35mm Developing Issue

Lostgear

Lostgear

Messages
402
Name
Adam
Edit My Images
Yes
Looking for advice on whether this is a developing issue, or a camera issue. All from the same role of Portra 400, all the photos had ghosting, about 25% had sprocket holes across the frame. Any ideas?
 

Attachments

  • LM6-413.jpg
    LM6-413.jpg
    220 KB · Views: 50
  • LM6-400.jpg
    LM6-400.jpg
    237.6 KB · Views: 53
  • LM6-420-2.jpg
    LM6-420-2.jpg
    157.9 KB · Views: 52
Last edited:
How was it developed and what camera was it shot in? Was the film expired?
 
Wouldn’t that be a light leak? Almost looks like light hit the film while it was in the camera because of the sprocket holes. I’d say camera, it looks like the light came in on the right side of the camera where the film is taken up at the bottom
 
So I'm assuming you didn't do anything daft (like I did once) and pop the baseplate off before rewinding the film?

If you've put rolls through this camera before and they've been ok, and with it being an M6 which is pretty much bulletproof, and removing any fault between the floor and the shutter button, I'd be thinking it happened in development. Only way to be sure is put another roll through and send it to a different lab. Light looks to have got to this film somehow but I can't see how those sprocket hole marks got there while it was in-camera.

Lots of people here with more experience than me though so hang fire for other replies.
 
With sprocket holes in view I would say that the film had not been loaded into the camera correctly. If the film was not sitting correctly in the film gate, that could well have stopped the back closing quite as intended and allowed some light in.
 
john.margetts said:
With sprocket holes in view I would say that the film had not been loaded into the camera correctly. If the film was not sitting correctly in the film gate, that could well have stopped the back closing quite as intended and allowed some light in.
Click to expand...

I think it's unlikely to be the loading. An M6 is pretty much idiot proof to load and the only issue you could possibly end up with is the film not taking up (rare - esp if you've loaded it before). The baseplate won't lock either if you haven't re-attached it properly. I could be wrong, but given I'm the most cack handed person I know, the M6 is one of the few cameras I haven't spoiled a roll on by misloading. (Lost 2 to opening the baseplate before rewinding though!)
 
I could accept a light leak if it was along the bottom or up one side, but some of the exposures have two rows of sprocket holes overlaid at different angles.
 
Lostgear said:
I could accept a light leak if it was along the bottom or up one side, but some of the exposures have two rows of sprocket holes overlaid at different angles.
Click to expand...
As far as I can tell from the photos you gave the leak is all along the bottom on the same edge of the 3 photos. Maybe the different angles occurred when you were winding on the next frame? I would take the lens off the Leica, put it in bulb mode and look through the front and see if any light comes in. It probably won’t but I would have said it’s a camera problem first.
 
Lostgear said:
I could accept a light leak if it was along the bottom or up one side, but some of the exposures have two rows of sprocket holes overlaid at different angles.
Click to expand...

That's my sticking point as well. I can't visualize any realistic mechanism that could achieve that in camera. Fogging with sprocket holes surely must require either a film processing error, or the combination of a light leak and another strip of film in the camera simultaneously. Or part of the film which isn't in the frame twisting over the part that is.
 
StephenM said:
That's my sticking point as well. I can't visualize any realistic mechanism that could achieve that in camera. Fogging with sprocket holes surely must require either a film processing error, or the combination of a light leak and another strip of film in the camera simultaneously. Or part of the film which isn't in the frame twisting over the part that is.
Click to expand...
Maybe it was fogged while it was on the reel?
 
Ben johns said:
Maybe it was fogged while it was on the reel?
Click to expand...

Which is a film processing error, outside Adam's control.

There was a time when labs reported back on errors - comments on exposure and the like. I wonder if it's worth asking them for what can cause this?
 
StephenM said:
There was a time when labs reported back on errors - comments on exposure and the like. I wonder if it's worth asking them for what can cause this?
Click to expand...

Would they actually know I wonder ?
If the staff are togs / technicians actually interested in what they do then perhaps .
If however they are simply there to act like a robot ´ load machine, empty machine, take money from customer’, then I doubt they will have a response much beyond ‘Sorry, dunno’.

No harm in asking though ;)
 
StephenM said:
Which is a film processing error, outside Adam's control.

There was a time when labs reported back on errors - comments on exposure and the like. I wonder if it's worth asking them for what can cause this?
Click to expand...

I took processing error to mean chemical problem etc. Maybe the changing bag wasn’t fully closed or the tank slightly open
 
Unlikely to be a processing error, when I worked in a lab, the film is attached to a plastic sheet, then set in guides in the compartment at the end of the machine, lid closed and press start, if the lid was opened even for a split second you would get complete flogging of the film.
 
Did you ever come across this "fogging with overlaid sprockets" problem?

As to labs not using changing bags and spirals, that would be true of any long established lab. But there have been reports in the last year of people effectively opening up as a lab to create a home business, and using if not a Paterson tank then perhaps a Jobo machine. In this case, the normal "this can't happen because the machine doesn't work like that" wouldn't apply.

Possibly knowing whodunnit might shed light on howdunnit?
 
I have to say I am more with @StephenM , this looks more like a processing fault to me, and one that would be abnormal for a volume lab. Time to name and shame?
 
Boots said:
one that would be abnormal for a volume lab.
Click to expand...

I had a clearly visible thumbprint one of my "volume lab" devs, along with marks that look like it had been dragged across the floor by a moulting cat.
 
I’ve asked the lab for some feedback. I won’t name and shame, anyone can make a mistake.......it’s how they deal with it that counts.
 
Lostgear said:
I won’t name and shame, anyone can make a mistake
Click to expand...

Huh.....they could be very important shots (if lab is at fault). Keeping light out from developing negs using the M\Cs must be fool proof as have had my negs dev by Tesco and Asda for many years and although sometimes had poor colours and dust spots, I never had any light leaks other than from a faulty camera.
 
For the 1st and third picture I have no explanation but for the middle one where the sprocket marks appear on the edge of the frame, I have had these myself. I process all of my films, B&W and colour myself and have experienced these on a few films, but never with B&W. I do not know definitively what causes it but I can make a reasonable guess and that is beach fix on it's last legs. Labs usually have a auto replenishment trigger in their mini-labs and this should take care of any replenishment needs.

What I also have on my problem (not every film but occurring randomly) is on the strip of film between there are sometimes within about 1-2mm of the preceding frame areas where the film does not appear to have developed evenly and generally has a brown tinge This may happen over 3-4 frames and the remainder of the film is clear. of problems.
If it were a camera with a horizontal travelling focal plane shutter I would think of 'shutter bounce' but it occurs only on my cameras that have vertical travel shutters.

There is also a known phenomenon called 'developer drag' where on a negative with a deeply dark area which of course on the negative is almost clear film. If this area is next to an area of a normal toned negative, you can get this 'normal' area, showing strips where the film is over developed. Not enough to see just looking at the negative, but enough to be visible when it is printed. My last experience was with 120 B&W film in a Bronica ETRSi where I pictured snow drifts with fence posts sticking out of the snow. I put this down to insufficient agitation when using a Jobo Processor, but I have no definitive proof this is the cause
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top