101 ways to ruin a roll of film

Sitting on a temple wall in Katmandu changing a completed roll and a monkey comes along, pinches it and then proceeds to strip out the whole lot.
 
FishyFish said:
That's a difficult one to beat!
Click to expand...

I told the Mrs about the monkeys being B................, she thought all monkeys were cute and cuddly.

Last time we went to India I took her into a Temple with a bag of fresh Roti..........Ha ha,

One of the wardens had to beat them off with a big stick. A big male was snarling at baring its teeth trying to get at them.

Now she knows......

:)
 
Another new-to-me cheap plastic P&S caught my attention and duly arrived. Looking quite good. it had motor wind and auto focus.
All seemed to be working well and as I didn't have a scrap test roll to hand to try the rewind function, went ahead and loaded up a part used roll.
The first dozen shots were from another super lightweight wide angle fixed everything, P&S which I had tried out on holiday.
The new cam went well and at the end of the film, it would not rewind. In the end, I had to open the camera back and pick out the film, loop by loop from the take-up spool.
Another lost film.
 
Cluster said:
The new cam went well and at the end of the film, it would not rewind. In the end, I had to open the camera back and pick out the film, loop by loop from the take-up spool.
Another lost film.
Click to expand...
The advantage of having a dark bag, even if you don't do your own dev!
 
I tried to extract it in my dark bag. The cam has one of those take-up spools that has a little tooth that engages the leader. It was all wound up on that, pushing the film further in the back, fast and slow didn't get it off.... or if it did, it will have re-engaged on the tooth. Picked it out in the light, loop by loop off the spool.
 
Oh that sounds so horribly frustrating!
 
I found an old APS camera with a film in situ in the cupboard. I completed the film, but whatever I tried, it would not eject and eventually I had to pretty much break the camera to get it out (they slide in like a battery rather than spool in a nice accessible way!). I didn't have a dark bag, but did it in a dark room, inside a well padded rucksack to minimise light, but it was do fiddly I think it was pretty much trashed when I finally extracted it...haven't managed to get it developed yet (no-one seems to touch APS cameras anymore), but I suspect my ministrations will have destroyed it anyway....
 
MelS said:
I found an old APS camera with a film in situ in the cupboard. I completed the film, but whatever I tried, it would not eject and eventually I had to pretty much break the camera to get it out (they slide in like a battery rather than spool in a nice accessible way!). I didn't have a dark bag, but did it in a dark room, inside a well padded rucksack to minimise light, but it was do fiddly I think it was pretty much trashed when I finally extracted it...haven't managed to get it developed yet (no-one seems to touch APS cameras anymore), but I suspect my ministrations will have destroyed it anyway....
Click to expand...
I had an email newsletter from https://mshobbies.co.uk/ 2 days ago.

They said they process APS (and also stating they have a selection of unused APS film whist noting that it was a min. of 18 years old) but for speed they are directing APS to https://www.apertureprinting.com/

(Whilst I've used MS Hobbies before I haven't come across Aperture before).
 
auntiemaryscanary said:
I had an email newsletter from https://mshobbies.co.uk/ 2 days ago.

They said they process APS (and also stating they have a selection of unused APS film whist noting that it was a min. of 18 years old) but for speed they are directing APS to https://www.apertureprinting.com/

(Whilst I've used MS Hobbies before I haven't come across Aperture before).
Click to expand...
Thanks for this - I will check them out. I would like to see if there is anything salvageable on the film, if possible, so good to know there are still potential options for getting it developed.
 
Maybe not quite runied, but weird at the time. Many years ago I made a Polalubitel, you graft the polarid camera onto a Lubitel (still have it up the attic) The idea being to get a 6x6 pola camera, I wanted it for testing lighting set-ups in the studio. (and was too tight to buy a pola back)

So with the help of a mate with a workshop we knocked this "camera" up, it actually looked pretty good.

So to test it I bunged in a pola film, shot of pic on my mates van and something hadnt worked, ok, so I shot another this time fine, then we started taking pics of each other. I took the first shot of my mate and got a pic of his van, what? He took one of me and got a pic of him..
It took use a few seconds to realsie we were a shot behind the camera.

Somehow, and I still dont really understand it, the camera took a pic, but gave us a blank shot at the start, I suspect I'd done something wrong loading the film.

Anyway, once we got got it figured out it worked really well.

It's actually pretty easy to do, more or less you remove the back of the Lubiten, and the lens and part of the front of the pola camera, and stick them together, with some filler and I think some bits of the back of the Lubitel to line up the cameras.
 
swanseamale47 said:
Maybe not quite runied, but weird at the time. Many years ago I made a Polalubitel, you graft the polarid camera onto a Lubitel (still have it up the attic) The idea being to get a 6x6 pola camera, I wanted it for testing lighting set-ups in the studio. (and was too tight to buy a pola back)

So with the help of a mate with a workshop we knocked this "camera" up, it actually looked pretty good.

So to test it I bunged in a pola film, shot of pic on my mates van and something hadnt worked, ok, so I shot another this time fine, then we started taking pics of each other. I took the first shot of my mate and got a pic of his van, what? He took one of me and got a pic of him..
It took use a few seconds to realsie we were a shot behind the camera.

Somehow, and I still dont really understand it, the camera took a pic, but gave us a blank shot at the start, I suspect I'd done something wrong loading the film.

Anyway, once we got got it figured out it worked really well.

It's actually pretty easy to do, more or less you remove the back of the Lubiten, and the lens and part of the front of the pola camera, and stick them together, with some filler and I think some bits of the back of the Lubitel to line up the cameras.
Click to expand...

Are you still waiting for the final photo?
 
swanseamale47 said:
Maybe not quite runied, but weird at the time. Many years ago I made a Polalubitel, you graft the polarid camera onto a Lubitel (still have it up the attic) The idea being to get a 6x6 pola camera, I wanted it for testing lighting set-ups in the studio. (and was too tight to buy a pola back)

So with the help of a mate with a workshop we knocked this "camera" up, it actually looked pretty good.

So to test it I bunged in a pola film, shot of pic on my mates van and something hadnt worked, ok, so I shot another this time fine, then we started taking pics of each other. I took the first shot of my mate and got a pic of his van, what? He took one of me and got a pic of him..
It took use a few seconds to realsie we were a shot behind the camera.

Somehow, and I still dont really understand it, the camera took a pic, but gave us a blank shot at the start, I suspect I'd done something wrong loading the film.

Anyway, once we got got it figured out it worked really well.

It's actually pretty easy to do, more or less you remove the back of the Lubiten, and the lens and part of the front of the pola camera, and stick them together, with some filler and I think some bits of the back of the Lubitel to line up the cameras.
Click to expand...
Sounds like that Two Ronnie's Mastermind sketch where Ronnie Corbet answers the question before last, but in Polaroid format.
 
FishyFish said:
Sounds like that Two Ronnie's Mastermind sketch where Ronnie Corbet answers the question before last, but in Polaroid format.
Click to expand...
It was really. I did plan to have fun with it by taking a pic of a monkey, then going and taking someone pics, pulling the picture and letting it develop in their hand. Trouble was it only did it with the first film, I must have pulled two tabs or something when installing the film.
 
Use a sprocket rocket. The transport doesn't hold the film well. Then further seal the fate of the film victim by winding the wind knob the wrong way so the film unfurls.... then reload the same film and start again. Then find you've wound on so far you are at the end of the roll in about 3 shots as the white dot thing for each frame is invisible much of the time. :headbang:
 
Me again. Electra 100 which seems to be a slippery fish and breaking the golden rule of always check the cartridge end spool turns when you wind on otherwise you're winding on air. Managed to misload the olympus trip. Thought it had caught on but somehow it didn't even with the leader right through the take up spool. Loaded second time quickly after and had another go. Thought it was fine and tramped around a lovely garden taking pictures of nothing as it turned out.

Hopefully third go will be ok.
 
The problem with having quite a few cameras and don't use them much is .......I forget how to use the more modern ones and the worst is the Nikon F4 e.g. in how to rewind the film. Anyway I'm using a Chinon CP7m ATM and after a few shots in the garden noticed the film counter wasn't advancing WTF, so out with the manual and the switch for multiple exposures was on :(, Silly me although I'm deaf should have at least heard the film auto winding on:rolleyes: Anyway with multiple exp on I've only lost one frame on the film.
 
Woodsy said:
Turns out, if you accidentally load two sheets into one side of your SP-645 holder, the bottom of the two doesn't get developed! Who knew.
Click to expand...
Good to know that even you are fallible Mr Woods, it gives the rest of us hope.
 
Logically, if the failure to develop is caused by accidentally loading two sheets into one slide, doing it deliberately will not :exit:

The first film I ever developed was a glorious mass of purples and greys because I had no idea that you didn't load a Paterson spiral by winding the film round the central shaft.
 
Last edited:
StephenM said:
Logically, if the failure to develop is caused by accidentally loading two sheets into one dide, doing it deliberately will not :exit:

The first film I ever developed was a glorious mass of purples and greys because I had no idea that you didn't load a Paterson spiral by winding the film round the central shaft.
Click to expand...
I was going to write a smart comment which went something like "university students are no what they were"
but you will probably tell us you were eight or something. :ROFLMAO:
 
Close. This would have been 1959 (or possibly 1958). So around 10 (decimal) years old.
 
I went out today to shoot some large format film, the first time in over a year. I took four holders with me, two loaded with HP5+, the others with Ektar.

I decided to take a trip into the Peak District, to Stanton Moor, where there are a number of interesting features, including rock outcrops, stone circles, and ruined industrial buildings amongst others. It's roughly 45 minutes drive from home and I left at 6:15am in order to ensure the sun was still quite low in the sky.

Shooting 4x5 in rarely a speedy process (for me at least) so, given the locations for my pictures were a fair distance apart, each shot necessitated setting everything up - tripod, camera out of the bag, camera set-up, lens attaching, framing the composition and setting any movements required before firing the shutter. Then packing it all away again before moving on to find the next shot.

I shot all four sheets of HP5+, and tow sheets of Ektar. I've probably knackered one of these because I forgot to change the ISO on my light meter, so it's effectively underexposed by two stops. Oh well.

Anyway, I got home around lunchtime and decided I'd develop the HP5+. Imagine my delight when I discovered that both film holders contained no film. :headbang:

I was certain that they were loaded as I've been meaning to shoot them for ages, concerned that they have been sat in a cupboard for months, but it seems my memory doth deceiveth me.

I'll have to check the Ektar to make sure those aren't the same (although I'm still pretty confident that they're loaded).

Thankfully, I took my Olympus XA-3 with me and shot about 20 frames with that, so the day shouldn't be a complete failure. I also developed a roll of 120 HP5+ I shot last weekend (given I'd gotten all the gear out), and those look quite nice. I also still got to visit Stanton Moor and note that it's place worth visiting again in future, so as a scouting trip, it was a success at least.

I'm a bit gutted though, all the same.
 
FishyFish said:
I went out today to shoot some large format film, the first time in over a year. I took four holders with me, two loaded with HP5+, the others with Ektar.

I decided to take a trip into the Peak District, to Stanton Moor, where there are a number of interesting features, including rock outcrops, stone circles, and ruined industrial buildings amongst others. It's roughly 45 minutes drive from home and I left at 6:15am in order to ensure the sun was still quite low in the sky.

Shooting 4x5 in rarely a speedy process (for me at least) so, given the locations for my pictures were a fair distance apart, each shot necessitated setting everything up - tripod, camera out of the bag, camera set-up, lens attaching, framing the composition and setting any movements required before firing the shutter. Then packing it all away again before moving on to find the next shot.

I shot all four sheets of HP5+, and tow sheets of Ektar. I've probably knackered one of these because I forgot to change the ISO on my light meter, so it's effectively underexposed by two stops. Oh well.

Anyway, I got home around lunchtime and decided I'd develop the HP5+. Imagine my delight when I discovered that both film holders contained no film. :headbang:

I was certain that they were loaded as I've been meaning to shoot them for ages, concerned that they have been sat in a cupboard for months, but it seems my memory doth deceiveth me.

I'll have to check the Ektar to make sure those aren't the same (although I'm still pretty confident that they're loaded).

Thankfully, I took my Olympus XA-3 with me and shot about 20 frames with that, so the day shouldn't be a complete failure. I also developed a roll of 120 HP5+ I shot last weekend (given I'd gotten all the gear out), and those look quite nice. I also still got to visit Stanton Moor and note that it's place worth visiting again in future, so as a scouting trip, it was a success at least.

I'm a bit gutted though, all the same.
Click to expand...
Sorry to read about the film Nigel.
Let me know next time you plan on going up there, its an hour or so for me, so nothing really and it would be nice to meet up. I was at Winnets Pass Thursday but was on the bike and did not shoot much, like wise that shows huge potential.
 
Use a developer that you only discovered was too old when you see the negs and they are almost clear.

Photography would be easy if I did not keep on repeatedly feckin something up.
 
VirtualAdept said:
This snow type stuff


retro80srb67004 by Madison S, on Flickr
Click to expand...
I take it the dark spots on the negative are fog from the backing paper markings.
I have had similar with a old roll of FP4 + left in the Rollie in the loft room under eves storage space for many years, I don't care too much for the lost film but I am quite disappointed with myself for leaving the camera there.
 
FishyFish said:
I went out today to shoot some large format film, the first time in over a year. I took four holders with me, two loaded with HP5+, the others with Ektar.

......

Anyway, I got home around lunchtime and decided I'd develop the HP5+. Imagine my delight when I discovered that both film holders contained no film. :headbang:

I was certain that they were loaded as I've been meaning to shoot them for ages, concerned that they have been sat in a cupboard for months, but it seems my memory doth deceiveth me.
Click to expand...

The usual advice with darkslides is to standardise on whether Black or white side means "unexposed". The other "colour" then means either unexposed or empty. A method to remove that ambiguity (which I don't use) is as follows, copied from the thread where I posted it.

I came across an interesting take on the holders convention that gives a three way id.

Step 1. Number the holders.
Step 2. Apply the same numbers to the dark slides.
Step 3. When loading film, make sure holder and dark slide numbers are the same, show white side.
Step 4. When unloading film, put a dark slide from a different holder in the now empty holder showing black side.

Result (assuming white = unexposed, black = exposed or empty):

If white shows, good to expose.
If black shows: if numbers match, exposed; if numbers don't match, holder empty.
 
StephenM said:
The usual advice with darkslides is to standardise on whether Black or white side means "unexposed". The other "colour" then means either unexposed or empty. A method to remove that ambiguity (which I don't use) is as follows, copied from the thread where I posted it.

I came across an interesting take on the holders convention that gives a three way id.

Step 1. Number the holders.
Step 2. Apply the same numbers to the dark slides.
Step 3. When loading film, make sure holder and dark slide numbers are the same, show white side.
Step 4. When unloading film, put a dark slide from a different holder in the now empty holder showing black side.

Result (assuming white = unexposed, black = exposed or empty):

If white shows, good to expose.
If black shows: if numbers match, exposed; if numbers don't match, holder empty.
Click to expand...
My normal process us that if the white tab of the dark slide is showing, then it contains unexposed film. I flip the slide after taking a shot.

I also take care not to mix loaded, exposed holders with unloaded holders (I don't have that many, so this isn't usually a problem anyway).

In this case though, I had four holders with the white sides showing, and believed I'd loaded them ages ago (but, foolishly, didn't check!).

I think the fact I don't have time to shoot LF very often is a major contributor to my failure here. I'm out of practice and routine.
 
Yesterday I took a shot using my Burke and James and when I reinserted the dark slide it went behind the sheet of Ektacolor so when I withdrew the film holder the film was immediately exposed to light! Never happened before.
 
I have a feeling it happened because I forgot to tap the film holder before inserting it. It's a necessary step as it can happen that the sheet of film ends up cockeyed in the film holder.

The film was a gift, it's 20 years out of date so no loss on that score, also the shot itself is easily repeatable. Just to compound the fun, it wasn't until I emptied the film holders to return the exposed film to the box that I notices that the Ektacolor is tungsten balanced. Combined with the 20 years out-of-date I'm going to get some interesting results, eat your heart out Lomographers. I did take the precaution of exposing the film at half box speed though.
 
I was in the darkroom re- spooling 36 exp 35mm down to either roughly 12 or 18 exposures - I wasn't using a bulk loader. I caught (dim) light reflecting off the fluorescent casing above me and looked to my right where there was a feint glow around the top of the darkroom door. Damn!!

Luckily only one of the six HP5 I'd purchased could have been affected. Will save the likely fogged cassettes for camera testing...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top