss Kodak printing the film type on paper tab at the start of the roll, as that was really easy to tuck in and keep track of.

I have a couple of the original Hasselblad "12" type backs that I still use. At least on those too with MOST film if I really forget, I can open the peephole and watch while I slowly advance, as most films do at least still print the stock between frame numbers on the backing paper.

I've opened LF holders with unknown film in the dark before to check the notch codes, although on a few occasions I've been stumped on what I found. If I loaded them myself, chances are I know the possibilities for what's there(especially since now I think the only stock I have is FP4+, TXP-320, and RVP). When I was buying used holders, I got in the habit of checking them in the dark as I got some "freebie" film to play around with that way, but there again I had more than a few that stumped me. There are a few online resources for notch codes(IIRC University of Louisville libraries had a pretty comprehensive one...) but I found a few that I couldn't find in any of those resources.

 

[MattKing]

I save and re-use my 120 reminder tabs
I need to get some laminated!

 

[Pieter12]

most films do at least still print the stock between frame numbers on the backing paper.

Not Ilford.

save and re-use my 120 reminder tabs

I can generally tell by the ISO set on the camera what film is loaded, but I do have back tape marked with a silver sharpie that I will keep on my exposed film holder to put on my film insert cases and sometimes transfer to the camera once loaded. Sounds more complicated than it is.

 

[MattKing]

Not Ilford.

Not Kodak either, I believe.
Just on the loading and trailing ends.

 

[Ben Hutcherson]

Not Kodak either, I believe.
Just on the loading and trailing ends.

I could have sworn I had seen it at least in the past, but then who knows anymore. I could well be wrong, especially as I've not used a ruby window advance camera in a while(just the occasional use of a Hasselblad back or early Rolleicord that needs me to watch for frame 1 to start the counter). I also don't currently have a dark room set up, so haven't looked at backing paper in a while and to add to that have been making a conscious effort to dig down into the freezer and shoot some of my ~2015-2020 purchased stock. With that said, I did load a roll of Portra 160(late 2022 purchase, 4/24 expiration) into a Hassy "12" back yesterday, so will try to remember to look when I-hopefully tomorrow-finish that roll. My lack of a dark room is discouraging me from shooting B&W as on the rare occasion I've had it lab processed, it's even more rare that I'll actually be happy with the result in the same way I am my own processing.

 

[MattKing]

I could have sworn I had seen it at least in the past, but then who knows anymore.

In the past, yes, because at one time 120 (and 620) volumes were so high that they printed individual versions of the backing paper.
That all went away when volumes imploded, and eventually they ran out of the huge excess of inventory that was left in their warehouses for years.
When they then had to find someone to make backing paper for them, they had all sorts of problems with the modern papers and inks and wrapper offset, which made it necessary to minimize the printing. And the volumes plus the minimum order requirements mean there is no economical way to make several versions of backing paper - one for each colour and black and white film - without the capital requirements killing the profitability.