Uneven edge markings on hp5+ 120

[likemarlonbrando]

I shot a few rolls of hp5 this weekend and 3 of the rolls have uneven edge markings that go into the image area. Never seen this before, but scary. It makes me want to shoot tri-x, I always shot tri-x before but switched to hp5 because it is cheaper...

 

[anfenglin]

I've have these quite a lot and never worry about them to be honest. I develop my film myself and my guess is that this has something to do with the spools. Maybe the developer or fixer doesn't get all the way to the edge of the film and that is causing the black areas.
I never worry about them because I never see them in my scanned pictures. Even when printing you can cut them off easily.
I've also had this "problem" with all kinds of film, not only hp5.

 

[likemarlonbrando]

Anfenglin, I wasn't referring to the dark marks on the edge, that is just a little light that got on the edge of the film. I am referring to the words "ilford hp5 plus" that is raised higher than normal on some images and goes into the image area.

 

[37th Exposure]

I shoot both Kodak and Ilford film. The edge markings look normal to me. It probably has to do with film alignment variations on different cameras and manufacturing tolerances of the film imprinting. I notice this too with various film/camera combinations I have used. As long as it doesn't cause you to lose an image.... I never have in some 25 years of shooting 120. Did you use a Fuji GF670 or Voigtlander Bessa 3?

 

[goros]

That is something I also have experienced. It has happened to me with two cameras, a Mamiya RZ67 and a Hasselblad, and I think it is more an operator (me) problem than an equipment or film deffect.

 

[Ian C]

We sometimes see this with 120 Ilford films. 120 backing paper is necessarily wider than the film it protects. The machinery that unites the film and backing paper sometime offsets the film to one side and this is the result.

It produces different-width edge margins. This is clearly seen in the 3rd and 4th strips of the first roll.

I have seen this with some 120 Ilford films in my Mamiya RZ67 and using several different film backs. I have never seen this with Kodak or Fuji 120 films. This is a small annoyance, but it does no harm.

This was discussed in the following thread in April 2014:

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

 

[BrianShaw]

Two thoughts:

1: Could be a camera issue where the film path/gate isn't registering the film precisely over the length of the roll. What camera was used?

2: What is the consequence? This intrusion is so small and in an area normally cropped anyway.

I've seen that before on an old TLR but after having the camera serviced it stopped.

 

[ic-racer]

I don't know of any medium format cameras that show that much of the image area in the viewfinder. This is good because, when printing, the blades need to overlap the projected image to make a sharp white border. If you want to print what you didn't see in the viewfinder with a black border, then those marks on the film edge will show.

 

[AgX]

We sometimes see this with 120 Ilford films. 120 backing paper is necessarily wider than the film it protects. The machinery that unites the film and backing paper sometime offsets the film to one side and this is the result.

It produces different-width edge margins. This is clearly seen in the 3rd and 4th strips of the first roll.

What we see above (If I see it right...) is something else. It is that the margin between the edge of the film and the letters varies.
Such is a manufacture fault/irregularity.


It would be beneficial though if we could get images that are larger in scale or uploaded in way that we can enlarge them.

 

[Kirks518]

What we see above (If I see it right...) is something else. It is that the margin between the edge of the film and the letters varies.
Such is a manufacture fault/irregularity.


It would be beneficial though if we could get images that are larger in scale or uploaded in way that we can enlarge them.

I see it too. And thank you for paying attention to what the OP was questioning. So often people don't actually read the problem(s) in question, and automatically it becomes either "Operator Error" or "Your camera is the problem".

With the concern in question, which is that the imprinting (Ilford HP5) of the rebate is uneven from one frame to the next, and is placed inside the image area. This is certainly a manufacturing issue, and not caused by the operator or the camera. I would send this to Ilford, and at the very least get a replacement roll (or two).

 

[BrianShaw]

I wonder what the established manufacturing spec tolerances are for edge marking.

 

[mooseontheloose]

Anfenglin, I wasn't referring to the dark marks on the edge, that is just a little light that got on the edge of the film. I am referring to the words "ilford hp5 plus" that is raised higher than normal on some images and goes into the image area.

That's strange - I'll need to look at the 30 odd rolls of HP5+ I just developed to see if I have the same issues. I didn't notice anything as I was sleeving the film, but I wasn't looking for this problem either. Some of the text goes quite high into the image area - I can see how annoying that would be, especially if you print full frame.

 

[rwreich]

I see it and I've recently noticed the same issue on some 120 HP5+ that I developed last night.

 

[pentaxuser]

Besides the problem mentioned, what are the lines running through most if not all the frames in the top third that no-one seems to have mentioned? These look much more serious problems to me.

pentaxuser

 

[BrianShaw]

Besides the problem mentioned, what are the lines running through most if not all the frames in the top third that no-one seems to have mentioned? These look much more serious problems to me.

pentaxuser

Reflection from the PrintFile sleeve; the film is curled. The pics appear to be digital camera images of sleeved negs on a light table.

 

[likemarlonbrando]

Thank you to those who understand the problem correctly and do think this is an issue. It isn't the end of the world, just a bit of an annoyance. I will contact Ilford about it as it is a manufacturing issue. I guess for more important things ill shoot tri-x until this issue is solved.

@pentaxuser Are you referring to the reflection of the lights?
@37th Exposure it is a Voigtlander Bessa III 667

 

[pentaxuser]

Reflection from the PrintFile sleeve; the film is curled. The pics appear to be digital camera images of sleeved negs on a light table.

Thanks for that. I can only presume that everyone here except me knew that these were non existent problems. Might have been worth a mention by the OP but then again if I am in a minority of one maybe not. There's no place on an analogue forum for a digital ignoramus as they say

pentaxuser

 

[BrianShaw]

...
@37th Exposure it is a Voigtlander Bessa III 667

So what are the exact dimensions of the film gate on the Bessa? As I said earlier (and appears to be discounted as irrelevant, thank you very much) I had this problem with a camera once - a Rolleicord. The film transport mechanism was binding and not tracking well. Never had that problem with a Hassy, but the Rollei appears to have a slightly larger film gate aperture... making it more susceptible to this kind of encroachment of edge marking.

 

[BrianShaw]

Thanks for that. I can only presume that everyone here except me knew that these were non existent problems. Might have been worth a mention by the OP but then again if I am in a minority of one maybe not. There's no place on an analogue forum for a digital ignoramus as they say

pentaxuser

I looked twice and thrice before figuring that out.

 

[likemarlonbrando]

@BrianShaw and everyone else who thinks this is a camera issue, look closely at this you will see the ilford printing is flush with the bottom on the left image and raised going into the image on the right negative. There is no way for this to happen in camera or during developing. This happened at ilford when the film markings were exposed on the film.

I have shot many, many rolls of film with this camera and many others, I know how the image should be on the film and that isn't an issue, yes it sits a little low on the film with this camera... that is not the issue at hand.

 

[pentaxuser]

Thank you to those who understand the problem correctly and do think this is an issue. It isn't the end of the world, just a bit of an annoyance. I will contact Ilford about it as it is a manufacturing issue. I guess for more important things ill shoot tri-x until this issue is solved.

@pentaxuser Are you referring to the reflection of the lights?
@37th Exposure it is a Voigtlander Bessa III 667

There was a time not so long ago that a Mr S Galley would have beaten you to it and invited you to submit your film to Ilford and told all of us whether Ilford QC had reported any kind of issue thereby maybe preventing you from considering another company's product and others who were/are about to buy HP5+ .

Let us know what Ilford say. If it is a manufacturing problem then I'd be surprised if yours is the only film affected. Given the speed the lines run at, it may be an awful lot of films

pentaxuser

 

[BrianShaw]

I believe that you may be missing the point I'm trying to make. Yes, we see that the "Ilford HP5 Plus" is at different positions. That is undeniable and rather obvious. The point I'm trying to make is that it may be within acceptable film manufacturing tolerances and your camera may be pushing those limits. Nobody yet has been able to address the engineering aspects of this camera-film interaction. But I can say I've seen it before when there has been an incursion and I've seen it more often when there hasn't. That's my experience whether you want to accept it or not. Your Bessa appears to frame the image low on the film; the rebates are not equally sized. The other point I'm trying to make is that .5mm isn't going to make or break yours or my photos. Some of these types of threads in which film artifacts are shown but little related data/information is presented make me think that we are starting to eat our own... why piss all over Ilford too quickly for a nit when they are one of the few remaining film manufacturers??? Ilford is a quite well-honed act, after all. I'd be shocked to hear Ilford say that this is a manufacturing problem. I do expect, however, that they may send you some film as a goodwill gesture. I eagerly await your report of their response.

 

[BrianShaw]

... but since I have some time on my hands I'll go look at some of my negs to see if they show any variation in marking height like yours. I know for sure that I've not noticed image area incursion with a Hassy.

 

[likemarlonbrando]

ahh thank you for clearing that up @BrianShaw. While I do hear what you are saying, I have never seen this much of a variance before and I believe it is beyond the reasonable expectation for consumers no matter what the tolerances of their standard is.

 

[MattKing]

I would contact Ilford/Harman about this. You can use their website and you could also start an APUG "conversation" (formerly Private Message") with their representatives here on APUG - Harman Tech Service.

That being said, it appears to me that your camera has a very large film gate. I don't think any of my medium format cameras leave such narrow areas outside the image. It may be that the movement of the edge printing is within standard tolerances, but the camera requires more narrow than standard tolerances.