Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,963   Posts: 1,523,296   Online: 1149
      
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 21
  1. #11

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Nova Scotia, Canada. Ex-California
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    346
    Here's how to analyze it:

    1) It's light on print, dark on negative. That means it is more likely extra light and definitely not an absence of development due to bubbles.

    2) It's a very bright spot, so it can't be simple overdevelopment due to bad agitation.

    3) It's a streak. That points to something related to the film advancing.

    4) It's a comet shaped streak. That indicates some strong burning in of light followed by a lot less light (per square sub-millimeter). That strongly points to a hole in the shutter curtain. The film rests for the shot and then is exposed to the hole sequentially as it is advanced. The advancing film accelerates, so the streak wanes and fades.

    5) It's in the same position with respect to the vertical dimension. Added weight to the shutter pinhole hypothesis.

    6) Condensation problems would be randomly located and would not be so intense.

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Tartu, Estonia
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    62
    It might be a problem related to emulsion, but I've shot several rolls of Lucky and it happened only with this roll that might have been exposed to condensation water. By the looks of it, it certainly seems to have happnened inside the camera. However, I still doubt it has anything to do with shutter, since my camera has metal horizontal leaf shutter and motor drive.

    I think I'll just try to avoid shooting a film taken right from a freezer and see if this happens again.

    And yes, on the right photo is theater "Vanemuine" in Tartu. Very nice you recognized it.
    I like my film stirred, not shaken.
    Flickr

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Winnipeg, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,301
    Ok, what make and model is the camera, leaf shutters aren't horizontal.
    Bob

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    NYC
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,181
    Those are the only 2 frames it happened in or the entire roll in the same place n shape? The frames that don't have this are near the end of the roll or not looking into a bright sky?

    .
    Anyone can make a Digital print, but only a photographer can make a photograph.

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Cheshire UK
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,822
    Dear Juri,

    The first image is more distinct than the second : I think they are a coating aberration called 'comets':

    Comets can be caused by many things, base anomalys, bubbles, dust etc, etc and they are typical in that they have an 'erupted' area followed by a tail where the emulsion then 'repairs' itself after the eruption and during the coating process.

    These individual coating aberrations are usually identified and cut out of the master rolls of products.

    My suggestion is that you return the film to the reseller and ask him / her to return it to the manufacturer
    to check, as it may NOT be as I suggest and its only fair they have a chance to examine it and give you their own verdict.

    Similar looking 'comets' can actually be done in processing if the emulsion side of the film is 'nicked' but it is very rare and usually the comet tail is not as linear as the example shown in the left hand print.

    Simon ILFORD Photo / HARMAN technology limited :

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Tartu, Estonia
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    62
    Quote Originally Posted by Bob-D659 View Post
    Ok, what make and model is the camera, leaf shutters aren't horizontal.
    The camera is Pentax *ist. I know leaf shutters are round, but I thought that the term "horizontal leaf shutter" would mean a shutter consisting of metal leaves that move horizontally.
    Quote Originally Posted by paul ron View Post
    Those are the only 2 frames it happened in or the entire roll in the same place n shape? The frames that don't have this are near the end of the roll or not looking into a bright sky?
    The frames in the original post are #7 and #13 respectively. It also occurred on the first frame, which you can see below. So three frames in the first part of the roll and the same position each time. That's strange now that I think of it.

    I like my film stirred, not shaken.
    Flickr

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    NYC
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,181
    Ah yes the same place, same shape on the frame as well. This suggests a light leak, not aliens, comets, condensation, chemicals or bubbles.

    With the mirror in the up position, shine a bright light into the lens as you look through the open back where you can see the closed shutter? Do this in a dark room so any light wil be seen imedeately if it is in fact a pin hole in the shutter curtain. BTW the image will be upside down in the camera so look in that location as if the film were oriented in the camera, not as seen on a print? Also look in the place where the dot is not the streak.

    I'm banking on a light leak.

    .
    Anyone can make a Digital print, but only a photographer can make a photograph.

  8. #18
    Nicholas Lindan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Cleveland, Ohio USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,372
    Images
    4
    My vote is also emulsion defect.

    If you look at the emulsion side with glancing light is there any evidence of a bump or cavity where the spots are?

    I have never gotten condensation damage on film. I had on occasion taken film from freezer and put directly in the camera with no problems. I began to suspect that the condensation thing was a bit of a hysterical old wives' tale. I have since tried, with all my might, to get 'condensation damage' on film by taking it straight from the freezer and putting it in the camera as fast as I can - both breathing into the camera to raise the humidity and doing it on days with 99.999% relative humidity [an all too common occurrence in Cleveland, Ohio]. I can't get anything to happen. That may the be reason for a complete lack of examples of condensation damage.
    DARKROOM AUTOMATION
    f-Stop Timers - Enlarging Meters
    http://www.darkroomautomation.com/da-main.htm

  9. #19
    Jerevan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Sweden
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,858
    Images
    9
    Quote Originally Posted by Jüri View Post
    And yes, on the right photo is theater "Vanemuine" in Tartu. Very nice you recognized it.
    Yeah, that's the name of it, remember it now. I've been a fair bit in Tartu, borrowed an apartment out in Annelinn for a while. Walked around town and found all sorts of run-down, crazy places in Supilinn for example. Unfortunately I was no good at photography back then.
    “Do your work, then step back. The only path to serenity.” - Lao Tzu

  10. #20
    Newt_on_Swings's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    NYC
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,787
    Ive experienced bad condensation, and it causes large vertical lines and wide splotches all over the emulsion surface. I only had 1 printable negative from a roll of 36, it was that bad. The others were not even fixable after scanning. After that I learned to let it warm up before shooting, and not to throw them in the fridge after.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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