What caused these lines through my entire 35mm negative strip?

[smiba]

Hi everyone,

My film has these really nasty wavy lines going through the whole strip. It doesn't look to be damaged and its the actual emulsion that contains the error. This line is not limited to exposed parts, but its the entire film.

Is this an issue in how I handled the film? Development issue? Has the film (Cinestill 800T) been manufactured incorrectly?

Please judge:

More pictures (including the unmodified negatives) can be found here: https://owncloud.bartstuff.eu/index.php/s/FgGR6dWrYVg4NqE

What happened?

 

[runswithsizzers]

Was this film processed by a lab or did you develop it yourself?

I am thinking if something in camera or lab processing transport mechanics left marks, the lines would be more straight. The only thing I can think of that might leave wavy lines would be if something was used to "squeegee" the film by hand (?) Just guessing.

 

[smiba]

Processed it myself, couldn't have been the loading of the film because at best in my paterson tank it could've hurt the sides.

I did use a squeegee, but that would leave actual marks right? The film itself looks undamaged by my naked eye, its just the emulsion.
Probably unlikely it was the squeegee though as on this film I slipped half-way through and continued again. I'd assume if anything damaging was on the squeegee I'd see a major change half-way through the film. Its like this from exact beginning to start

 

[cramej]

Those have been exposed by light, they're not mechanical marks.

 

[AgX]

Yes, fogging by blue light. But how??

 

[smiba]

Those have been exposed by light, they're not mechanical marks.

Thats what I've been thinking, any idea what kind of environment would cause these kind of leaks? I've shot many rolls with this camera (Minolta X-700) and replaced the seals on it a few months ago. Loaded and unloaded the film in low light.

Yes, fogging by blue light. But how??

Keep in mind its Tungsten balanced film, so I guess if it has been hit by bright white (5500K etc.) it might turn blue-ish
Maybe this has happened in manufacturing? They need to re-spool the 35mm source film onto a 35mm canister

 

[railwayman3]

Those have been exposed by light, they're not mechanical marks.

If the OP is satisfied that these are not mechanical marks on either emulsion or base (not doubting the OP, but maybe a check with a strong magnifier would be worthwhile?), it must be light fogging. But ir must be a very small source of light ? Sort of pinhole or small LED sized ? Or an image of a light source ? Unlikely to be in camera, so probably in manufacture ?

 

[runswithsizzers]

Unless you also posted <this> on Reddit, you are not alone.

 

[eli griggs]

If these are physical scratches, they will be viewable on the film itself, and you might as well take the frame with the most visible example and check it out, including lightly dragging your fingernail over the surface, perpendicular to the lines.

If there is a scratch, you will feel it.

The image is trashed, (or is it) so you've nothing to loose.

Check the tank for a crack in the dark with a strong white light inside the mouth of it,

IMO.

 

[runswithsizzers]

I assume you developed on a reel, in a tank, right? Do you load the film onto the reels in a darkroom, or do you use a film changing bag?

 

[cramej]

It kind of looks like the shutter was stuck open a bit while rewinding...the x700 has a horizontal travel shutter the lines are continuous along the film and not broken. Maybe a piece of film caused it to stick. If something happened in the tank, they would not be so consistent along the entire length.


Edit: Now that I read the Reddit post above, it seems that these are nearly identical. The F301 on Reddit has a vertical travel shutter so it can't be that the shutter was stuck open. Most likely a manufacturing(packaging) issue. Wouldn't surprise me if someone at Cinestill left their phone on the counter while winding.

 

[smiba]

Unless you also posted <this> on Reddit, you are not alone.

Thats not me, but it looks like they have the exact same issue!
I have more 800T film in the cooler from this exact same batch (and one in the camera at the moment), kinda nervous and wondering if its even worth finishing this roll because of the risk.

If these are physical scratches, they will be viewable on the film itself, and you might as well take the frame with the most visible example and check it out, including lightly dragging your fingernail over the surface, perpendicular to the lines.
If there is a scratch, you will feel it.

Can't feel it, underneath this post I've uploaded some pictures from underneath a microscope, they look like to be the emulsion.

Check the tank for a crack in the dark with a strong white light inside the mouth of it,

I developed a roll of 120 film right after this 35mm, it came out correct. (Both ISO 800), Never had this issue before in the same tank.

I assume you developed on a reel, in a tank, right? Do you load the film onto the reels in a darkroom, or do you use a film changing bag?

Developed on a reel in a tank yes, I loaded it into the reel in a film changing bag. The room was just dimly lit and it was dark outside.

-----

I've made some pictures underneath a microscope for everyone to check, this lights from the top (and not from the bottom as would be most convenient for pictures, but I have this microscope for non-photographic reasons)
Also sorry about the dust, but I couldn't really care too much to keep this strip dust-free.
The mechanical scratches are from my Pakon F-135 scanner which I still need to fully correct, these only are visible due to the strong light and don't show up on scans. (But yes, I know! Working on it )



Not the first time having issues with Cinestil 800T though, this one had light leaks on the first few frames. But it did result in a kinda cool effect
https://www.flickr.com/photos/smiba11/49278847103

 

[eli griggs]

If you are in doubt about the film, exchange it for something more reliable, and try to get a refund from the store/maker, otherwise, process a short roll of B&W in the same tank, reel and top and see if it has the same markings.

IMO.

 

[glbeas]

The fact that the streak is weaving around a bit points away from a camera causing it. It looks like its from a wiping motion, maybe a contaminant getting wiped onto the film. The last images the film looks pretty rough like it was mishandled and abraded as well. Did that happen after processing?

 

[runswithsizzers]

IF the lines were caused by light contamination, then it could have happened either:
A. During the manufacturing process (before it went into the cartridge at Cinestill). Supporting this theory is at least one other example (link, post #8)

B. In the camera. IF caused by a light leak in the camera, it would have most likly have been during the rewind process (lines go across all frames, including the gaps between frames). If it happened in the camera, I would expect the lines to be more straight than they are. I don't think it's very likely that the lines were generated in the camera.

C. In the changing bag. First, I assume you do not wear an iWatch or an analog watch with a luminous dial while loading film(?) The lines might possibly be consistant with a pinhole in the changing bag letting light streak across the film as it was wound on the reel? But if you're like me, the process of wrapping the film onto the reel includes several stops and starts and checks - so I would expect the lines to vary more in brightness and width and position as the film is moved around.

D. In the tank. I don't think so. A leak in the tank would result in one end of the film getting much more exposure than the other end.

So, *IF* caused by exposure to light, the most like theory to me is A. It's also the most easily proved. Have a lab process the next roll, which would rule out B and C. And if you have another film camera, you could rule out B as well.

 

[AgX]

It looks like its from a wiping motion, maybe a contaminant getting wiped onto the film.

With a fogging contaminant one could easily explain the blue kind of the fogging.

However to me the shape of those stripes are not to explain by applying a contaminant. That is why I called it light- and not chemical-fogging.
Though, if someone comes up with a good explanation of such application...

 

[smiba]

The last images the film looks pretty rough like it was mishandled and abraded as well. Did that happen after processing?

Oh yeah that's likely after processing. My scanner (Pakon F-135) has some very slight issues with its take-in mechanism which causes small scratches (These are not deep enough to show up on scans).
They look very extreme on the shots because the light is being reflected off the film instead of through (as usually would be the case)

The scanner had some issues scanning the film because the lines going through had it confused where to split frames. This meant the film went 4 times through the troubled take-in mechanism.

Also because its ruined I didn't take too much care about it, I just kinda put it on my bench where the microscope is at. Might have contributed slightly as well.

IF the lines were caused by light contamination, then it could have happened either:
A. During the manufacturing process (before it went into the cartridge at Cinestill). Supporting this theory is at least one other example (link, post #8)

B. In the camera. IF caused by a light leak in the camera, it would have most like been during the rewind process (lines go across all frames, including the gaps between frames). If it happened in the camera, I would expect the lines to be more straight than they are. I don't think it's very likely that the lines were generated in the camera.

C. In the changing bag. First, I assume you do not wear an iWatch or an analog watch with a luminous dial while loading film(?) The lines might possibly be consistant with a pinhole in the changing bag letting light streak across the film as it was wound on the reel? But if you're like me, the process of wrapping the film onto the reel includes several stops and starts and checks - so I would expect the lines to vary more in brightness and width and position as the film is moved around.

D. In the tank. I don't think so. A leak in the tank would result in one end of the film getting much more exposure than the other end.

So, *IF* caused by exposure to light, the most like theory to me is A. It's also the most easily proved. Have a lab process the next roll, which would rule out B and C. And if you have another film camera, you could rule out B as well.

B: I've had many shots run through this camera, which never had this issue. I'm planning on just developing the Cinestill 800T thats in there right now (With just 12 shots).
If the camera is the issue then on this test after about 12 frames the lines should stop, as this part of the film would've never left its canister. I'll probably develop again tomorrow as I'm just too interested about what might have happened.
C: The watch goes off during development, the bag is already very tight, don't want to try and get my watch through it. Also right after I've developed this film, I've developed another film (120) which came out without problems.
D: Same as for answer C, I developed another film right after without trouble.

Currently I'm with A as well, but maybe I'm slightly biased because its the only answer that would not be kinda my fault

If you are in doubt about the film, exchange it for something more reliable, and try to get a refund from the store/maker, otherwise, process a short roll of B&W in the same tank, reel and top and see if it has the same markings.

I'll develop the Cinestill 800T (Same batch, bought at the same time) thats currently in my camera tomorrow, It currently only has 12 shots but I just don't want to risk it being another disappointment.

-------

This is the film and canister in question, wondering if anyone else has the same batch (B0664-A/4935) and has had good experience with it?

 

[eli griggs]

What is most curious to me, is the sheer motion in such a small space as individual frames, and that the 'light leaks' are of the same width across the film.

That's part of why I suggested a check of your tank, as I have seen stress fractures in SS tanks and polymer before, especially some of the thinner ones, and the up and down may be explained by a limited motion in agitation, with twisting of the tank each time you set it down and pick it up, causing some areas no having the same markings.

Before you load up your film, double and triple check the changing bag, with a strong white light, including the zipper for any gaps and use strong rubber-bands on the sleeves, and do a run or two along the stitching lines, in case a seam came loose.

IMO.

Think about how you orient the reels in the bag when loading film and visualize the axis on which a pinhole may have allowed light to track it's way across the film.

I hope you can track down the source, it's an interesting mystery to me.

 

[Luckless]

Weird set of reflections going on in those images, so I would assume an optical contamination of some manner, and at a time where there is some space between the light source and the film to allow light to bounce around a little.

A good way to start tracking down issues like this is to flip things around: Pretend the light is coming from the film and, and consider what paths it would have to take. Odds of the light mapping back to a single point are fairly high.

That leads us to the question: Where is the film being handled such that there can be reflections picked up, but the light isn't so intense as to impact the whole width of the film?

 

[AgX]

Weird set of reflections going on in those images.

Could you explain where do you see reflections? I am slow on the uptake again.

 

[smiba]

Weird set of reflections going on in those images, so I would assume an optical contamination of some manner, and at a time where there is some space between the light source and the film to allow light to bounce around a little.

What reflections do you mean? If you mean the hue around the lights, thats expected behaviour of cinestill.

 

[removed account4]

The scanner had some issues scanning the film because the lines going through had it confused where to split frames. This meant the film went 4 times through the troubled take-in mechanism.

its your scanner

 

[Luckless]

Could you explain where do you see reflections? I am slow on the uptake again.

View attachment 239157

The bright top looks like a primary in focus light, but has a more diffused copy of nearly the same pattern near the bottom. [Slightly angled. Compare the sudden dip in the lines about 1/3 in from the right.] To me this looks a lot like whatever light caused the bright top line has reflected and become unfocused before hitting the film.

Parts in the middle also show similar signs of potential signal reflection, but they're a lot harder to map out to be sure if they're directly related to the light of the bright top line based on such a short sample.

its your scanner

His scanner is leaving lines that he can see in a microscope? That's a neat trick...

 

[removed account4]

His scanner is leaving lines that he can see in a microscope? That's a neat trick...

maybe? anything that drags film through it to scan the strip has the ability to scratch up the film, its either that or bad emulsion ..

 

[smiba]

The bright top looks like a primary in focus light, but has a more diffused copy of nearly the same pattern near the bottom. [Slightly angled. Compare the sudden dip in the lines about 1/3 in from the right.] To me this looks a lot like whatever light caused the bright top line has reflected and become unfocused before hitting the film.

Oh I see it now! Thats intresting!

The person on reddit seems to have the same effect: https://www.reddit.com/r/AnalogComm...lue_smokelike_on_my_negatives_cinestill_800t/

maybe? anything that drags film through it to scan the strip has the ability to scratch up the film, its either that or bad emulsion ..

I directly noticed the issue when finished developing the film and let it dry. This was way before it ever hit the scanner.
Keep in mind there are no indents or scratches where the blue light is at, check the microscope pictures.

I've also scanned 20 rolls with this scanner and no problems like this has ever happened.