School boy error - my 1st roll of 120 got loose wile loading. Ruined?

[ted_smith]

Hi

Just had a play at loading my Hasselblad 501CM with my first roll of Fuji Provia 400X. I followed a guide or two on YouTube first, but suffice to say that I made a mistake and the roll became very slightly loose (I guess I'm too used to the light tight way 35mmis loaded into its canister). Not entirely but there was perhaps a 1mm gap along the whole roll. The question is - is the whole roll ruined and should be binned or is there a fair chance the shots won't be fogged? I ask because if there is no chance it's OK, I'd rather not pay for it to be developed. I've taken some shots with it anyway just to get used to using my blad and light meter.

I was indoors in a window lit room. It wasn't in bright sunshine but there was certainly light in the room.

 

[CGW]

Hi

Just had a play at loading my Hasselblad 501CM with my first roll of Fuji Provia 400X. I followed a guide or two on YouTube first, but suffice to say that I made a mistake and the roll became very slightly loose. Not entirely but there was perhaps a 1mm gap along the whole roll. The question is - is the whole roll ruined and should be binned or is there a fair chance the shots won't be fogged? I ask because if there is no chance it's OK, I'd rather not pay for it to be developed. I've taken some shots with it anyway just to get used to using my blad and light meter.

I was indoors in a window lit room. It wasn't in bright sunshine but there was certainly light in the room.

Been there, done worse. I'd develop it. If it's OK, you're smiling; if not, consider it "tuition."

 

[ic-racer]

There is about 2 feet of plain paper before the film. You should have it developed so you know in the future if what you did ruined the whole thing. I suspect the inner (last) frames may be OK. Even if it is fogged a little, you still should be able to see if you had focus, stability and exposure correct on the rest of the roll. Basically its a test roll anyway because its your first roll.

 

[railwayman3]

Did you mean that the 1mm gap was along one edge, i.e. the backing paper not centrally wound on the spool? Or was it just not tightly wound?

Either way, I'd go with the other replies and have it developed...may well be OK, backing paper is very light-resistant, and light doesn't track along through the base of an ordinary film to any great extent.

 

[ted_smith]

Did you mean that the 1mm gap was along one edge,

Hard to explain, but if you laid the roll flat down onto a table and looked at the plastic inner spool, the film was wrapped around it (of course) but the gap between one lap round and the next lap round the spool and got to about 1mm, maybe less. When I eventually got it in the holder it tightened up OK, but it might have been too late you see.

I will get it developed as you have all stated so far. You never know, and as you say, it will give me an idea for future rolls if this happens again as to whether I have ruined it or not, and therefore whether to shoot with it at all. Imagine the scenario - at a wedding getting the 12 money shots, and the film got fogged! |Thats why I am experimenting well in advance of ever using it for anything serious!

Ted
PS - for the benefit of others who might read this who are in my shoes - a nice HOW TO here : http://silverbased.org/load-120-film/)

Ted

 

[brucemuir]

120 can fog the edges fairly easy so you need to take care in handling.

Also you might want to make sure the dark slide seal is good in your back if you got it used.
These need to be replaced every few years depending on use but at least it is easily distinguishable if leaking and easy/cheap to fix yourself.

 

[Rick A]

Only one way to know for sure, develope it. For future reference, never set a roll down that has been untaped.

 

[MattKing]

One useful hint - don't take the "wrapper" paper band off the roll of film until after you have it clicked into the back or insert. That way, if you fumble it a bit, the roll will remain tightly wrapped until it is where it belongs.

Just be sure to retrieve the entire paper band from the camera.

Some cameras give you more access to the band than others, but I've yet to encounter a camera that this doesn't work with.

 

[ted_smith]

Hey Peeps!!

Help! I'm not sure what the hell I've done and I'm hoping you guys can help me.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but a film accidentally exposed to light would fog it, and in a severe case, make the whole film a fairly solid black? Well, check out the attached, which is a flatbed scan of my "exposures". As you can see, one has been "correctly exposed", 2 or 3 have very slight images that are barely visible of my 3 year old daughter and the rest look like they've not been exposed to light at all...either in the camera or out of it?

Has my slight unrolling of the film caused this or have I not used my Blad properly? I made sure the film was wound on for each shot and that the small screen had a white colour in it to avoid any double exposing.

Ideas please? I need to leanr what I am doing wrong!!

Ted

 

[ted_smith]

Oh, hang on...I've just realised - this is Fuji Provia 400X transparancy film, not negative film. So a solid white exposure on this is the equivalent of a solid black on a negative? Yes?

So the solid white shots are totally fogged and the few that came out with some degree of image are the one's that were perhaps sufficiently unfogged to produce some kind of partial image, allbeit unusable? Am I right?

 

[frobozz]

Yep, slide film goes clear when fully fogged...

Duncan

 

[Matthew Rusbarsky]

Here is a good example of fat-roll syndrome (negative film). I bobbled the roll while removing it from the back:

You can see the light leaks as flares creeping in from the edges. You have an extreme case as the flares are meeting in the center.

 

[clayne]

Ted, it's fogged. But atleast you got a single frame out of it and know the camera works. As someone else said: tuition.

If you get into a lot of E6 I recommend just learning how to develop it yourself to cut down on costs.

 

[MattKing]

Caveat: I have never loaded a Hasselblad.

With that in mind, take this with a grain of salt.

As I understand it, it is possible to load film incorrectly in a Hasselblad, and then have it sort of function.

 

[Poisson Du Jour]

Try loading 120 film into a Pentax 67. Guaranteed to teach you about dexterity, patience, courage and precision: I botched my first roll load, but that was about 8 or 9 rolls back. Oh, and watch out for the shutter curtain...

The suggestion that you leave the roll tape on (usually bearing the film description) until the reel is firmly bedded down, then remove the tape and thread it across is an excellent idea that I have recently taken up on for extra security. Also, use two fingers ('V' shape) to hold down the top and bottom of the roll firmly as you thread the leader across: this will also keep the reel tightly wound. Only When the film is threaded and wound a little, place your hand over the film spool to protect against light leak, then close the back (but remove hand first! :confused. Never failed me.

 

[railwayman3]

Oh, hang on...I've just realised - this is Fuji Provia 400X transparancy film, not negative film. So a solid white exposure on this is the equivalent of a solid black on a negative? Yes?

So the solid white shots are totally fogged and the few that came out with some degree of image are the one's that were perhaps sufficiently unfogged to produce some kind of partial image, allbeit unusable? Am I right?

You're totally correct. Light has really got into the roll quite badly. (And, in the top strip, you can, I think, see where the light has reflected on the numbers on the adjacent film backing paper). The sharp boundary on the lower strip between the clear base and the usable image seems to be where the centre of the roll was tightly rolled (was this one of the first images on the film, hence nearest the centre of the spool?).

Matthew Rubarsky's picture is a very typical example of how edge fogging from a loose roll would appear on the print (black, of course, on the neg). I've a stack of old negs given to me by an elderly relative (taken by her Father on a Box Brownie), which show this to a small extent on almost every one...guess the film-loading and wind-on on the Brownies was not very sophisticated!

 

[vpwphoto]

Ice racer 2 feet really!!!.. the whole paper doesn't go 4 feet!!
I measured it's about 10 inches!!

OP... you are likely ok.. it happens now and then, and at worst in your situation you got some edge fog as long as you cinched it up fast. It happened to me outdoors in summer sun, I'd shift it into my body's shadow FAST, and tighten it up..

 

[edp]

That is some funny-looking fogging, with the first frame fine right up to the edges of the film, then a sharp cutoff from one good frame to the rest of the roll almost completely exposed.

Loose-roll fogging looks more like irregular blotching starting at the sides, and generally decreasing in severity towards the centre of the roll. I'd say that in addition to some damage from having a loose roll, all but one of the pictures were considerably overexposed to begin with, and you do say it's a new camera and you were shooting "just to get used to using my blad and light meter".

 

[ted_smith]

edp - I was thinking that myself. The film becoming a bit loose is one thing, but to see entire frames look like they've been unwound and held up to the window is another.

I'm worried it's something more serious with the camera or with me and how I've operated it so maybe it was getting exposed to light when just sat idle. I'm not sure? Maybe I need to just have another go and see what happens.

WHat's the situation with the film back metal slide? I realise you can't take a shot while it's inserted, so I always had that out while taking shots. When loading film, does that need to be kept in place or removed?

 

[chioque]

To give you some piece of mind, why don't you sacrifice one roll of B&W film and develop yourself, to see whether it's the camera having problems as well.

As for the dark slide, I only remove it when taking shots. Other than that it's slotted in.

 

[benjiboy]

Here's how to do it Ted http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vEtcBLIehr8

 

[ted_smith]

Hey guys

Good news. I've watched all the YouTube clips in a bit more detail and read all the posts etc and this week I've shot another two rolls while I was on London.

Though my shots were not fantastic, at least they're not all white! So the unrolling was clearly the cause and not the camera. Now 'all' I need to do it work out how to better meter a scene. The two shots below were taken by using an incident light meter that I held in front of the lens pointing it AT the scene. In most cases it reported EV values of 2 or 3 so I usually shot at about 3 or 4 EV to account for the brighter areas.

 

[clayne]

Ted, doesn't look like the metering was massively off although pointing it at the scene is using it in reflectant style.

 

[benjiboy]

Hey guys

Good news. I've watched all the YouTube clips in a bit more detail and read all the posts etc and this week I've shot another two rolls while I was on London.

Though my shots were not fantastic, at least they're not all white! So the unrolling was clearly the cause and not the camera. Now 'all' I need to do it work out how to better meter a scene. The two shots below were taken by using an incident light meter that I held in front of the lens pointing it AT the scene. In most cases it reported EV values of 2 or 3 so I usually shot at about 3 or 4 EV to account for the brighter areas.

Ted your using the incidental meter the wrong way, you should point the dome from the subject at the camera lens.