Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Can we talk about film?
- Thread starter mollyc
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
PSA folks-don't load your Hasselblad and let it sit.
I removed this roll of film for a good reason, and if my memory is correct it's been in this back since around the first of October 2021.
Unfortunately too I opened a back I was sure was empty, ignoring the Tech Pan box tab on it...although this looks like Fuji backing paper.
I removed this roll of film for a good reason, and if my memory is correct it's been in this back since around the first of October 2021.
Unfortunately too I opened a back I was sure was empty, ignoring the Tech Pan box tab on it...although this looks like Fuji backing paper.
is the film ruined due to the camera or that you opened the back without realizing there was film there? had you taken any images yet?
I ditched this roll because it had made a few trips through checked baggage without my realized it and I didn’t want to take a chance. I didn’t have anything on it
That aside, it would have been fine. Typically you see loss of sharpness on the second frame taken but all subsequent ones will go back to normal.
Also, I should mention that it's not a Hasselblad-specific problem. Many medium format SLRs use this same sort of film path where the film winds off the spool, around into the film gate, then back around to the take-up spool. This is the norm on removable back SLRs. Of the cameras I've owned, I've seen it on all the Bronicas, the Pentax 645, and the Mamiya RB/RZ67. That's not an exhaustive list, but just what I've personally seen and handled.
Last edited:
Kudos @mollyc, you were right....I put the FD-EF adapter on the EF-RF adapter and the old FD 50mm f/3.5 macro actually works on the RP, and my negatives pretty much fill the frame! So I'm back in business.
The RP freaked out initially, I had to dive in and change some settings because with the old FD Macro on it the camera has no idea there is a lens attached to it now. But after figuring that out I am now snapping away. Focus is tricky but I think this will be a 'good enough' solution for me to play around developing my own film.
Incidentally, would anyone care to recommend a not-terribly-expensive wide angle (~24-35mm) I can get for the Nikon FM? I am not planning to buy a bunch of glass for it but something wider than the 50mm prime would be handy to have in the camera bag.
You give me too much credit.
With that said, the 35mm f/2.8 AI is inexpensive and optically good. I'm not a big fan of the Series E lenses in general, but they are all optically good and the 28mm f/2.8 Series E is no exception. I have a few flavors of 24mm f/2.8(a pre-AI and an AI-S) and they're good but they can be a bit pricier.
I scanned the rest of the slides last night and was quite pleased with the results. The Kentmere 400 does seem lower contrast than the other B&W films I've shot thus far, but not so much that it can't be adjusted during postprocessing.
Now I just need to finish that roll of Tri-X currently in the FM and attempt my first developing!
Now I just need to finish that roll of Tri-X currently in the FM and attempt my first developing!
Thanks! That's exactly what I was looking for.
Yep, you have to go through the menu to custom functions and enable "Release shutter w/o lens" any time you're using a manual lens. Remember to reset that to "disable" when you go back to using normal lenses for normal photography!
It's such a personal decision, but I always relied on the Nikkor 24mm f/2.8. It just seemed to be the perfect wide lens formula for the way I liked to work, the things I like to include in my frames, the distance I like to work from a subject. The 28 just seemed bleh. I never liked it. The 35 is more "normal" than wide to me. And the 18 and 20 both seem to have too much wide-angle wigout for my taste. The 24 hit the sweet spot for me. Try KEH or other reliable used dealers. There may even be a local camera shop near you that sells used gear. An AI or AIS would work with your camera, don't buy a newer, plastic AF lens. And if buying a used wide lens, always check the rear element for scratches and rubbed-off coating. You'll notice a slight lens flaw on the rear element more than you would on the front element. Good luck!
EDITED: Meant to write rear element, not real element. Sorry for any confusion!
Last edited:
Who wants to play the "what went wrong in development" game? 🙂
I shot a roll of HP5+ this week, which is a 400 speed film. I rated it at 800 and pushed it one stop in development (first time pushing a roll). I use a plastic Paterson reel and haven't really had any issues with them before for either 135 or 120 film.
I used Ilford Isofol Developer at the same concentration for my 120 film and developed for 13.5 minutes at 68 degrees, inverting 4-5 times every 60 seconds, and tapping after each inversion set. I used 68 degree water for stop bath for about 3-4 minutes, and then used Ilford Rapid fixer, and rinsed according to the directions.
I was wanting higher contrast and grain for this particular roll, and for the images that came out, I'm pleased.
Unfortunately, the rewind mechanism went wonky, and I opened the camera back part way through the roll, so I lost some of those images; this I was expecting, and while disappointing, not a surprise.
However, the very beginning of the roll, is really messed up! I thought I spooled the roll with no issues, but I am guessing that maybe some of the film stuck together early on? There are weird sprocket hole marks on some images that are on the negatives, but are not the sprocket holes for those frames, some images just don't really have any images, and I don't think that's from the camera back opening, because there are intermittent images that are perfectly clear. Also, I have had a back open before, and the only images that were ruined were right around the opening, and the earlier and later frames have been fine.
Where did I go wrong? Luckily this was just a goof around roll to play with pushing in dev, so no huge loss, but I'd like to not repeat this in the future.
To be honest, I'm surprised it took me 5-6 rolls to have a major screwup besides just some uneven agitation, so I'm totally fine with what happened, but want to try to prevent it in the future. 🙂
I shot a roll of HP5+ this week, which is a 400 speed film. I rated it at 800 and pushed it one stop in development (first time pushing a roll). I use a plastic Paterson reel and haven't really had any issues with them before for either 135 or 120 film.
I used Ilford Isofol Developer at the same concentration for my 120 film and developed for 13.5 minutes at 68 degrees, inverting 4-5 times every 60 seconds, and tapping after each inversion set. I used 68 degree water for stop bath for about 3-4 minutes, and then used Ilford Rapid fixer, and rinsed according to the directions.
I was wanting higher contrast and grain for this particular roll, and for the images that came out, I'm pleased.
Unfortunately, the rewind mechanism went wonky, and I opened the camera back part way through the roll, so I lost some of those images; this I was expecting, and while disappointing, not a surprise.
However, the very beginning of the roll, is really messed up! I thought I spooled the roll with no issues, but I am guessing that maybe some of the film stuck together early on? There are weird sprocket hole marks on some images that are on the negatives, but are not the sprocket holes for those frames, some images just don't really have any images, and I don't think that's from the camera back opening, because there are intermittent images that are perfectly clear. Also, I have had a back open before, and the only images that were ruined were right around the opening, and the earlier and later frames have been fine.
Where did I go wrong? Luckily this was just a goof around roll to play with pushing in dev, so no huge loss, but I'd like to not repeat this in the future.
To be honest, I'm surprised it took me 5-6 rolls to have a major screwup besides just some uneven agitation, so I'm totally fine with what happened, but want to try to prevent it in the future. 🙂
Last edited:
My guess is the sprocket hole marks are from the camera back being open. I seen that before on my film and it was from opening the camera back. I doubt it from the development.
okay, good to know. but why are the first few frames basically ruined, and then some good ones in the middle, before the back opened? i mean, clearly the back opening didn't ruin the entire roll.
It does seem odd. Is it possible that they are all the result of light leaks from the open back? Light hitting some parts, but not all, of the exposed frames of film on the takeup spool?
I accidentally popped the camera back once this summer, but it was in a dimly lit room and the back barely cracked open...I got away with it because I don't recall any frames being ruined (apart from by my clumsy and generally poor photography 'technique'
).Well I can't explain that, but in the past I must admit I have opened my fair share of camera backs. And I have encountered similar results. I never seen something like that happen from film developing gone wrong. It's been my experience if film touches film in the development process is gets glued together, and the resulting marks are more organic. The sprocket marks I seeing look exposed on to the film.
I suppose it's possible the back opened at the beginning of the roll and I just don't remember it. I loaded the roll in the camera in July before we went on vacation, but never ended up using it. I shot all the frames this week. But maybe something happened in my camera bag that I didn't realize or don't recall this many months later. This back is kind of hard to open accidentally, as you have to pull the winder handle up, rather than it just being a little latch.
Maybe I'll tape the back of it the next time I load it. It's just so weird that frame 6 is perfect, other than the sprocket holes, then 7 is not well developed at the top, and then 8 is normal except for the sprocket holes....
Maybe I'll tape the back of it the next time I load it. It's just so weird that frame 6 is perfect, other than the sprocket holes, then 7 is not well developed at the top, and then 8 is normal except for the sprocket holes....
Most of the flaws appear to the result of a combination of misloaded film a and opening the back midway through the rewind.
Opening the back fogged the film across the film gate and around the outside of the film on the takeup spool. Some light will make it deeper into the film roll on the takeup spool by passing through the sprocket holes, leaving the telltale trace on those earlier images.
The fact that you had rewind problems and that the sprocket hole "shadows" are very very poorly aligned indicates that the film did not wind properly on the takeup spool. Unless you disturbed the film on the takeup spool before closing the back, the misalignment indicates that either the film wasn't attached to the takeup spool properly or that there is a problem with the camera's transport mechanism (e.g. faulty slip clutch on the takeup, transport stuck in the rewind mode during film advance, ...). One common film loading fault is to let the film be loose over the film gate when closing the back. This can cause the cassette to rotate as the back is closed and trap it in a position where it will cause a bind during rewind and sometimes during film advance as well.
Opening the back fogged the film across the film gate and around the outside of the film on the takeup spool. Some light will make it deeper into the film roll on the takeup spool by passing through the sprocket holes, leaving the telltale trace on those earlier images.
The fact that you had rewind problems and that the sprocket hole "shadows" are very very poorly aligned indicates that the film did not wind properly on the takeup spool. Unless you disturbed the film on the takeup spool before closing the back, the misalignment indicates that either the film wasn't attached to the takeup spool properly or that there is a problem with the camera's transport mechanism (e.g. faulty slip clutch on the takeup, transport stuck in the rewind mode during film advance, ...). One common film loading fault is to let the film be loose over the film gate when closing the back. This can cause the cassette to rotate as the back is closed and trap it in a position where it will cause a bind during rewind and sometimes during film advance as well.
Interesting. This is the third or fourth roll I've put through this camera, and I don't think there's anything wrong with the camera per se, but a good theory that I didn't have it spooled properly when loading it... I'll pay more attention with the next roll. 🙂
The most curious thing to me is that the light leak coming through the sprocket holes are misaligned with the film that they're "leaking" on. That tells me that the film was not wrapped tightly on the takeup spool when the back was opened, OR the film was accidentally exposed to light while it was being loaded on the reel. There really aren't that many other places in the process where film can be wrapped around itself loosely enough to cause misaligned sprocket exposures like that.
Maybe you opened the back AND also got a little light leak while loading the film on the reel?
Maybe you opened the back AND also got a little light leak while loading the film on the reel?
The rig I'm using to copy a whack of old 4x5 negs. Light source is a Kodak 6x8 LED light panel which has proven itself to have very even full spectrum diffused lighting. 4x5 carrier is recycled from the Epson 2450 scanner. Canon EOS T4i camera, kit 18-55mm Canon lens, zoomed into 55mm. Using 1/30th sec, ISO typically comes in at 100. Small Slik travel tripod. The green thing is a kneeling pad. I used a small string level on the camera back to assure the camera was not tilted.
Fuji XP90 camera and built in flash.
Fuji XP90 camera and built in flash.
Last edited:
Back opening is a problem, but even with the back not opening I was getting sporadic problems. Some were obvious as due to development jamming on reel and touching so didn’t develop, but it was those stray lights ruining a frame. Refoamed the seals on both the Canon and Kodak. No light leaks even when taken in high light areas, such as beach. I noticed that the leak was more prevalent on high light scenes or sat for a few days. Ordered two sheets of foam, different heights, and cut rather than the “kits” but the kits did tell me the height needed. The Canon, foam probably needs to compress as back no longer pops open, but pry open with fingers…so no chance of accidental opening. The Kodak is a different issue with a slide latch that can slide by self. To keep from accidentally opening and a reminder that loaded with film, I put a strip of black electrical tape over latch and opening width. Black tape on black camera blends in nice.
yes the camera i used for my bad roll definitely has leaks but not on the order of those first few frames. i put another roll in it the other day and was going to develop it yesterday, only to discover this roll is 36 not 24 like the light leak roll. still have a few more frames to go to finish it.
Electrical tape around the back seams can be a stop-gap solution to rule out light leaks, although I agree that the above don't look like them.
I could never get great results with TMAX of any kind; the 3200 was ok but I always preferred pushing Ilford HP5 to 1600, as I had a great chemical formula to develop that. I spose it's just cos I never spent enough time to get the right formula for the Kodak films. Ildord's later Delta 3200 was quite nice. Was never a big fan of the slower speed Delta films; many liked the fine grain, but for me, coarse grain was what it was all about, aesthetically.
That nose grease trick worked so many times for me. Never seemed to
degrade the actual negs; obvs you only do it on the shiny non-emulsion side.