Marks on photos

[Pinch]

I am new to the forum and just shot my first roll of film (two in fact) since 1997.

I recently bought a Mamiya RB67 with a 180mm lens and they are in nice shape as far as I can tell - at least cosmetically, I shot two test rolls of Ektar 100 and I have a consistent blotch in the lower left. Three images are attached and the blotch is on the scans from both rolls. If you can forgive my photography I would appreciate your advice on what can cause this. Thank you!

 

[Dan Daniel]

Welcome back to film!

Are these scanned? Looks like dirt on the scanner glass.

Look at the negatives themselves and see if the marks are on the negatives.

If you ar scanning them yourself, rotate the negatives and rescan. If the blotch follows the film, it is on the film. If it stays in the same place, it is on the scanner.

 

[Pinch]

Yes they were scanned by the film lab. I'll go pick up the negatives tomorrow and take a look. Thank you

 

[koraks]

Are these scanned? Looks like dirt on the scanner glass.

Absolutely. Since the blotch is the exact same shape and in pretty much the same position as well, it's nearly guaranteed to be scanning-related.

@Pinch Inspect the actual negatives and see if you can find anything resembling this shape on those particular negatives. If you can't, this is definitive proof that the issue originates from scanning.

Welcome to Photrio!

 

[Pinch]

Okay, the plot thickens: I picked up the 120 negatives and I do see the blotch on them but I see a lot of other stuff along the bottom as well. I have attached two images of my negatives. You should be able to zoom in and see all the blotchiness along the bottom. I would appreciate your thoughts on what can cause this.

Whatever it is I see it even going into the space between the negatives. Can it be something about my film back and how it is handling the film? They just don't look like scratches. The other thing is I think the lab cropped the bottom for the scans but they could only crop so much thus leaving that area in the lower left I shared earlier.

 

[MattKing]

Looks like wrapper offset - contact between the inked letters and numbers on the back of the backing paper with the emulsion o the next layer of the film affected the response of the film, leading to ghost images on the film.
How old is the film, and how has it been stored.

 

[koraks]

Looks like wrapper offset -

No, not really, at least not to me. They look more like scuff marks. I don't see how the camera back would cause this, but it's relatively easy to get this kind of damage when something goes wrong taken the wet film off of a development reel.

I'd inspect those marks closely with a loupe or microscope and check for physical damage to the emulsion. Check both sides of the film as 120 film also has a gelatin coating on the backside.

 

[Pinch]

The film was purchased last week from B&H. Ektar 100 - expiration 03/2024.

It is curious that the lab cropped so much off the bottom. Perhaps they were trying to help although I told them these rolls were to test the camera. I will check the negatives more closely.

 

[Don_ih]

I agree with @koraks - that looks like your film was damaged by the lab.

 

[SodaAnt]

You'd expect a professional lab to take good care of film entrusted to them, but that's not always the case. I had a local lab develop a roll of 120 B&W recently and the negatives came back with more gunk and scratches than a roll of the same film I developed myself a few weeks earlier (and that was the first roll I'd developed in 15 years).

 

[Dan Daniel]

Have you shown this to the lab? I would go talk to them. Sure looks like liquid marks, some wet roller or something leaving goo or affecting the emulsion or back side in some way. A good lab will help you figure this out and if it is on their end you are doing them a favor (don't be accusing; be problem solving, ask advise, let them know it's a test roll, but also be determined). Take your camera in with you so they can look over the film transport.

If they blow you off, find another lab. Mail order opens up options of good labs.

In the meantime, put the negatives in your camera as if it was being shot- emulsion forward, upside down. Look at the rollers and such for any goo. As suggested, examine the negatives to see if the marks are on the film.

 

[Ben 4]

Looks like roller-transport gunk to me. Did the lab use a roller-transport machine?

 

[koraks]

Looks like roller-transport gunk to me.

Hm. Good point. The repetitive pattern does suggest it.

 

[SodaAnt]

Hm. Good point. The repetitive pattern does suggest it.

Odd, though, that the pattern exactly matches the RB67 frame spacing.

 

[Pinch]

Excellent observations and advice . I'm on it!

 

[koraks]

Odd, though, that the pattern exactly matches the RB67 frame spacing.

Yes - if it's an exact match. A little investigation with a ruler to establish whether the spacing perfectly matches the framing would be sensible.

 

[MattKing]

When I first looked at this, I thought I saw text:

I'd say check with the lab.
Now, after reading everyone else's posts, I no longer think so - it looks more like gunk.
In which case, reach out to the lab.
If you see repeated examples of exactly the same mark in each frame, I'd check the film back as well.

 

[calico]

It is curious that the lab cropped so much off the bottom. Perhaps they were trying to help although I told them these rolls were to test the camera. I will check the negatives more closely.

The Noritsu and Frontier scanners will not scan the entire 120 frame (due to their design). At Richard Photo Lab, where I have my film developed and scanned, I can request "with rebate" for 6x6 scans, which means they have to manually do something to film holder so the whole frame is scanned. Costs extra. I get some of the frame edges (black areas around image) on the scans, but sometimes just three edges and never even.

So I think the crop you're seeing is due to the scanner, not intentional.

 

[AnselMortensen]

That looks like a lab issue to me...
I agree with the above posters who suspect gunk on a roller-transport processor roller.

 

[foc]

Any word from the lab as to the type of C41 film processor they are using?

If it were a roller transport issue (not a common type of processor), I would have suspected to see the marks repeated more frequently.

If it is a leader card transport processor (a more common type of processor), the only thing that I can see that could cause these marks would be a faulty roller squeegee and again the pattern would be repeated more frequently.

 

[Pinch]

No news yet. The lab in NJ that processed the rolls mentioned above has not been helpful even though I told them they were test rolls and I'm just looking for answers. The owner would not speak with me and I was told they checked the machine.

To investigate further, I bought another film back for my RB67 and shot a roll of film which I promptly sent to a highly regarded NYC lab via Priority Mail. The USPS has lost the package. I'm serious, they cannot find it anywhere. While that film was on the way to NYC, or so I thought, I shot another test roll using the first film back (the one I used for the negatives above). I sent that roll to the same NYC lab. Fortunately, that one made it and I will have the results on Tuesday.

My road back to film has been bumpy. More to come.

 

[SodaAnt]

I can associate with that. My first roll of film in my new RB67 after getting back into film was covered with white spots. Turned out to be a known problem with the backing paper on PanF+.

 

[Pinch]

I just received my scans from the NYC lab. Same film back as the rolls in question. Not great images for evaluating but there are no marks that I can see and with the TIFF scans I can really zoom in. The bottom of each scan looks pretty clean although I see some flares at the bottom of the first one. I thought they may be leaks but I do not see them in any other images.

They are mailing back the negatives, but I think it may have been the lab.

 

[calico]

May I ask what lab in NYC you used? Interesting that they provided tiffs of scans. Most labs will only provide jpegs.

Thanks.

 

[Pinch]

May I ask what lab in NYC you used? Interesting that they provided tiffs of scans. Most labs will only provide jpegs.

Thanks.

PictureHouse on W. 16th Street. I thought most labs offer TIFFS for an additional fee.