Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,219   Posts: 1,532,254   Online: 818
      
Page 2 of 9 FirstFirst 12345678 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 81
  1. #11

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    UK
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    49
    Images
    2
    Had a customer whose camera film-advance didn't work - broken film sprockets - so the whole 'film' was exposed on one 'frame'. They accused us of dropping the film whilst it was wet. Huh? ...so like..er.. all the wet pictures slipped down?...

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    local
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    16,060
    50-75ish 5x7s to be made for the governor's press release,
    formal full body view next to the flag, retouched 5x7 negative.
    as i nervously put the film into the solar enlarger it slipped out of my hands
    onto the cement floor ...
    i picked it up brushed off the pebbles dirt and debris
    and began to apply a little oil from behind my ear
    (never from the nose! my boss would exclaim ).
    an hour later the prints looked nice ...

  3. #13
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    22,972
    Images
    65
    The chain drive on our rack and tank Pako film processor was jamming and we found that the jam was at the top of the overhead traverse about 10 feet above the floor. So, I had to climb up on the machine to unjam and oil it. While up there, I stepped on the lower chain which was quite well oiled, thank you! The machine had a 120 gallon 4 x 5 ft wash tank directly below that spot. I fell. Of course, I went into the wash tank feet first up to my chest.

    Another time, the boss told me that the run was 6 rolls short, which is exactly the capacity of one rack. So, I went into the darkroom, thinking the run was finished, checked the chain drive for hung racks and not finding one, I turned on the lights. Turns out I hung the film and got distracted and never moved the rack onto the chain drive at all. Of course there were no hung racks if I never hung it in the first place! There were 6 dry (now fogged) rolls haging in front of the developing tank.

    PE

  4. #14

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    509

    another great one

    We had a fuji SFA optical minilab at the time, and I had just finished printing about 10-15 rolls of doubles. Hit the buttons to perform an all process...the machine would feed untill a small amount of exposed paper remained as a leader otherwise. "paper jam in drying section". Not nearly as large of a machine as PE's experience, but damn that was a lot of paper to pull out of the racks. The solution was cutting some at the dryer and turning, by hand, the drive gear on the last wash rack.

  5. #15

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    509
    on a related note, every print processor I've worked with, save one have all processed paper as a long roll, cutting into sheets after the dryer. Jams in those are relatively easy to clear as its hard to miss the roll. Why is the frontier 340 designed to cut as it exposes paper? and for god's sake why do they make their stabilizer racks without cut outs, so you have to count count the number of sheets you remove vs the number of sheets you just printed and the machine claims is jammed?

  6. #16

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    509
    Quote Originally Posted by apochromatic View Post
    Had a customer whose camera film-advance didn't work - broken film sprockets - so the whole 'film' was exposed on one 'frame'. They accused us of dropping the film whilst it was wet. Huh? ...so like..er.. all the wet pictures slipped down?...
    I made the mistake of dropping a roll once as I was taking it in. The customer was shocked and upset because according to her, the shock would make all her craptacluar snapshots blurry.

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    279
    When running a photo department at a college and processing film shot by academics ... finding 35 mm film rewound into the cassette inside out - not hard to deal with, very hard to understand why the person concerned did not realise something was wrong ... finding 35 mm film rewound without the rewind button pressed, causing the camera sprockets to rip the film down its entire length on either side - also not hard to fix by see-saw developing the film in a dish.

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Nanaimo, British Columbia
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    907
    Images
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by bob100684 View Post
    on a related note, every print processor I've worked with, save one have all processed paper as a long roll, cutting into sheets after the dryer. Jams in those are relatively easy to clear as its hard to miss the roll. Why is the frontier 340 designed to cut as it exposes paper? and for god's sake why do they make their stabilizer racks without cut outs, so you have to count count the number of sheets you remove vs the number of sheets you just printed and the machine claims is jammed?
    Our Noritsu QSS-3411 cuts the roll to size before the laser section.

    One of my colleagues once pulled a paper jam of about 6' (depending on my memory's lack of embellishment) all neat folded accordion style in to folds between 1/4" and 1/2". We never did figure out how that happened.

  9. #19
    Ed Sukach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Ipswich, Massachusetts, USA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    4,520
    Images
    26
    I've never worked in a Commercial processing - or a "One-Hour" lab ... but...

    One of the participants in a Workshop came to me and announced that her camera was now officially a "wreck" and she had to replace it. Knowing that the camera in question was a Canon A-1 and having seen exellent work from it, I asked her how she came to that conclusion.

    She had exposed a roll of film, and had it processed at the local Super Market "One-hour" station. There was *no* question that the resulting prints were a disaster. She had complained, and one of the counter-persons (not even remotely worthy of the title "Tech") had (guru from the mountain top voice) adamantly and decisively blamed her camera.

    I asked to see the developed film - part of what we were studying was trying to determine quality of processing from the appearance of the processed negatives/ transparencies ...

    The film was cut in strips - four or five to a strip - and when laid out in sequence, it looked like a barber pole - diagonal "bands" of alternating under- to over - development. Severe over and under.

    Needless to say - NO problem with the camera - the processing crew - was another matter.

    I'm still trying to figure out what happened - everyone I've talked to say that it it isn't possible to barber-pole-ize film in a processing machine like that - either deliberately or accidentally.
    Carpe erratum!!

    Ed Sukach, FFP.

  10. #20
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    22,972
    Images
    65
    Ed;

    If the film "jumps the track" in some types of processors, this can happen as the film creeps diagonally across the rollers.

    PE

Page 2 of 9 FirstFirst 12345678 ... LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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