The mystery of my Leica IIIF + Blue cast on frame edge

[RoboRepublic]

Hi folks,
Having some trouble with negatives out of my Leica IIIF. I shot 4 rolls, one in the Pentax MX, and 3 with the Leica IIIF. . The rolls out of the Leica is exhibiting odd blue casts on the edge of the frames. Here are the facts I have on hand:

- All four rolls were processed in the same Jobo 1500 tank
- They often have sprocket shaped casts but not always.
- Some Leica frames are 100% okay
- There is no evidence of this happening on b+w film (trix /delta 400)
- The Pentax MX roll did not exhibit this issue at all
- The cast shows up in the same spot on the negative (bottom) no matter the orientation of the negative in the scanner
- The cast shows up in the spot on the negative (bottom) no matter the scanner (v850/ plustek)

Based on this I'm beginning to suspect the camera has some sort of light leak, but its difficult to conclude that because I've been shooting this body since January, in b+w and never experienced this issue.

Please see the attached files of the owl. You can find the full tiff file here: https://filetransfer.io/data-package/ej4sp7DM#link
Thanks for your help!

 

[4season]

Was this the top-most reel in the processing tank? Because I see what appears to be some vertical streaking, which makes me wonder if the film wasn't fully immersed during part of the processing.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Light on the bottom of the negatives means light is coming into the top to the camera door. The cast looks like the light leak is at the top of the film back. Is there some light blocking material missing from the camera body along the top or the top of the film door?

 

[RoboRepublic]

Was this the top-most reel in the processing tank? Because I see what appears to be some vertical streaking, which makes me wonder if the film wasn't fully immersed during part of the processing.

I used a jobo 1500 tank, and 1L of chemistry. There were four reels inside, 3 of which exhibit this, and 1 of which did not. I don't believe it to be missing chemistry, though that would be a simple fix. In addition, I've developed 2 rolls at a time previous to this, also in 1L chems from the same mix, and they too are exhibiting this issue.

 

[RoboRepublic]

Light on the bottom of the negatives means light is coming into the top to the camera door. The cast looks like the light leak is at the top of the film back. Is there some light blocking material missing from the camera body along the top or the top of the film door?

This is my guess as well, but I cannot explain why my BW rolls do not exhibit this issue.

 

[Nicholas Lindan]

My experience is that color processes get their panties in a twist over issues that B&W just shrugs off.

If my processing temperature for B&W was 3 degrees off or the time was 10% off I doubt I would ever notice it in the normal course of things.

 

[250swb]

Light on the bottom of the negatives means light is coming into the top to the camera door. The cast looks like the light leak is at the top of the film back. Is there some light blocking material missing from the camera body along the top or the top of the film door?

This is my guess as well, but I cannot explain why my BW rolls do not exhibit this issue.

It is a Leica IIIF which doesn't have a film door.

 

[gone]

I've had screw mount cameras exhibit light leaks from the top. It usually comes in around the rangefinder window.

Rick Oleson has a handy PDF on the thread below that describes how to look for the leak. As this thread states, there's a gasket up in the RF area, and if it's bad, light leaks will show on the negs.

I don't know that this is your problem, but it wouldn't hurt to ck and see.

Have no luck with Leicas :( / RF light leak - Rangefinderforum.com

This is a good place to discuss the care and repair of your photo gear. You can share Do-It-Yourself repair and maintenance, as well as your recommendations for pro repairs. This new forum was created 4/1/07. PLEASE title your thread wisely, so others searching for a certain make of camera or...

www.rangefinderforum.com

 

[btaylor]

I feel very fortunate that I have not had any light leak problems, especially on the rangefinders as they seem particularly tough to diagnose. Thank you for posting the link to Rick Oleson’s page- if I do have issues in the future that is a very useful resource!
Here is the direct link: http://rick_oleson.tripod.com/lightleak.pdf

 

[btaylor]

http://rick_oleson.tripod.com/lightleak.pdf

 

[Sirius Glass]

It is a Leica IIIF which doesn't have a film door.

Picky, picky a slide of bottom that can leak light on the top edge.

 

[mshchem]

You are shooting TUNGSTEN balanced film in daylight. Daylight is blue.

 

[r_a_feldman]

Both the first and fourth images show the same triangular/trapezoidal shape in the blue area. The right-pointing triangle shows more strongly. The marks repeat every frame. That suggest a light leak in the camera, possibly through the view finder, as noted by Momus.

 

[250swb]

Picky, picky a slide of bottom that can leak light on the top edge.

Not picky at all, particularly as the colour cast is blue/cyan which means the leak can't be coming from the BACK of the camera anyway. (If I need to explain it's because if a leak is coming from the back of the camera it will shine through the film base which makes the leak appear orange).

 

[pentaxuser]

It must be my eyes again but while there may be some sort of a cast on the negatives I cannot see where there is a problem in the negatives and I cannot see why a light leak only affects colour and then only some frames

If the OP had presented these pics and simply asked what we thought of them without any mention of problems I wonder what we would have said?

pentaxuser

 

[r_a_feldman]

@RoboRepublic,
Can you scan the full width of first and fourth images and post those as positives so we can see if the "leak" also affects the sprocket hole area of the film?

 

[r_a_feldman]

Both the first and fourth images show the same triangular/trapezoidal shape in the blue area. The right-pointing triangle shows more strongly. The marks repeat every frame. That suggest a light leak in the camera, possibly through the view finder, as noted by Momus.

Looking at the image of the negative attached to the original post (owls_11.tif), I now think some of the artifacts are due to a liquid. The marks I noted (to the left of "A" and "B" in the attached image) are not the same distance from the edge of the frame ("A" is at slightly a greater distance than "B"). In area C, the edge of the artifact is not straight, but raises slightly from right to left. The two areas pointed to by "D", which are along the lower edge of the right artifact, have dark "particles".

These observations still do not explain the blue cast, which -- as mshchem noted -- could be from daylight shining on the tungsten-balanced film.

 

[250swb]

There is some sort of hard edge repeating pattern/artefact showing up which isn't the sort of thing a liquid or a light leak would make on the negative, it almost looks like the pattern you'd get from torn Sellotape.

 

[RoboRepublic]

Really appreciate your diligence- the liquidy junk A/B/D, you folks see on the bottom is very likely due to the tap water thats present in my tap. I've since switched to a final rinse in distilled water, and that helps things alot.
Daylight on tungsten film would make sense, however the fifth frame is Vision 250D, daylight balanced.
I will attempt a scan of the sprockets as requested- appreciate you going into the TIFF!

Ali

Looking at the image of the negative attached to the original post (owls_11.tif), I now think some of the artifacts are due to a liquid. The marks I noted (to the left of "A" and "B" in the attached image) are not the same distance from the edge of the frame ("A" is at slightly a greater distance than "B"). In area C, the edge of the artifact is not straight, but raises slightly from right to left. The two areas pointed to by "D", which are along the lower edge of the right artifact, have dark "particles".

These observations still do not explain the blue cast, which -- as mshchem noted -- could be from daylight shining on the tungsten-balanced film.


View attachment 314206

 

[RoboRepublic]

There is some sort of hard edge repeating pattern/artefact showing up which isn't the sort of thing a liquid or a light leak would make on the negative, it almost looks like the pattern you'd get from torn Sellotape.

The repetitive patterns, and lines, are likely the squeegee stuttering over length of neg. I haven't gotten my technique down right, and I don't love using the squeegee, but I am having a really hard time (even with distilled) to remove drying marks. The brave effort to eradicate this plague continues.. but not the biggest concern. yet

 

[RoboRepublic]

@RoboRepublic,
Can you scan the full width of first and fourth images and post those as positives so we can see if the "leak" also affects the sprocket hole area of the film?

I'm not sure if you meant the fourth positive (the lady walking up the paved path), or fourth image (traffic lights) but here are some more scans, uncorrected, and edited.

 

[r_a_feldman]

Hmm. In the last strip (the KI 75) the orange light leaks are regularly spaced, but not aligned with the image. To me, that suggests a light leak in the film cassette. Do you use Leica cassettes in your IIIf? If so, it/they might be be leaking light. Also, curiously, the larger orange light leak is at the top of the image, while the blue cast leaks are at the bottom and are wider/less localized.

Do you bulk load your film? That could be another culprit.

Edit: Looking more at your scans of the negative strips, I now see faint light leaks at the TOP of the Cinestill strip, which I hadn't noticed before. I was looking at the faint haze at the bottom, as in the Owl picture.

 

[RoboRepublic]

The cinestill is factory loaded. The KI emulsion is bulk loaded. I will count the sprocket distance, for the orange leak. I attributed it to the pattereon reel it went on. The roller balls on the reel tend to mark all my negatives (135/120) with this sort of pattern. The cinestill can was loaded on a job reel which is much more forgiving on the ribbon.
I suspected the bulk loader or cans up until the cinestill can.

 

[RoboRepublic]

also i'm using ilford cassettes, not leica ones.

 

[250swb]

also i'm using ilford cassettes, not leica ones.

But what you are showing now isn't as clearly defined as your first postings, in that you haven't even focused in on what people are drawing to your attention. It makes it frustrating when the lines are redrawn again and again..