101 ways to ruin a roll of film

abdoujaparov said:
It's the paper tag that sealed the film. It dropped into the camera and sat nicely in front of the lens. I didn't notice until it fell out when I next changed the film.
Click to expand...

That's a good one :( I think I've posted my one where I had a curly black line on every shot and it turned out to be one of my hairs stuck in the 35mm film gate i.e. where the shutter fires
 
Was it a short, curly hair, by any chance?

Anyway, get blasé about loading 2 rolls of 120 on a spiral because you've done it before and it's so easy and find when opening the tank that they've overlapped and half of each film is buggered :(
 
Reset the bloody meter when you change films you plonker...

I feel like one of those plonkers with "diesel" sticker under the filling cap but I am clearly an idiot so...
 
Last edited:
Holy thread revival, possibly not quite apt but...

Took my Pentax MX out this afternoon to finish off the roll of Acros 100 in it on some possible architecture shots... got to 36, oh still another one... and another... and another...

Well over 40 now and showing no signs of getting to the end of the film. The film rewind lever is going round as well. :( :( :(

I presume this means some gear inside is slipping and I'm only getting a part wind for each frame. Don't see much point in continuing, so I suppose when I get a chance I'd better dev the film...:banghead:
 
I've added 3 to my ruined pile in the last few months. Two in the voigtlander due to me being a complete idiot and not loading it properly. Then Royal Mail lost both rolls! Then for the hat trick, cocking up the end of the roll in the Hi-Matic so it snapped off instead of winding back.
 
ChrisR said:
Holy thread revival, possibly not quite apt but...

Took my Pentax MX out this afternoon to finish off the roll of Acros 100 in it on some possible architecture shots... got to 36, oh still another one... and another... and another...

Well over 40 now and showing no signs of getting to the end of the film. The film rewind lever is going round as well. :( :( :(

I presume this means some gear inside is slipping and I'm only getting a part wind for each frame. Don't see much point in continuing, so I suppose when I get a chance I'd better dev the film...:banghead:
Click to expand...

Oh Dear!:(

Should all the frames be stuffed, the only consolation is that you still have a good 3 weeks left to retake them all so as to get your FPOTY entry.......Time to get snap happy Chris :snaphappy::D
 
Asha said:
Oh Dear!:(

Should all the frames be stuffed, the only consolation is that you still have a good 3 weeks left to retake them all so as to get your FPOTY entry.......Time to get snap happy Chris :snaphappy::D
Click to expand...

Yes, it's annoying as I took my first night shots only a few days ago on this film, which might have produced something useful. I'm already looking on fleabay for a replacement; this particular MX was a charity shop purchase that's already been CLAd twice, and last year had problems with the mirror not flipping up. :(

Now where's that thread showing second hand suppliers? Goes off to look in the resources sticky...:exit:
 
Ffordes and Wycameras are my go to places :)

I'm sure I have an ME super in the loft. Can't remember if it's got the sticky shutter thing though.
 
You never know Chris, it might be that the film slipped on the camera's spool for the first few frames before finally 'engaging' and winding the film on, so perhaps wait till you get the developed film back to established what's occurred before you beat the camera to death with a tree branch Fawlty Towers style?
 
Last edited:
Mr Badger said:
You never know Chris, it might be that the film slipped on the camera's spool for the first few frames before finally 'engaging' and winding the film on, so perhaps wait till you get the developed film back to established what's occurred before you beat the camera to death with a tree branch Fawlty Towers style?
Click to expand...

You're right, I won't do anything hasty, but nothing wrong with a little bit of GAS, eh? :)
 
ChrisR said:
You're right, I won't do anything hasty, but nothing wrong with a little bit of GAS, eh? :)
Click to expand...

I know, but if your luck is anything like mine can be at times, then you could just end up with two heffalumps instead of just one! :whistle:
 
Last edited:
okay, so after reading every single comment on here it seems no one has gone through my little predicament. So, here's my contribution, but it's not really MY mistake (really)
Bought some expired film off t'interweb and shot through all of it bar one roll of HP5 400. all went fine. I used the HP5 a while ago and shot the last of it last weekend. Developed it at home myself. Scanned it later on only to find out that it was a previously exposed film and only one shot of mine had come out.
The seller obviously hadn't wound the film all the way back, and with the leader showing, had mistaken it for an unused roll. Soooooooo, moral of the story, make sure you wind that film all the way back into the cannister or you could end up selling your unwanted exposed film...........to me!
 
chunky71 said:
okay, so after reading every single comment on here it seems no one has gone through my little predicament. So, here's my contribution, but it's not really MY mistake (really)
Bought some expired film off t'interweb and shot through all of it bar one roll of HP5 400. all went fine. I used the HP5 a while ago and shot the last of it last weekend. Developed it at home myself. Scanned it later on only to find out that it was a previously exposed film and only one shot of mine had come out.
The seller obviously hadn't wound the film all the way back, and with the leader showing, had mistaken it for an unused roll. Soooooooo, moral of the story, make sure you wind that film all the way back into the cannister or you could end up selling your unwanted exposed film...........to me!
Click to expand...
Oh .... oh dear ....... Dave, you know that box of 10 rolls of film you bought from me ... well, I've just remembered something ... :whistle:




:naughty:
 
You want me to develop it for you? right? :D
 
Well just something amusing:- the 180mm lens on the RB67 is not massive so stupid me thought it was the 65mm as I wanted to use to finish the film up...h'mm well the iris on the 180 has a delayed action before it works (a fault) :eek:...well rather than drive home and get the 65mm thought I'd use it without a tripod, the amusing bit is in taking the shot where I had to wait about 14 secs for the iris to work and holding the RB67 steady (at eye level) after framing the shot was a slight problem. :rolleyes:
 
Sadly, I have to report I've joined this particular club today. I went out with my Lubitel to try and get some shots for this month's FPOTY category. Unfortunately, possibly because I wasn't in the right frame of mind and was only out taking pictures because I had the opportunity and the weather was nice, rather than actually feeling like doing so today, I didn't pay enough attention...

The Lubitel's focussing method is such that you can still see the infinity symbol just at the right of the scale when you're focussing at the closest distance, so I look down and think "f/8 at infinity should get everything I need in focus". Instead I'm focussing on some empty air about a metre in front of the camera.

For every shot on the roll...

:banghead:

Basically, this is the style of all of them...

Blurry street.jpg

Going on the cost of the film, processing, and today's parking, I'm £12 quid out of pocket on the deal. Alternatively, I've paid £12 for a valuable lesson. :)

On a more positive note, at least I now know that Rollei Retro 400s is best exposed as though it's 200 ASA. Also, despite them being blurred beyond practical use, I can still see that a couple of compositions might be worth another (more careful!) shoot. Every cloud and all that, eh? :)
 
Last edited:
Sharpness is a bourgeois concept
– Henri Cartier Bresson
 
Feel your pain, Nige. I have an entire roll of film from the Acropolis in 1968 or so, shot on my scale-focus Werra 1 set at a focal distance of about 8 feet! It sucks, doesn't it... :(
 
ChrisR said:
Holy thread revival, possibly not quite apt but...

Took my Pentax MX out this afternoon to finish off the roll of Acros 100 in it on some possible architecture shots... got to 36, oh still another one... and another... and another...

Well over 40 now and showing no signs of getting to the end of the film. The film rewind lever is going round as well. :( :( :(

I presume this means some gear inside is slipping and I'm only getting a part wind for each frame. Don't see much point in continuing, so I suppose when I get a chance I'd better dev the film...:banghead:
Click to expand...

After posting that, I shot a few blank frames, then some night shot from the window, then more blank frames, then eventually the roll was done. Still showing 36 of course.

So today I devved the film. I was expecting a lot of overlapped frames, or a multi-exposed frame somewhere. Not a bit of it. Lots of nicely spaced frames, lots of blank ones near the end of the roll.:):confused:

I've been scratching my head, but just spotted that the empty camera sitting on the shelf is STILL showing 36 shots! The film counter is not resetting when the back is opened... that's a really annoying fault. It's tricky to keep track of 36 frames with no frame counter. But it doesn't seem a major enough fault for a CLA or a replacement camera. Grrrrr.:banghead:

Anyone have an idea how to force frame counter reset on a Pentax MX?:help:
 
ChrisR said:
After posting that, I shot a few blank frames, then some night shot from the window, then more blank frames, then eventually the roll was done. Still showing 36 of course.

So today I devved the film. I was expecting a lot of overlapped frames, or a multi-exposed frame somewhere. Not a bit of it. Lots of nicely spaced frames, lots of blank ones near the end of the roll.:):confused:

I've been scratching my head, but just spotted that the empty camera sitting on the shelf is STILL showing 36 shots! The film counter is not resetting when the back is opened... that's a really annoying fault. It's tricky to keep track of 36 frames with no frame counter. But it doesn't seem a major enough fault for a CLA or a replacement camera. Grrrrr.:banghead:

Anyone have an idea how to force frame counter reset on a Pentax MX?:help:
Click to expand...


Might be something in this lot: http://www.eserviceinfo.com/equipment_mfg/Pentax_48.html

I'd think there will be a button or tab or something that gets moved when the back is open and it's stuck in the back is closed position.
 
When you close the door, a small tab on the top edge will push a small flat 'button' that's in the top seal around the rear body. Some seal rubber has probably come off and stick it in so it's not springing out when the door is opened so the latch connected to the frame counter isn't releasing. If you get a toothpick or a needle, put it under the button in the rear body and see if you can free it. If that doesn't work, get some lighter fluid on a cotton bud and give it a soaking :0)
 
ChrisR said:
Feel your pain, Nige. I have an entire roll of film from the Acropolis in 1968 or so, shot on my scale-focus Werra 1 set at a focal distance of about 8 feet! It sucks, doesn't it... :(
Click to expand...

I can at least take some small comfort from the fact that I only travelled as far as the town centre. I bet you were gutted when you got those processed.
 
stevelmx5 said:
When you close the door, a small tab on the top edge will push a small flat 'button' that's in the top seal around the rear body. Some seal rubber has probably come off and stick it in so it's not springing out when the door is opened so the latch connected to the frame counter isn't releasing. If you get a toothpick or a needle, put it under the button in the rear body and see if you can free it. If that doesn't work, get some lighter fluid on a cotton bud and give it a soaking :0)
Click to expand...

Not sure if I've properly identified the culprit, but after exercising the door a few times the frame readings were 36, 22, 20, 18, 14, 00! I'll have another look tomorrow with better light. The film in the other MX might be finished soon, so if I can resist putting some film in the b&w on, I'll be able to make a direct comparison. Thanks Steve.
 
The ones that he showed other people maybe :p :LOL:
 
andy1868 said:
The ones that he showed other people maybe :p :LOL:
Click to expand...

Indeed no guarantees owning a Leica, but I don't know why he said "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept"...did he mean only rich people can afford good cameras therefor unsharp pictures are for the peasants with box brownies OR did he mean only the rich people can afford LF cameras therefor sharp pictures are expected. h'mm
 
excalibur2 said:
Indeed no guarantees owning a Leica, but I don't know why he said "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept"...did he mean only rich people can afford good cameras therefor unsharp pictures are for the peasants with box brownies OR did he mean only the rich people can afford LF cameras therefor sharp pictures are expected. h'mm
Click to expand...

I think he meant that criticising pictures with comments about sharpness was missing the point (a point which is frequently missed in some of the digital parts of TP!). Which is quite a stretch from the actual words quoted. I wonder what the context was?

EDIT: my initial searches have failed to find a direct quote in context, though there might be one in a BJP article from 2003 (probably just the isolated quote, though). Maybe it's something he said rather than wrote. But what I found does support my interpretation, and there were also references to many of his pictures being fuzzy but still having meaning, or similar words...
 
Last edited:
ChrisR said:
I think he meant that criticising pictures with comments about sharpness was missing the point (a point which is frequently missed in some of the digital parts of TP!). Which is quite a stretch from the actual words quoted. I wonder what the context was?

EDIT: my initial searches have failed to find a direct quote in context, though there might be one in a BJP article from 2003 (probably just the isolated quote, though). Maybe it's something he said rather than wrote. But what I found does support my interpretation, and there were also references to many of his pictures being fuzzy but still having meaning, or similar words...
Click to expand...

Good explanation Chris but poor or rich can appreciate a sharp or unsharp picture..but then we go off topic by the meaning\understanding of "bourgeois" as the word "concept" can't be changed much.
 
Try to load the backing paper from a 120 roll into your Paterson system 4 reel then open the film changing bag to find out what's going wrong.
 
soupdragon said:
Try to load the backing paper from a 120 roll into your Paterson system 4 reel then open the film changing bag to find out what's going wrong.
Click to expand...

Oops....:facepalm:
 
excalibur2 said:
Well just something amusing:- the 180mm lens on the RB67 is not massive so stupid me thought it was the 65mm as I wanted to use to finish the film up...h'mm well the iris on the 180 has a delayed action before it works (a fault) :eek:...well rather than drive home and get the 65mm thought I'd use it without a tripod, the amusing bit is in taking the shot where I had to wait about 14 secs for the iris to work and holding the RB67 steady (at eye level) after framing the shot was a slight problem. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

See what I mean holding the RB67 at eye level waiting about 14 secs for the iris to click, I wobbled and missed the window frame :eek:
View attachment 95962
 
Almost ruined a roll of 120 tonight. And then another at the same time.

First time developing for nearly a year and I ran a couple of rolls of HP5+ through earlier with no issues so thought a couple of rolls of 120 would be no trouble. I've got a new reel that should prevent the previous issue of the films overlapping as it has a little clip that blocks the channel once you've loaded the first film. All fine and dandy, right?

Started off by bringing everything through to the spare room, into the changing bag and as I'm getting my second hand in, the tank falls over. No drama, I can find everything. Except the reel. I'm searching through the bag for it but can't find it anywhere - I put it in the tank, it should still be on the spindle for goodness sake. Thankfully I hadn't unwound the first roll of 120 before trying to find the reel because the reel was sitting on the draining board in the kitchen. :facepalm:

Take two. First film to go on and I should have thought this through ... it's GP3 and curls the moment I unroll it. After a lot of faffing about I finally get it fed on to the reel but then it's too thin for the reel to grip properly so I have to develop a technique of pressing (not too hard), turn, release, turn back yet every blummin' third turn back, the damn film comes with the reel. :banghead:

Finally get the GP3 on and the next is a roll of Portra, which is much better behaved until I get half of it on the reel, the rest curls and twists up and just doesn't want to play. The inside of the bag is getting moist from my sweaty paws and I think I had to re-start that roll three or four times before it finally goes on.

Then the happy ending - after an hour of semi-stand I fix and rinse, open the tank to discover no overlap, the new reel worked! Hanging them up and the Portra has some very faint images (expected) while the GP3 looks to have come out fine! Woohoo! Scanning tomorrow so I'll be able to see what, if anything, was worth all the fuss! :D





BTW, the Portra was in a folder that's going in the Classifieds soon. I'd forgotten all about it but don't think there's anything important on there so I thought it'd be worth using it up and developing as B&W to see how it comes out. :)
 
As you get older, ruining film gets easier. I decided on Friday to give my Olympus 35 ECR a spin. Took it out of the display case and cleaned it. As I was about to leave the house, I reminded myself to put a film in the camera. When I opened the back, there was the film I had put in ten minutes previously. OK, the whole film is not ruined but I have lost a few frames and it could have been more.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top