Strange vertical blemish on every frame

[Stanbey]

Hi,

This is my first post on Photrio so please forgive me if I have posted it in the wrong forum or bludered in some other way.

I have just developed a batch of films from a recent trip and have found that on one of the rolls there is a strange vertical blemish cutting across the frame on almost every frame. I have never seen this kind of problem before so I'm reaching out to the wisdom of this community for some advice. Fortunately (?) all the photos were pants anyway so nothing is lost that I'm too upset about, but I want to ensure it doesn't happen again. It would be horrific to find a great photo ruined by this. I've attached three images from the roll and a zoomed in image of the blemish from Untitled7.jpg.

Some notes on the problem:

• The band/blemish runs from top to bottom of the frame in *about* the same place on each frame.
• On some frames (e.g. Untitled7.jpg) it totally obliterates the underlying image, on others (e.g. Untitled4.jpg) it is much lighter and on frames 2, 6 and 8 wasn't present at all. Note that it didn't get progressively worse throughout the roll: frame 1 was bad, frame 2 was good, ... it seems random.
• I've not seen this on any other films. Other films that went through the same camera on the same trip and developed on the same day were fine.
• The film was Ilford Delta 100 and was shot on my older (pre-MLU) Pentax 6x7. (This camera does have a problem with loading/winding that causes it to waste the first frame-and-a-half or so of film so I only get 8 or 9 shots per roll out of it.)
• I developed it in Ilfotec DD-X in a Patterson tank. I do two at a time and the other roll that shared the tank with this one had no problems at all.
• What you cannot see on the attachments -- because I only just noticed it after I made the scans -- is that the blemish _does_ extend into the clear parts of the film outside of the image frame. It's hard to see because everything is clear there anyway, but it is faintly detectable all the way to the edge of the film.

The fact that the blemish is in the same place on each frame makes me think it must be a camera-related problem. But then why are no other rolls affected? It _looks_ like a scratch and if it were going horizontally rather than vertically across the frame I would immediately suspect something like grit on the shutter curtain. But a vertical scratch? What could make that?

If anyone has seen anything like this before or has any ideas as to what could have caused this (and how to prevent it in the future) I'd love to hear them.

---
Stanbey

 

[koraks]

This is my first post on Photrio so please forgive me if I have posted it in the wrong forum or bludered in some other way.

You're doing great; no worries. Thanks for joining and please stick around!

The first thought is that some kind of contamination spread across the roll; it's almost like a drop of fixer was pushed along the length of the film, or something. But looking at the zoomed example, I think the most plausible cause is really a coating defect.

It's not a shutter problem and it's not a typical scratch related to sand or debris in the camera etc.

I'd get in touch with Harman and send them some examples of this problem and ask for their thoughts. My guess is that it's caused by particulate contamination during coating which resulted in bits of emulsion missing. I wouldn't be surprised if you find a clot of some kind of debris at either end of this line - if that end happens to be on your roll of film to begin with.

 

[Dustin McAmera]

But it's not a line along the film; it's across the width of the film in each frame.
I wonder if you could have got something on one of the rollers in the back of the camera, or on the film, so the film stuck to them in the time it was stationary between one exposure and the next. Then maybe the longer it was there, the stronger the effect. I have no idea what the contamination could be. Maybe even just the combination of dampness in the film with pressure from the roller.
I don't have any cameras that can use 220; what does it look like if you run a 120 film with the back set to 220; might that exert enough extra pressure to do this?

 

[snusmumriken]

What exactly does the blemish look like on the negatives, and is it on the emulsion side or the back? It seems odd that it shows as black in the positive image, implying it must be clear film in the negative. I wonder if the emulsion was tacky when the film went past a roller during manufacture?

 

[grain elevator]

But it's not a line along the film; it's across the width of the film in each frame.
I wonder if you could have got something on one of the rollers in the back of the camera, or on the film, so the film stuck to them in the time it was stationary between one exposure and the next. Then maybe the longer it was there, the stronger the effect. I have no idea what the contamination could be. Maybe even just the combination of dampness in the film with pressure from the roller.
I don't have any cameras that can use 220; what does it look like if you run a 120 film with the back set to 220; might that exert enough extra pressure to do this?

Maybe grease on a roller could do it, just by not letting developer get to the film?

 

[Don_ih]

Is there any trace of any defect on the backing paper?

 

[Kino]

You don't happen to shoot Instax film with an adapter on this camera, do you?

 

[Stanbey]

I've attached a scan of the blemish across the whole width of the film and a detail of where it affects the film number on the side. The seem to be consistently about 85mm apart. If it was something that had affected the film while it was rolled up I would expect them to be about 70mm apart at the start of the roll (I just measured a 120 roll's diameter of the film to be about 22mm so 22*π=69mm) and then getting closer together towards the end of the film. It doesn't feel like anything *on* the negative -- it's not a bump or gunk or anything on the suface of the film.

Getting in touch with Harman is a good idea. I just reached out through the contact form on their website. I referred them to this thread since there was no way to attach photos to the contact form.

 

[Stanbey]

Re backing paper: unfortunately I ditched the paper before I detected the problem so any clue there is lost. It would be really interesting to see if there was any corresponding marks on there!

Re Instax: ... mind ... blown .... I had no idea that was possible ... or that anyone would even dream such a thing ... until I just Googled it.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Welcome to Photrio!

 

[Kino]

Re Instax: ... mind ... blown .... I had no idea that was possible ... or that anyone would even dream such a thing ... until I just Googled it.

OK, scratch that idea. Thought maybe some pod goo wound-up on a roller, but nope...

 

[koraks]

But it's not a line along the film; it's across the width of the film in each frame.

Sorry, I missed that; you're right.

This is an odd problem for sure. Yeah, maybe backing paper related, although it generally doesn't come in such a selective pattern. And the mild arc/radius also doesn't quite add up.

 

[MattKing]

It almost looks like the result of an oil leak in your camera!

 

[pentaxuser]

Was this D100 the last film you shot on this camera?. If it was then maybe some in-camera fault has arisen on that film which is unrelated to that film. Have you take and developed other films since and were these OK? If it wasn't the last film and those developed after that film are OK then whatever it was that caused the issue seems to have disappeared on whatever the next film was

pentaxuser

 

[Luckless]

I don't have a Pentax 6x7, but based on what I'm seeing in this video:

Phttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZpfIQLVU4zY&ab_channel=Nico%27sPhotographyShow

I would check the two rollers next to the spools.

Those look like they align roughly with the spacing on your negatives either before or after exposure.

Can't tell if they might have been transferring something that interfered with development, or it was a soft emulsion on that roll that was damaged by sitting against them between shots, but if you can line up the damage with a part you can start narrowing the actual cause down.

 

[MattKing]

This could indeed be due to "Oily rollers". "Oily rollers" sounds like either:
1) a Scottish pop rock band known for their worldwide teen idol popularity in the 1970s ( ); or
2) an explanation for what is causing your problem.
Most likely, it is the roller contacting the frames before they are advanced to lining up with the film gate.

 

[BAC1967]

Was it hot and humid there when you shot the roll? Did you go from cool Air conditioning to hot and humid? Could be condensation on the rollers.

 

[mshchem]

It would be on other films if this was oil. I would get with Ilford. Looks like a defect. MHOFWIW. Camera should be serviced if frame counter is whacked.

 

[snusmumriken]

Was it hot and humid there when you shot the roll? Did you go from cool Air conditioning to hot and humid? Could be condensation on the rollers.

To me, that seems the most plausible explanation so far: emulsion sitting against one of those rollers in the camera and getting slightly stuck because it’s damp. Maybe there are some more clues. Can you work out which frames would have been taken shortly after the previous one, and which ones involved the film sitting longer against a roller?

 

[koraks]

To me, that seems the most plausible explanation so far: emulsion sitting against one of those rollers in the camera and getting slightly stuck because it’s damp.

I concur.

 

[Don_ih]

Why would there be condensation on the rollers and not on the inside element of the lens, which has much more air flowing behind it? If there was enough condensation to do that repeatedly frame after frame, the photos would also not be sharp due to condensation on the back of the lens.

Far more likely the film itself had been subjected to the condensation and was, as a result, a bit sticky. So maybe it was frozen then unwrapped before it thawed in a humid location.

 

[mshchem]

Why would there be condensation on the rollers and not on the inside element of the lens, which has much more air flowing behind it? If there was enough condensation to do that repeatedly frame after frame, the photos would also not be sharp due to condensation on the back of the lens.

Far more likely the film itself had been subjected to the condensation and was, as a result, a bit sticky. So maybe it was frozen then unwrapped before it thawed in a humid location.

Exactly. For the rollers to condense significant amounts of water (greater than the rest of the innards) it would need to have refrigerant passing through. Sticky film, maybe.
Call Ilford.

 

[Dustin McAmera]

The OP mentions developing two rolls together. Was the other roll also the same Delta 100? That would weigh against it being the film's fault.

 

[loccdor]

How many rolls of film have you put through the camera?

How was this film stored immediately before you loaded it?

It looks like the film was shot in China, which could point to potentially hot and humid shooting conditions. Perhaps they could have caused roller lubricant to flow and coat the rollers to a degree greater than you would have experienced shooting somewhere colder?

In any case, I would clean the rollers and the film path with isopropyl and a q tip.

 

[Stanbey]

Thanks for all the thoughts and suggestions folks. I have contacted Ilford and will report back here if/when they get back to me.

Sticky rollers was my first thought as well, but then the thing about rollers is that they roll.... I would expect any gunk from them to be spread on the film, not stamped in a neat vertical band. I suppose if there is something on the roller that damages the film in proportion to how long it is in contact with the film then that would explain a lot: photos that were taken in quickly after a previous shot would have no line on them while parts of the film that were stationary in contact with the roller for a long time before being moved into the image area would have very bad damage.

Also, I think this is indeed the last film that came out of the camera, so if something has gone wrong just before that film was put in it would explain why it is the only one affected so far... and would imply that the current film in the camera is going to have the same problem when I finally finish it and develop it. The time-in-contact theory would also predict that the next shot I take will be maximally damaged, since the film has been sitting stationary in the camera for a couple of weeks now. So that is clearly the next step in the investigation.

If it is something on the roller, I have no idea WHAT that could be. It was not particularly humid and I wasn't loading the camera while hanging around in any Weird And Dangerous Chemical Factories.

One idea that just occurred to me: if the coating on the roller is somehow disintegrating/flaking maybe purely due to age (and perhaps related to the winding/film-position issue I mentioned) then maybe when the film sits in contact with the roller for a prolonged time bits of that coating accrete on the film and then block the light from reaching the film or (more likely given the effect on the film number in the edge) block the developer from reaching the film, before being washed off later in the process. If that hypothesis is correct then taking the current film out of the camera and thoroughly pre-washing it before developing would be interesting: we should see that film edge is undamaged but maybe there is a slightly different-looking banding through the image where the light was (partially?) blocked but the developer was not.

Thanks again everyone. I'll certainly report back when I have more information.