Advice please: What's the cause of this fault on my photos?

FishyFish

FishyFish

Suspended / Banned
Messages
8,792
Name
Nige
Edit My Images
No
This is the second roll of film through my Olympus 35 RC. The first roll (Poundland Agfa 200), processed at Max Spielmann a couple of days ago, came out fine. This roll (same film), shot yesterday and processed at a different branch of Max Spielmann did not. Any advice on the cause of the fault? It gets progressively worse through the roll (although even the initial shots don't look great, with odd marks being apparent). Looking at the negatives, there are definitely some stains on the surface in a few cases, but the actual dark vignette / streak appears to be in the shots themselves (and appears to be visible between frames). I'm hoping that this is just a film / processing fault, but any advice is appreciated.

I think I'll shoot another roll, but take it to Peak Imaging for processing next time to hopefully rule out lab error.

The photos below are straight out of the scanner. Everything was cleaned and kept free from dust, so the majority of marks seen on these jpgs is from the negatives. The first two shots are from the start of the roll, #3 is about 80% through the roll, and the final two shots are near the end (the beach huts shot is the penultimate shot).

As much as I quite like the crappy "Lomography" feel of the last shot, I'm hoping it's just a processing or film problem and I'm not stuck with it! :)

Thanks.


1
Scan152.jpg
2
Scan150.jpg
3
Scan132.jpg
4
Scan131.jpg
5
Scan129.jpg
 
Last edited:
Seems as if the film losing its chemical coat or more likely it has gone much harder than normal (and curved too much in the cassette). On the image with the beech huts it looks as if the film has rubbed against itself when wound out or back in the cassette. The film could be very old, the camera spools too stiff when you wind back the film ... (and I could be completely wrong) :) I don't see how a lab could cause this much damage.

PS. Is the film fresh?
 
Last edited:
TLR-330 said:
Seems as if the film losing its chemical coat or more likely it has gone much harder than normal (and curved too much in the cassette). On the image with the beech huts it looks as if the film has rubbed against itself when wound out or back in the cassette. The film could be very old, the camera spools too stiff when you wind back the film ... (and I could be completely wrong) :) I don't see how a lab could cause this much damage.

PS. Is the film fresh?
Click to expand...

Thanks. Yeah, it was a roll of Poundland Agfa I bought the other day. It had an expiry date of 2018 I believe. I'm not too concerned about a bad roll of film (or even a processing cock-up), I just don't want it to be a camera fault (although even to my inexperienced eye it doesn't look like one). Maybe I mucked up the loading process? It's only the second roll I've inserted into this camera.
 
I'd try another roll of the same film, and send it to Filmdev (or Photo Express, or one of the other well-known labs) rather than Max...
 
That is definitely a LAB Processing Fault -- it is covered in DUST, hence all the white spots which would be black specks on the negative AND it looks as if they have not replenished their C41 developer since 1967-- there is NOTHING WRONG with the cheap Agfa Vista Poundland film . I use BOOTS Brentwood Branch and the operator there 'Knows' photography and keeps the solutions replenished with test strips as supplied and does not drop your film onto a dusty lab floor !! I bet Max Spielman Lab employs a 16 year old who only knows a bit about taking photos on a 'Gadget' not even a 'real c amera' let alone a FILM one !
Here is an Agfa Vista 200 processed by BOOTS and it was outdated but NO SPOTS and perfect colour balance ----

Lechon ( or 'Hog Roast') by Peter Elgar, on Flickr
 
pentaxpete said:
That is definitely a LAB Processing Fault -- it is covered in DUST, hence all the white spots which would be black specks on the negative AND it looks as if they have not replenished their C41 developer since 1967-- there is NOTHING WRONG with the cheap Agfa Vista Poundland film . I use BOOTS Brentwood Branch and the operator there 'Knows' photography and keeps the solutions replenished with test strips as supplied and does not drop your film onto a dusty lab floor !! I bet Max Spielman Lab employs a 16 year old who only knows a bit about taking photos on a 'Gadget' not even a 'real c amera' let alone a FILM one !
Click to expand...

Thanks Peter. I'm going to take my next roll to Peak Imaging (they're only a 10 minute walk away, and I can drop film off and collect the results in person). They don't so same-day processing, but I'll feel safe in the knowledge that they know what they're doing. They also do negs onl processing, which will save me a bit given that I scan them at home anyway and don't necessarily need the prints.
 
pentaxpete said:
That is definitely a LAB Processing Fault -- it is covered in DUST, hence all the white spots which would be black specks on the negative AND it looks as if they have not replenished their C41 developer since 1967-- there is NOTHING WRONG with the cheap Agfa Vista Poundland film . I use BOOTS Brentwood Branch and the operator there 'Knows' photography and keeps the solutions replenished with test strips as supplied and does not drop your film onto a dusty lab floor !! I bet Max Spielman Lab employs a 16 year old who only knows a bit about taking photos on a 'Gadget' not even a 'real c amera' let alone a FILM one !
Here is an Agfa Vista 200 processed by BOOTS and it was outdated but NO SPOTS and perfect colour balance ----

Lechon ( or 'Hog Roast') by Peter Elgar, on Flickr
Click to expand...


I Agree. The lab has made a complete mess of processing your film. It looks to me like they used exhausted chemicals and then dropped the negatives on the floor. Either that or their processor is completely clogged up with dirt and/or remjet. I'd ask for your money back. You won't receive any compensation, but you should be refunded whatever you paid for the processing.
 
Well it could be Max, but the whole roll could be under exposed so would suggest for the first say three shots increase exposure by 2 stops to see the results.
 
Got a roll of Agfa Vista Plus 200 back from Peak Imaging this morning and these have all turned out perfectly (apart from the one where I messed up the focus, and the one where I left the lens-cap on :oops: :$), so it was just bad processing at Max Spielmann. I'll probably stick to Peak Imaging in future.

Here's a shot from the new roll to contrast with the ones above:


FILM - Countryside telephone by fishyfish_arcade, on Flickr
 
Glad to see you've tracked the problem down. Damn frustrating when you have a roll of duff negatives and no idea why. Been there a couple of times!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top