Weirdest negative. Hasselblad back problem?

fredekblad · Jul 17, 2016

Hi all,

I have had some problems before with my Hasselblad 500 C/M but sent it and it's lenses to reapair a couple of times and made some repairs myself as well, nothing fancy. I really love the camera and have a history with it so I'm very fond of it, but I'm starting thinking of letting it go because I can't stand all the problems..So this is kind of a last shot to see if anyone can identify my new problem and hopefully tell me its an easy fix because I'm travelling soon for a long period and want a medium format with me.

So, sorry for the long introduction, here is first problem. I processed my rolls from my last trip and noticed the weirdest negative ever. I've had many cameras with light leaks before but whats up with those sharp, defined edges? Any ideas what this is?

Second problem is the white edges inside the frame. On the second image I uploaded you can see it very easy on the upper part of the frame. Whats that about?

I just took a photo of it with my phone, hope thats good enough.

Here it is:

And here is an unedited version of the neg if thats better/easier in some way:

gone · Jul 17, 2016

That's unlikely to be a light leak. It appears as if the emulsion has been pulled off somehow, or there is something between the film and the lens blocking things.

fredekblad · Jul 17, 2016

momus said:
That's unlikely to be a light leak. It appears as if the emulsion has been pulled off somehow, or there is something between the film and the lens blocking things.

That's actually kind of a relief. Or maybe I should be terrified haha? Any indication that it happened in camera? Since I will be travelling soon I moved all my stuff including negatives today so I don't have it in my hand at the moment..An emulsion that has been pulled of somehow is likely to be seen when holding the negative in just my hand i guess?

Thanks for your reply!

rwreich · Jul 17, 2016

Could it be an odd double exposure?

shutterfinger · Jul 17, 2016

Inspect the auxiliary shutter for any loose sections that could fold over into the film path.
Any other frames on the roll affected similarly? The bowed edge suggest the film was bulked or bowed, not laying flat.

fredekblad · Jul 17, 2016

rwreich said:
Could it be an odd double exposure?

One of my first thoughts, but after I inspected it a bit closer I can't see how that could be since there is an even grey without any details but has those rough edges which should show some kind of detail from the landscape i guess..hmm.

fredekblad · Jul 17, 2016

shutterfinger said:
Inspect the auxiliary shutter for any loose sections that could fold over into the film path.
Any other frames on the roll affected similarly? The bowed edge suggest the film was bulked or bowed, not laying flat.

Will look into that in the coming days when visiting the place where I put all my stuff. No only that frame. BUT, I've never had those lines of light in-between almost every frame as you can see. Maybe that is occurring because of the same problem.

jerrybro · Jul 17, 2016

Looks like a double exposure to me.

fredekblad · Jul 17, 2016

jerrybro said:
Looks like a double exposure to me.

Since you're the second one to say this I will do a proper scan of the negative asap and take a closer look. It's not impossible because I know i changed back somewhere around this frame to a back with color film in it. It would really be a relief!

Thank you all for your replies, I will get back when i've looked at the camera and negative after reading your posts.
Thanks for now!

cramej · Jul 17, 2016

jerrybro said:
Looks like a double exposure to me.

wiltw · Jul 17, 2016

Absolutely NOT a light leak, with such hard (sharply defined) irregularly conforming edges.

winger · Jul 17, 2016

I'll chime in to make it three or four - it looks like a double exposure to me, too. It looks like there could be an icy shot layered with the town shot.

Sirius Glass · Jul 17, 2016

rwreich said:
Could it be an odd double exposure?

jerrybro said:
Looks like a double exposure to me.

It still looks like a double exposure.

Kirks518 · Jul 17, 2016

At first I thought double exposure, then I didn't. Then I looked really closely at the person walking in the middle, and you can see his leg (I believe) through a rock. So, I'm voting double exposure. But the missing emulsion theory gets my secondary vote, but I would expect all of the image to be gone if that were the case.

AgX · Jul 17, 2016

My first thought was that of a double exposure. With one being a lake.

And I'm still inclined to some water/ice/snow surface.

AgX · Jul 17, 2016

A development-hampering emulsion-contact would have had a different border line.

A density-adding emulsion transfer, would not have been exactly limited to the image frame.

paul ron · Jul 17, 2016

i dont work on hassies n im not familiar with them but from what i see in your photo it appears to be a layer of the shutter is peeling. i saw this before in another focal plane shutter where the material was separating from the rubberized face. it flopped around n sometimes into the light path as it was cycling an exposure.

take the lens n back off and fire the shutter to see the condition of the shutter material fro both sides?

the bowed line is an idication the roller at the film gate is not holding the film in place or the preasure plate moved somehow.

oh also check for a runaway film tab inside the camera? that too can be bouncing around causing havoc.

AgX · Jul 17, 2016

Seperating shutter-material laid on the film during exposure would yield zero density on that part of the film, but not increased density.

monst · Jul 18, 2016

focal plain shutter on a 500C?

bdial · Jul 18, 2016

A double exposure seems like the most likely cause, given that you switched backs at one point. Is frame 12 OK or does it have some weirdness too?

railwayman3 · Jul 18, 2016

Since the irregular shape doesn't extend into the margins, I'd agree with the double exposure theory. Perhaps accidently pressing the shutter at some point, without realising.

fredekblad · Jul 18, 2016

Ok so I've looked at the camera and negative from what you all have said and this is what I can see:

- The pressure plate looks good and same as on the other backs.
- The auxiliary shutter works like a charm.
- All mechanics, shutter etc on all lenses work as it should.
- The negative is not scratched or indicating somehow that the emulsion was pulled of.
- Looking closer at the negative I can see, like some of you also mentioned, that there are some parts that extend into each other like that house to the right (that you might not be able to see is a house on these low quality pictures).

Regarding the bowed edge, that's from not holding the negative flat when taking the picture with my phone. The frame lines is perfectly straight.

So the only thing left is the grey line on top of the frame. More visible on the negative picture. It's not in the picture but outside the frame, if that's a lead. I checked the pressure plate and it's good. Any thoughts about that?

Thank you all for your help, really appreciate it!

cramej · Jul 18, 2016

Really - it is a double exposure. The gray line a the top of the negative is most likely due to some misalignment when the second shot was made or a little bleed from bright sky outside the frame.

AgX · Jul 18, 2016

I did not notice that line before, but now I see it at three frame-divisions.
Here my first thought was that of light leak just affecting the part where the film is bent on the rollers. But I know too little on Hasselblad backs to say anything substantial...

RalphLambrecht · Jul 18, 2016

can't help but can tell you not to give up. my Hasselblads(3 501cs) are the most reliable cameras I own.They have only failed me once in 20 years of use when a seal in a film back was ripped by the dark slide

Weirdest negative. Hasselblad back problem?

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency