Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,536   Posts: 1,544,164   Online: 887
      
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 21
  1. #11
    gr82bart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Culver City, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,224
    Images
    37
    I fly somewhere at least 3 to 4 times a month. I have always carried my Hassey and film with me, including Scala, and have never experienced anything like what was posted. The worst thing was some heavy fogging.

    Art.
    Visit my website at www.ArtLiem.com
    or my online portfolios at APUG and ModelMayhem

  2. #12
    Kevin Caulfield's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,101
    Blog Entries
    5
    Images
    52
    I fly about twice a month and have had films go through 8 or 10 or more X-ray passes with no damage.

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    129
    Images
    1
    Okay, my experience with scanners has always been as all who have replied. Imprinting is clear and good, Film was not fogged but clear. Three different cameras, two 35's One Nikon F3, One Minox GL35, and Mamiya f330 TLR. All were working and had produced clear pictures in film processed the day before I left Boston. Three different labs processed and all was C-41 film. If it wasn't the scanners, then I am really confused. Thanks for all the comments

  4. #14
    Monophoto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Saratoga Springs, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,691
    Images
    44
    Coincidence does not establish correlation - - -

    Let's approach this scientifically.

    A key symptom of scanning damage is fogging. Exposed and processed film will have images, but the contrast will be low and there may be areas in the images that look like flare.

    The symptoms you describe (clear edge imprinting, but otherwise blank film after processing) indicate that the film was never exposed.

    Therefore, it seems to me that you have an exposure problem rather than an airport scanning problem. Since two film sizes, and three cameras were involved, we can rule out camera failure. The only remaining explanation is that film that was submitted for processing was never exposed.

    I can easily understand how this can happen with 35mm - I've done it more than a few times myself. Exposed 35mm film is returned to its original cassette, and its easy to interchange exposed rolls with unexposed rolls, especially if the film is not rolled all the way into the cassette.

    Roll film is a bit harder to understand since the act of passing it through a camera transfers it totally to a different spool. Most roll films have a distinctive "exposed" warning at the tail end, and an alert processing operator should have questioned a request to process film that didn't have this flag. However, if the operator who processed that film had not done a lot of it, it is possible that he/she wasn't aware that the roll should have had an "exposed" notation.

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Minnesota Tropics
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    735
    My two-bits: the film was incorrectly processed, and the edges did not have exposure. Something else happened there. Our processor does both 135mm and 120 (220) and screwing up the process can happen.

  6. #16
    Dave Parker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,049
    Normally in print film, clear strip indicates the film was never exposured to light, in slide films the film would be black if there had been no exposure, when I was working in the lab, even a roll of traditional B&W that went through the c41 process by mistake had images on the film, and of course we all know about cross processing both c41 and e6 films, but again, the only time I have seen c41 come out clear with the edge writing still on it, is when it had not been exposed and then processed, I have done that with mine more than once over the years, I have never worked with scala, so I can't say about that roll.

    Dave

  7. #17
    Dimitri's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Athens, Greece
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    81
    Could it be that our old friend Murphy paid you a visit?

    He did pay me a few visits and I mixed up the films sendind the unexposed rolls for developing, instead of the exposed ones.

    X-ray damage seems so out of the question, since such high levels that completely fog the film would also do quite some damage to humans. In addition you would also not see the edge imprints, which in your case are visible.

    BTW, if you did send the unexposed ones, be on the lookout for some rolls with double-exposures
    Too many Chiefs not enough Indians.....

  8. #18

    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Shooter
    Large Format Pan
    Posts
    112
    Images
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by Eric Rose
    I travel all over the world on a regular basis with my cameras (mainly LF and MF), and the usual tons of film. I have never had any film that went thru as carry-on fogged. This includes everything from FP4 to Delta 3200. I also do not use lead bags to shield my films.

    I suspect your problem originates with your camera.
    My experience exactly. I think that people will blame the x-ray when the problem lays elsewhere.

  9. #19
    gr82bart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Culver City, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,224
    Images
    37
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr David Hall
    Imprinting is clear and good, Film was not fogged but clear.
    The frames appear to be over exposed. I suspect then this is not a scanner problem but an exposure problem. When I had my one incident of fogging due to a scanner, the fog went outside the frame area and into the imprint area. You are saying the imprinting area is fine, but the just the frames are clear - as in 'see through' and not black?

    Art.
    Visit my website at www.ArtLiem.com
    or my online portfolios at APUG and ModelMayhem

  10. #20

    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    san jose, ca
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,542
    Images
    77
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr David Hall
    Okay, my experience with scanners has always been as all who have replied. Imprinting is clear and good, Film was not fogged but clear. Three different cameras, two 35's One Nikon F3, One Minox GL35, and Mamiya f330 TLR. All were working and had produced clear pictures in film processed the day before I left Boston. Three different labs processed and all was C-41 film. If it wasn't the scanners, then I am really confused. Thanks for all the comments
    Can't help you with the 35mm... but did you change the lens on the C330 recently? Ask me how I know ths could be the problem with the roll film. Look for a red bar in the viewfinder of your Mamiya.

    tim in san jose
    Where ever you are, there you be.

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