Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,934   Posts: 1,557,032   Online: 1226
      
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 33
  1. #11
    Rick A's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    north central Pa
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,057
    Images
    33
    The pic does smack of a double exposure. I dont see where it could be anything else.
    Rick A
    Argentum aevum

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    980
    If it's a double exposure then the effect will be seen only inside frame - the edges and perforations will be clear. If the pattern continues outside of the frame, on the negatives, then a picture of the negs (made by holding the strip up to the light and photographing it with a digi cam of some sort) would be helpful in further diagnosis.

  3. #13
    martinhughesireland's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Ireland
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    270
    Images
    33
    Quote Originally Posted by MartinP View Post
    If it's a double exposure then the effect will be seen only inside frame - the edges and perforations will be clear. If the pattern continues outside of the frame, on the negatives, then a picture of the negs (made by holding the strip up to the light and photographing it with a digi cam of some sort) would be helpful in further diagnosis.
    +1, makes sense

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    72
    Hi thanks for all replies. The camera is a Leica M4 and I only exposed the picture once. Actually what I meant is the tree branch patterns on the picture. Please see the new picture for another example. The whole roll has this problem. But the other three rolls of the same film in the same tank do not have this issue.

    I bought the films from ebay. Based on the packaging of the cassette, I think they were loaded by freestyle but not the ebay seller.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Scan-130925-0016.jpg  
    Last edited by newtorf; 09-27-2013 at 11:36 AM. Click to view previous post history.

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,565
    Quote Originally Posted by newtorf View Post
    Hi thanks for all replies. The camera is a Leica M4 and I only exposed the picture once. Actually what I meant is the tree branch patterns on the picture. Please see the new picture for another example. The whole roll has this problem. But the other three rolls in the tank do not have this issue.
    Were the films processed at the same time (i.e. in a multiple reel tank) ? If that's the case and the whole of only one of the film is affected, it looks like a film fault or damage, maybe bad storage or dampness. Can you identify if the films were all from the same batch number or emulsion number?

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    72
    Yes all four rolls were processed in the same tank. I threw away the cassettes already but it is very likely that they are from the same batch.

    My further question is, if it is caused by fungus or mold, should I store this roll of films separately from other films in case the other got contaminated?


    Quote Originally Posted by railwayman3 View Post
    Were the films processed at the same time (i.e. in a multiple reel tank) ? If that's the case and the whole of only one of the film is affected, it looks like a film fault or damage, maybe bad storage or dampness. Can you identify if the films were all from the same batch number or emulsion number?

  7. #17
    Ian Grant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    West Midlands, UK, and Turkey
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    16,330
    Images
    148
    Quote Originally Posted by newtorf View Post
    Hi thanks for all replies. The camera is a Leica M4 and I only exposed the picture once. Actually what I meant is the tree branch patterns on the picture. Please see the new picture for another example. The whole roll has this problem. But the other three rolls of the same film in the same tank do not have this issue.

    I bought the films from ebay. Based on the packaging of the cassette, I think they were loaded by freestyle but not the ebay seller.
    This one looks even more like double exposure than the first, there's more definite shapes on the left over the people. I'd guess the film was wound back but not fully into the cassette after exposure.

    Ian

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    980
    Newtorf, please look at the area outside the frame as I suggested above. In this way you can decide with 100% certainty if it is an exposure problem or a film problem.

    What does this mean?
    "Based on the packaging of the cassette, I think they were loaded by freestyle but not the ebay seller."
    Are you suggesting that the film was not in Foma factory cassettes, inside Foma plastic canisters, inside Foma carton-packaging?

  9. #19

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    72
    OK I will take a look when I get home tonight and report back.

    The films came without canisters, only the cassettes. On the cassettes, there is a printed label of Arista Edu 400. The cassettes are not reusable, and the films inside are not taped to a short lead at the end. So I think this means the films were loaded by freestyle. They were not bulk loaded by the ebay seller who would either used a reusable cassette or a non-reusable cassette with a short lead.


    Quote Originally Posted by MartinP View Post
    Newtorf, please look at the area outside the frame as I suggested above. In this way you can decide with 100% certainty if it is an exposure problem or a film problem.

    What does this mean?
    "Based on the packaging of the cassette, I think they were loaded by freestyle but not the ebay seller."
    Are you suggesting that the film was not in Foma factory cassettes, inside Foma plastic canisters, inside Foma carton-packaging?

  10. #20

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,565
    Quote Originally Posted by newtorf View Post
    OK I will take a look when I get home tonight and report back.

    The films came without canisters, only the cassettes. On the cassettes, there is a printed label of Arista Edu 400. The cassettes are not reusable, and the films inside are not taped to a short lead at the end. So I think this means the films were loaded by freestyle. They were not bulk loaded by the ebay seller who would either used a reusable cassette or a non-reusable cassette with a short lead.
    I'm becoming convinced that the film has been badly handled, maybe partly exposed, or affected by damp before it reached you. Particularly as it was not in a proper canister and could have been stored anywhere (old film from unknown sellers on Ebay is always a gamble).

    Do Freestyle actually load their films themselves...I would have assumed that rebranding was done in the factory and the films packed to the same standards as the manufacturers own products. When own-brand films were more usually available it was quite easy to spot the original manufacturer from the style of cassette, canister and batch number printing, and, while the film was not always the latest version, the QC seemed always as good as the main products. For example, you can see the family likeness between Ilford and Kentmere and also between the current Agfa Precisa and Fuji products.

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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