Shutterfinger, thanks for the reply . . . a sticky shutter does not explain the 4th exposure down from the top . . . where the exposure changes in the middle of the image ??Typical of a shutter needing servicing, speeds slow the first few cycles then start freeing up and running correctly after some use. Said shutter may run fine in warm weather (60°F/15°C) but gets slower in colder weather until several operations have occurred. Also know as your equipment lying to you.
Part of your problem is a serious light leak. The light seals in Hasselblad backs go bad and need replaced, and yours looks like it has reached that point. Notice how the edges are fogged, too?
Yes, chriscrawfordphoto . . . I agree, I need to replace the light seals, but this does not explain what I am asking about which is evident in the 4th exposure down from the top . . note that the is a demarcation line where it appears that there is a difference of 2 stops or so of exposure on the same image.Part of your problem is a serious light leak. The light seals in Hasselblad backs go bad and need replaced, and yours looks like it has reached that point. Notice how the edges are fogged, too?
Yes, chriscrawfordphoto . . . I agree, I need to replace the light seals, but this does not explain what I am asking about which is evident in the 4th exposure down from the top . . note that the is a demarcation line where it appears that there is a difference of 2 stops or so of exposure on the same image.
Hmmm, I think you're rightThe demarcation line goes out into the edges of the film, beyond the image. It is not an exposure issue. That's where it began leaking light.
no clue what your strangeness is caused by
but i am sure a qualified repair person would
be able to figure it out. might cost some $$$ to get
it fixed, after all its a 'blad ... to me it looks like
a timing belt issue, or you threw a rod and need a valve job.
but im talking air cooled, and your's has a radiator.
at least you don't have to send it back to sweden !oh, a comedian . . .don't quit your day job. I'm trying to avoid a $300 minimum "qualified repair person" WTF is wrong with you? :/
LOL! Thanks for the reply anyway!at least you don't have to send it back to sweden !
LOL . . yeah that's what I thought but my dog was very content (and asleep) next to the wood stove.The evidence (clues) show:
1. Uneven exposure beginning in middle half of a single frame, which continues on to successive frames..
2. Area outside the image region is also light-struck.
3. Dark area seems consistent across the width of the film.
Taken together, I think this eliminates a shutter issue and even a rear baffle issue.
I see only one photo of three that seemed to be posted. What do the other rolls look like?
If I didn't know better, I'd say that when you stepped out of the room, your dog knocked the developing tank on its side for 30 seconds, letting some developer spill out, and then out of kindness placed the tank upright before you came back.
Thanks for the reply glbeas . . . but, Nope, Didn't happen.It looks to me like someone popped the back open for a quick peek then closed it after seeing the film.
(Dont ask me how I know this)
If the camera is ok, then the other possibility is fogging during handling and processing. If you processed other rolls in the darkroom session that came out ok, that would tend to point to the camera.Respectfully Guys . . . . I would expect a light leak on the Film Magazine to be much more pronounced on the dark slide side of the negative . . . this is evenly dispersed across the negative . . . Although the magazine may need light seals, I ~Don't~ think that is what I am seeing here. I have had magazines with light leaks,, they do not look anything like what I'm seeing here, this is new
The film was loaded onto the developing reel in the darkroom with NO light, then put into the developing tank . . ., What you see as the leader is actually the first three exposures on the roll . . . messes with your head, doesn't it . . . FWIW it was an Omega 2 reel tank https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/prod...z_2yKGgnB734q4nIz2dEZKAl15ZpFY8hoCVesQAvD_BwEThe film was fogged, probably out of the camera, as it goes out in the rebate and is uniform across. Light seal leaks are localized and very characteristic, not uniform. Shutter issues are in the film gate only, and there is obvious fogging inside the frame.
Why is the leader exposed (bottom of the picture)? Hand processed film should be loaded in the dark, and there should be no exposed leader. Machine processed sometime gets exposes when they use a processing cassette and cannot turn off the lights loading the cassette.
I'm assuming you processed at home, what processing tank did you use? Did you unroll the paper leader in daylight to start loading the spool? It looks like the leader got exposed, and that half of the film got fogged during that time.
...
Like I said in original post, three rolls . . . same issue. Pretty sure these are all same magazine same body.
...
That state of the art light table fooled me.a sticky shutter does not explain the 4th exposure down from the top . . . where the exposure changes in the middle of the image ??
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?