film mystery

dave clayton

dave clayton

Suspended / Banned
Messages
181
Name
dave
Edit My Images
No
been using film now since i started uni in 2007 and developed loads of rolls over the years and had my fair share of muck ups and errors,so when this roll came out the tank i was rather bemused by it. the film used was Efke R21 so massive out of date and unsure on the handling of the film i gave it a play on a walk around this morning. processed it on times for the new 100asa film and give it a 1.30 extra and a two stop drop on the iso for the out of date so shot it at 25asa.
Now comes the fun base fog accepted risk but finding the numbers and markings from the backing on the neg was utterly unexpected
if you look closely you can see the square's from the markings on the backings so any ideas bar it being stupidly old film

14344216414_35c5d34dba_b.jpg
 
dave clayton said:
Now comes the fun base fog accepted risk but finding the numbers and markings from the backing on the neg was utterly unexpected
if you look closely you can see the square's from the markings on the backings so any ideas bar it being stupidly old film

14344216414_35c5d34dba_b.jpg
Click to expand...

You've answered your own question really, it's pretty much just stupidly old film. I had the same thing on some 20 year old AgfaPan, I just called it 'art' ;)
 
ha yes but curious to why that effects the film in that way. id just thought it would be a base fog level but finding the backing markings confused me
 
dave clayton said:
ha yes but curious to why that effects the film in that way. id just thought it would be a base fog level but finding the backing markings confused me
Click to expand...
I'm not sure exactly but I assumed that since the film had been foil packed until I used it that the markings were some sort of ink transference onto the film itself. I'm sure there'll be a proper geek along soon enough to explain it fully.
 
RaglanSurf said:
I'm not sure exactly but I assumed that since the film had been foil packed until I used it that the markings were some sort of ink transference onto the film itself. I'm sure there'll be a proper geek along soon enough to explain it fully.
Click to expand...
if you think about it the side withe the markings is the otherside of roll the film side is the black side so cant see how the transfer would happen
 
I'm sure there's a perfectly rational scientific explanation for it.

But if not, Pixies did it...
 
dave clayton said:
if you think about it the side withe the markings is the otherside of roll the film side is the black side so cant see how the transfer would happen
Click to expand...
I know, it makes no sense but mine had 20 years to migrate the ink or whatever it did, just because the paper's black doesn't stop the markings getting through. As I said, there'll be a geek along in a minute, where are you @robhooley167
 
dave clayton said:
if you think about it the side withe the markings is the otherside of roll the film side is the black side so cant see how the transfer would happen
Click to expand...
That's when it's flat in the gate. But until then it was rolled up, so the ink from the markings will be pressed up against the emulsion further down the roll.
 
I've seen this happen a lot on poorly exposed Gp3. I've never really worked it out but @Cuchulainn explanation makes sense. Either that or Chinese pixies...
 
the whole image has that fog and even the the exposure looks correct there is some well odd things going on in the highlights so im putting it down to a very very badly stored expired film
 
Likewise, had it on old films....not unlike @dave clayton , I was somewhat bemused the firt time and had to study how it could happen....took a while for the penny to drop ( no comments thank you!:D:D)
 
RaglanSurf said:
As I said, there'll be a geek along in a minute, where are you @robhooley167
Click to expand...
he's behind you ,,,,,,alright above you


anyway i think its background radiation that has exposed the film over a long time ,and left some backing paper numbers on the film
 
Radiation wouldn't care about the markings though, if it can penetrate the aluminium foil and backing paper, the ink is highly unlikely to make any difference.
 
Some people above have been a bit silly - even I know that pixies only live in digital cameras and consider film the preserve of the dinosaur.
 
Dinosaurs? Pixies? Dinopixies? Pixisaurus?

Honestly, this discussion is ridiculous. Everyone knows that this sort of thing is caused by aliens.
 
I always thought it was the fish in the atmosphere...?
 
Sensible stab in the dark...

Does the camera have a small red window to view the frame number? If so, is it possible that enough light has come through the window and the backing paper to cause the effect seen in the shots? Some very old films were orthochromatic so were insensitive to red light while most newer ones are panchromatic so sensitive to all wavelengths. As I said, a bit of a stab in the dark but maybe a possible explanation.
 
Nod said:
Does the camera have a small red window to view the frame number? If so, is it possible that enough light has come through the window and the backing paper to cause the effect seen in the shots? Some very old films were orthochromatic so were insensitive to red light while most newer ones are panchromatic so sensitive to all wavelengths. As I said, a bit of a stab in the dark but maybe a possible explanation.
Click to expand...

That's a good point, the manual for my Ensign says to be sure to close the window when using panchromatic films.
 
Aha! , I've had exactly the same thing with an old roll of FP4 (or was it HP5? - I'll have a dig around and find it if need be) - It puzzled me in the same way as it was boxed as new and stored in one of those metal flight cases so I'm sure light could not have seeped though. I shot it using a Mamiya 645 so no issue with a red window. Kind of glad someone else has experienced this!
 
Here we are, it was FP4: you can see the number 10 in the clear area to the left, some dots here and there and if you look closely in the bottom and top of the black area on the right which would be between frames you can make out more frame numbers. Can only think it must be some kind of dye transfer / bleaching from the backing paper. It runs evenly throughout the film. Don't know what the wavy strip across the bottom was, could have been my dodgy development as this had been my first go at developing since the film was new, over 15 years before when I was a student!

View attachment 13209
 
Last edited:
Maybe it's radioactive...............
 
Haworth said:
Here we are, it was FP4: you can see the number 10 in the clear area to the left, some dots here and there and if you look closely in the bottom and top of the black area on the right which would be between frames you can make out more frame numbers. Can only think it must be some kind of dye transfer / bleaching from the backing paper. It runs evenly throughout the film. Don't know what the wavy strip across the bottom was, could have been my dodgy development as this had been my first go at developing since the film was new, over 15 years before when I was a student!

View attachment 13209
Click to expand...
What format were you shooting and what frame number was that? I'm trying picture where you'd be on the roll to get frame 10 of 6x6 on the image.
 
Steveo_mcg > It was shot on 645 format which if I remember rightly gives 15 shots per roll, so frame 10 would be about 2/3 of the way through. For some reason I chopped the film into strips of 2 or 3 frames, so will have to piece it back together to see if this correspond with the actual 10th frame as the number could have transferred off the back of the paper to the emulsion touching it when it was rolled up. I'm pretty sure it runs evenly through the roll though. I'll have another look when I get home.

excalibur2 > Strangely I was thinking along the same lines; that or background radiation fogging it over time and the inks somehow blocking it in places. I'll ask my brother; he works in the nuclear industry and calculates radiation dosages and stuff, he might know if it's possible to happen.
 
Haworth said:
Steveo_mcg >

excalibur2 > Strangely I was thinking along the same lines; that or background radiation fogging it over time and the inks somehow blocking it in places. I'll ask my brother; he works in the nuclear industry and calculates radiation dosages and stuff, he might know if it's possible to happen.
Click to expand...

The film wasn't kept in the middle of a sack pf Brazil nuts, for years, by any chance ;)

http://listverse.com/2013/02/06/10-things-you-probably-didnt-know-were-radioactive/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top