Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,745   Posts: 1,515,611   Online: 942
      
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 31 to 34 of 34
  1. #31

    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    2
    I have used this film a lot in past years and really liked it but the latest batch I got is really terrible. It has the print through problem with a Rolleicord, no red window, all over the image, plus very bad dappling of the negative. So it's pretty much not usable. The rolls are undated so might be quite old, or perhaps were not stored properly for a while. Not all the rolls in the package of ten are that way, some are fine. Gonna have to find another favorite methinks.

    Jimski

  2. #32

    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    2
    On second thought....After shooting eight of the ten rolls I had it was clear only my old Rolleicord was having the problem, not the Yashica or Richoflex. A further web search found someone who said the problem is caused by not having enough tension in the film. I don't really see the connection but it was easy to bend the little tension tab harder against the supply reel to increase film tension. I shot another roll thus with the Rolleicord and, bingo!, no more print through. Don't understand it but it worked. Try it.

    Jimski

  3. #33

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Shooter
    Med. Format Pan
    Posts
    354
    On the ultra fine film, it's the ink on the backing, and it looks like it might be the black part of the backing, as where the white numbers are seems to look better.

    I used multiple cameras, multiple backs, multiple exposures and 10 rolls of film from different boxes purchased on 2 different orders, and all of them have the issue. I also tried a different developer when I saw how bad the first few rolls were looking. So this has nothing to do with red windows in cameras. This film is junk pure and simple. I did 2 days of shooting with the stuff. I used it in a shoot where I should have known better than to use the cheap stuff but I had it and used it.
    * Just because your eyes are closed, doesn't mean the lights in the darkroom are off. *
    * When the film you put in the camera is worth more than the camera you put the film in... *
    * When I started using 8x10, it amazed me how many shots were close to the car. *

  4. #34

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    486
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Searust View Post
    On the ultra fine film, it's the ink on the backing, and it looks like it might be the black part of the backing, as where the white numbers are seems to look better.

    I used multiple cameras, multiple backs, multiple exposures and 10 rolls of film from different boxes purchased on 2 different orders, and all of them have the issue. I also tried a different developer when I saw how bad the first few rolls were looking. So this has nothing to do with red windows in cameras. This film is junk pure and simple. I did 2 days of shooting with the stuff. I used it in a shoot where I should have known better than to use the cheap stuff but I had it and used it.
    For me the real killer to this film was not the number transfer problem, but mottled emulsion. Take a loupe and look at, say the sky or even lit area of the negative and you'll see the pattern. I only use it to test a new camera or one I've repaired.
    JohnW

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin