Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 76,243   Posts: 1,680,112   Online: 839
      
Results 1 to 5 of 5
  1. #1
    clayne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    San Francisco, CA | Kuching, MY | Jakarta, ID
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,837
    Images
    57

    Overexposure Artifacts

    So I recently processed a roll of Neopan 1600@400. I additionally overexposed a ton of the frames due to user error (shutter speed just plain wrong). So as it was, some of the frames were probably taking +3 to +4 stops total (including the EI of 400) of overexposure. Now as expected, very flat images with little contrast and heavily burned highlights. That can be dealt with, but what I noticed is a strange broad edge blooming effect where on frames with more overexposure I simply had proportionally harder edge overexposure. On frames where I was closer to reality, it wasn't as bad. I can't tell if this is some agitation effect (I don't typically have issues there) and I surely don't remember opening the back, nor has the body (M4) had any issues with light leaks, etc. XTOL is fine, used it plenty of times before, and it's processed other rolls before and after without issue (although I typically do 1+1).

    Basically the only varying factor here is this specific roll - although I can say I don't often do XTOL 1+3, but chose to here to keep the dev times longer.

    Workflow:
    Leica M4 + Summicron-M 35mm f/2.0 IV,
    Fujifilm Neopan 1600@400
    Kodak XTOL 1+3
    11min@19C, 30s initial, 3 per 30s, 600ml tank, 500ml dev, single roll

    Since a picture speaks a thousand words, here is a blank frame from the same roll, two overexposed frames, and a sanely exposed frame:
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails R0041F02NP1600XTOL.jpg   R0041F18NP1600XTOL.jpg   R0041F17NP1600XTOL.jpg   R0041F27NP1600XTOL.jpg  
    Stop worrying about grain, resolution, sharpness, and everything else that doesn't have a damn thing to do with substance.

    http://www.flickr.com/kediwah

  2. #2
    Herzeleid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Ankara/Turkey
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    194
    Quote Originally Posted by clayne View Post
    On frames where I was closer to reality, it wasn't as bad. I can't tell if this is some agitation effect
    Did you do inversions or did you used the stick for agitation? They really look strange but if I had only seen the 3rd one I would say it is the agitation stick but the first one and the second, I don't know.

    If it was light leak the brightening should be more chaotic IMO why only on the edges. And the detail lost wouldn't be gradual, it would be like multiple exposure.

    Hope you find the problem.

  3. #3
    clayne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    San Francisco, CA | Kuching, MY | Jakarta, ID
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,837
    Images
    57
    Quote Originally Posted by Herzeleid View Post
    Did you do inversions or did you used the stick for agitation? They really look strange but if I had only seen the 3rd one I would say it is the agitation stick but the first one and the second, I don't know.
    All agitation was with inversions.

    If it was light leak the brightening should be more chaotic IMO why only on the edges. And the detail lost wouldn't be gradual, it would be like multiple exposure.

    Hope you find the problem.
    Yep, plus the end of the roll has no tell tale signs of an open back.
    About the only other variable is x-ray (as this film passed through multiple x-rays) but none of my other 1600-PR was affected, and in addition i'm heavily overexposing - a situation that shouldn't be in x-ray's favor.

    Only other factor I can think of is XTOL 1+3.
    Stop worrying about grain, resolution, sharpness, and everything else that doesn't have a damn thing to do with substance.

    http://www.flickr.com/kediwah

  4. #4
    glbeas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Roswell, Ga. USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,307
    Images
    109
    One possible thing, if you use an alkaline fix and open the tank too soon after pouring it in you will get fogging from residual developer activity as the alkali fix does not kill the developer. I found this out the usual way, DOH!
    Gary Beasley

  5. #5
    Scruff McGruff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    SF Bay Area
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    56
    I feel your pain! Like I said in response to you on my thread, try cleaning/re-mixing your equipment and chemistry. Also look for sources of light leaks not in the camera, like your changing bag and daylight tank (if you use these things).

    If you want to quickly eliminate the camera as the source of the problem, simply process a test strip of unexposed film (just pull out 6-7 inches after the leader on a new roll, snip, and repeat; that way you can use one roll to do five or six tests) and analyze it like you did with the blank frame you shot.

    I am certainly no expert, so YMMV. But, those images you posted do look pretty fogged throughout, so I would look for any unintended exposures to light or wonky chemistry.



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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