What could be the cause of hair-like marks on negatives?

Messages
7,474
Name
Nige
Edit My Images
No
Someone on another forum I frequent has been using a Rolleiflex he inherited from his dad. He's noticed that on some of his negatives there are small hair-like marks. These are in the emulsion of the negative, rather than being dust, and show up on the scanned images as dark marks. He doesn't hink it's anything in the camera, and the marks are occasional and not the same every time.

The only thing I can think of as a cause is either some debris in the camera that is damaging the emulson, or something in the development process (I think he uses a lab). If it was just debris blocking some light (e.g. a small hair in the camera) then I wouldn't expect the negative to show damage.

Any other ideas please?

Thanks
 
If it was damage to the emulsion, wouldn't that show up as a white mark on the image, not black?

edit- Ignore me, I has a bad case of the dumbs :wacky:
 
Last edited:
Anything like this? The flocking inside my Mamiya C220 was degrading and settling on the film before exposure, it washed off during processing but left unexposed areas. Had to clean up and use matt black paint to seal it. This is just a section of the scanned neg.

Scan-140206-0001crop2.jpg
 
If the camera has not been used for some years dust will congregate inside. Winding the film will cause a small amount of static electricity on the film surface which will attract the dust - the first film used in an old camera is likely to be very dusty - I keep a scrap film specifically to de-dust old cameras.
 
Last edited:
Any other ideas please?

I stopped using AG Photographic because of "dirty" negs. It wasn't "end of the world" dirty but they aren't as clean as I get DIY or Filmdev. Suggestion 1 would be to try another lab.
 
Anything like this? The flocking inside my Mamiya C220 was degrading and settling on the film before exposure, it washed off during processing but left unexposed areas. Had to clean up and use matt black paint to seal it. This is just a section of the scanned neg.

View attachment 251257

The example he shared is nothing like as marked as that, it’s just a single noticeable black hair-like mark.
 
Could be a single hair that got inside the camera and stuck on the film as David suggested (but a less extreme case!)
 
Hi! I’m the person on the other forum! Here’s the example I posted on the other place (cropped):

48408677787_1727a339da_o_d.jpg


I’ve also seen examples like the one above posted by dmb but not as evenly scattered or severe. The first batch of film I had developed were worse. I’m not sure if it’s something in the camera sticking to the film then peeling off later or something in the development process.
 
Hi! I’m the person on the other forum! Here’s the example I posted on the other place (cropped):

I’ve also seen examples like the one above posted by dmb but not as evenly scattered or severe. The first batch of film I had developed were worse. I’m not sure if it’s something in the camera sticking to the film then peeling off later or something in the development process.

Welcome! :)

If the problem is lessening over time, I wonder if it might be a case of the camera working off it’s aches and pains after being unused for awhile? Perhaps gradually shedding small bits of debris onto the film but working itself a bit cleaner each time.

It might be worth getting a quote for a CLA to give it a good service.
 
That is dust/hair sticking to the film in the camera, preventing exposure of the emulsion immediately beneath the dust/hair. A good blow around in the back of the camera with an air duster will remove any remaining in the camera but I suspect that the film has mostly removed it on its own now.
 
Hi! I’m the person on the other forum! Here’s the example I posted on the other place (cropped):



I’ve also seen examples like the one above posted by dmb but not as evenly scattered or severe. The first batch of film I had developed were worse. I’m not sure if it’s something in the camera sticking to the film then peeling off later or something in the development process.

On the C220 there is a large light trap that moves into place when you change lenses, that was the part with the flock, that film was the first one that I'd changed lenses on, Lucky I noticed the problem on the film after developing before loading another. Yours looks like a longer hair floating around, with luck it got cleared out, but a good blow out will make sure.
 
That sounds likely as it had been sitting in a box for decades and I didn’t clean it before using it.
 
A hair stuck in my T90 and IIRC was stuck behind and in shutter....came out like this:-
Tak50mm (5)-600px.jpg
 
Every now and then I see evidence of a small hair in my LX, right at the edge of the frame. But I'm usually changing films in the field and never remember to have a look then. It's very annoying!
 
That does look very like a "short and curly" hair on the film when the shot was taken.
 
My OM-1 does something similar, right on the very edge of the frame in every shot and luckily very easy to remove in most photos using Photoshop.

Sometimes we (well me at least) don't think of the obvious and we tend to blame scanning or where the film was developed first...:mad:
 
Anything like this? The flocking inside my Mamiya C220 was degrading and settling on the film before exposure, it washed off during processing but left unexposed areas. Had to clean up and use matt black paint to seal it. This is just a section of the scanned neg.

View attachment 251257
Blimey, I've seen the occasional bit of dust on a film before now, but that's come out looking like Lon Chaney Jr, was it a full moon?!
 
Last edited:
Sometimes we (well me at least) don't think of the obvious and we tend to blame scanning or where the film was developed first...:mad:

I might set it on bulb and give it a good blast with my rocket-blower at some point. I can't at present though because it has a part-used roll of Ektar inside. I know this because I saw it there when I opened the back the other day. :banghead:
 
Back
Top