Film Issue: What's Happening Here?

[Chris Dodkin]

Just got some scans back from a roll of Ilford F-Pan

Several frames, but not all, have these 'crease' marks on them - in the same area of the frame

Film guys - any ideas - processing/handling issue?

Don't think it's a light leak is it?

Thx.

 

[Brian Moore]

Same camera you used before with no issues, Chris?

Are they actually creases?

 

[Chris Dodkin]

Here's another example - more severe effect

 

[Chris Dodkin]

Same camera you used before with no issues, Chris?

Are they actually creases?

Different camera - when I look at the film itself there's no physical crease, just a dark area on the negative

Same location each time, but not every frame

 

[Chris Dodkin]

The more I look, the more it looks like the exposure is different in the problem area of the frame.

Sticky shutter would be the most likely cause - fix is $$$

That's what I get for upgrading to the expensive Canonet model!

 

[Hamish Gill]

That doesn't look like sticky shutter to me ... It's a leaf shutter anyway which wouldn't leave that shape
Just open the back of the camera set it to 1.7 and the shutter to... I dunno.. 1/8th.. Somthing slowish and fire off some shots lookin through the camera... I bet any money it works perfectly! You should (and will) see all the leaves opening ...

Unless there is anything on the pressure plate?

Try another film, and another dev shop! You could even ask in the dev shop...

All part of the trials of using film cameras

Last night I spent 20mins trying to get the back off a 1950's mf folder called a Agilux Agifold ... English camera, tatty as hell, but I don't have an English camera so I thought I should buy one! There's a roll of ektachrome in it... Anyway, then it took ages to get the shutter to fire, everything was ceased somehow! Works now though, all part of the fun

 

[Pete Askew]

As Hamish says, although it looks like a horizontal shutter blade issue, it can't be as it has a leaf shutter. It is not a scratch or a pressure issue as you cannot see a physical mark on the film. The band is lighter on the area affected and has therefore been exposed more than the rest of the frame. I guess it is possible that the shutter has not closed fully at the end of the exposure (or taken a long time to do so) and so as you wound on, the film got some extra exposure which is more apparent at the end of the frames for some reason (doesn't seem to quite match the symptoms shown - unless it needs more than one operation of te wind-on crank to advance the film). Do you shoot and then wind immediately?

This is 35mm film and I'm assuming it is new stock and has been well kept. If the frames are the first to be exposed and the problem runs for several and then gets less or stops it could be either light sneaking in through the light trap on the casing (unlikely), irradiation (have you taken the film / camera through an airport, left it near the microwave), maybe heat or maybe something at the lab during loading of the film into the processor. The presence of the darker bands is confusing though. It would certainly be worth asking the lab.

 

[Brian Moore]

It doesn't look like a light leak to me. I would expect some flare from a light leak, or the area affected by the leak to have less contrast or something like that. I wouldn't expect a light leak to produce such a symmetrical affect across the frame, and as Pete observed, one part of the band is darker than the other. When I first saw it I thought about some kind of pressure on the film,...like from the pressure plate or something. I don't know about Ilford Pan F in particular, but I do know that some films are more prone to scratches or other kinds of marks than some other films.

If you're going to re-test the camera with a another film, why not give Tri-X a go? (Or, any conventional Kodak or Fuji color film if you want a change from B&W.)

 

[Chris Dodkin]

Thanks guys - I'll go and talk to the lab owner and see what they say - it's the same lab I used for the Canonet 28 shots (which came out looking great of course!).

I have another roll of Pan-F in the camera now - so will finish that and see how it looks.

Hamish - just curious as to how you found out it was a leaf shutter - or is that just generic for that age of camera?

 

[Hamish Gill]

If you show them at the lab they will probably give you some free film too

 

[Hamish Gill]

It's a Copal leaf (Copal is the brand) ... Dunno how I knew ...
It says it is here though Canon Canonet QL 17 GIII - Camerapedia
So I'm guessing I read it when you said you were gettin one and I looked it up
And yes, common for this era and type of camera!!

 

[Pete Askew]

Canon Canonet 28 - Camerapedia

 

[Hamish Gill]

I actually can't think of a camera of this type without a leaf shutter?
Even the Fuji x100 has a leaf shutter
I think technically the are diaphragm shutters...
But I'm sure diaphragm is a leaf shutter by most peoples standards .. Wikipedia agrees with me so it must be right!

 

[Chris Dodkin]

Popped round to the pro dev shop and spoke to their darkroom guy.

Showed him the negs and we threw a few ideas around as to possible causes.

Then he noticed that there was one occurrence on the last piece of unexposed film after the final shot - i.e. on a piece which had been wound out of the can, into the camera, but not exposed by the shutter.

This was the clue we were looking for - and points to the main rear door of the camera having a light leak along it's vertical closing edge - near to the film can. i.e. the seal on the far right of the door in this stock shot.

When you push on the closed door, it moves at this point, so the thought is that the old light-seal foam is in need of replacement.

I have some new foam ready to go, and will be rewinding the current film, to allow me to get in there and have a go at repairs.

Should be straight forward, if a little fiddly - I'll take pictures and report back!

 

[Hamish Gill]

glad you have found a plausible cause mate!
will be interesting to see the process of replacement!

 

[Chris Dodkin]

ok - here's tonight's DIY effort

Old seal was shot - all sticky and decayed.

Used a dentist tool to scape out most of the crud - then soaked cotton tips in 'goo gone' and used them to clean off the remaining adhesive.

As you can see, it was a gooey mess!

Cut a new strip of self adhesive foam to size, and tweaked it into place with tweezers. Pressed it down with the dentist tool.

Door now closes against the foam with a nice firm resistance - reloaded a 35mm film, so we'll see if it's cured the problem.

 

[Hamish Gill]

Good work ...
Where did you wt the foam from?

 

[Chris Dodkin]

I purchased a light seal refresh kit from FleaBay

Battery & Light Seal Kit: Canon Canonet QL17, QL 17, GIII, etc. | eBay

Came with a new battery for the camera, which I will need in time, and a large strip of self adhesive foam.

Some good instructions, and some additional info on the Canonet.

The foam is more dense than the original material - so we'll see how my fix goes. No doubt I'll have to do all the seals eventually, as they are all rotting away!

 

[Pete Askew]

I guess that could indeed be the cause and the reason it doesn't affect every frame is because some were shot and wound-on quicker than others. Does the pattern of shots / stripes match that?

 

[Chris Dodkin]

Pete - looking at the uncut negs - you can see the last exposed frame (#33) and then a light leak bar to the left, which is exactly the distance to the end of the film, next to the door catch on the Canonet.

So this strongly suggests that area as the problem, as the light leak occurred without a frame being exposed in that section of the film.

If I was winding on quickly and/or squeezing the door closed - there's no light leak!