First Roll of Film | A Few Blank Frames

Dork Knight

Dork Knight

Suspended / Banned
Messages
197
Name
Jason
Edit My Images
No
Hello,

I've just had my first roll of film back from the lab and I appear to have six blank frames at the end of the negatives, I'm not sure why but a little disappointed as I was looking forward to one or two of those pictures.

This is a secondhand camera but new to me, hopefully there's not a fault with it but I'll put another roll through it on the weekend to see what happens.

Here are a few pictures from the roll, shot on a Bronica ETRSi using Ilford HP5+ 400 (metered for ISO 1000), the pictures have had levels and curves applied (one or two have been straightened and cropped due to me struggling with the waist level view finder);

1:
32213297596_c77b0dc9e1_b.jpg


2:
32132496491_29396447b9_b.jpg


3:
32251625655_f9fdae4f87_b.jpg


4:
32213298026_5273b06a10_b.jpg


5:
32213298686_4e9bc67354_b.jpg


6:
31441532123_79ca1fc436_b.jpg


7:
32251624805_8e8e66221e_b.jpg


8:
31441532923_0b631d8cdf_b.jpg


Thanks,

Jason
 
eNice set!

Are the negs correctly spaced on the film?

Seems strange that you've lost 6 frames at the end of the roll.

The 6 missing frames, are they clear or black ...that will dictate wether the film was exposed to light or not.

Was the fim back removed and replaced onto the body at any time or was it in place on camera for the full roll.

There will no doubt be a logical answer, it's all a matter of eliminating one possibility at a time.

The fact that you have these images would show that there is unlikely to be a problem with the outfit....User error is often the case ( sorry but it happens to us all at times)
 
Last edited:
Thanks... The negatives appear correctly spaced and the missing five frames (I thought it was six) are transparent, so they are clear and not black, although the very last section of the negative is black.

All the pictures were taken on a day out and the film back was not removed, which is why I'm scratching my head as to why the first images came out Ok but not the last five.

Lets hope it was a one off :)
 
Dork Knight said:
Thanks... The negatives appear correctly spaced and the missing five frames (I thought it was six) are transparent, so they are clear and not black, although the very last section of the negative is black.

All the pictures were taken on a day out and the film back was not removed, which is why I'm scratching my head as to why the first images came out Ok but not the last five.

Lets hope it was a one off :)
Click to expand...

If there are no images then the iris wasn't opening i.e. no light getting to the film...have a look at the camera and see if it's working properly.
 
Dork Knight said:
Thanks... The negatives appear correctly spaced and the missing five frames (I thought it was six) are transparent, so they are clear and not black, although the very last section of the negative is black.

All the pictures were taken on a day out and the film back was not removed, which is why I'm scratching my head as to why the first images came out Ok but not the last five.

Lets hope it was a one off :)
Click to expand...

I have the etrs .....curiosity is getting the better of me tbh .

If I get chance this evening, I'll dig it out and have a play to see what can be done ( other than leaving the lens cap on which is not likely as you would see no image to compose!) to cause the problem that yu've experienced.
 
excalibur2 said:
If there are no images then the iris wasn't opening i.e. no light getting to the film...have a look at the camera and see if it's working properly.
Click to expand...

That's right so perhaps a battery problem ??
 
I've just done a little digging, as I don't have a Bronica (and have never handled one!). It appears that if the darkslide is only slightly out, the shutter can be fired, giving a blank frame. So, what did you do with the darkslide before the 6 blanks, and could this explain it?
 
Dork Knight said:
Here are a few pictures from the roll, shot on a Bronica ETRSi using Ilford HP5+ 400 (metered for ISO 1000)
Click to expand...


Do you think this is correct, or a typo
If its not a typo, they look pretty good for a stop and a half under exposure
 
StephenM said:
I've just done a little digging, as I don't have a Bronica (and have never handled one!). It appears that if the darkslide is only slightly out, the shutter can be fired, giving a blank frame. So, what did you do with the darkslide before the 6 blanks, and could this explain it?
Click to expand...

Yes the darkslide can pose a problem in more than one way tbh as like you say stephen, it only has to be out a fraction to allow the shutter to fire and also when the back is off camera, the darkslide can be removed which depending how one has it stored in bag etc, can be too easy to pull it out slightly and potentially allow light entry.

It is one of the safety features that the RZ67 has, but is missing with the ETRS
 
excalibur2 said:
If there are no images then the iris wasn't opening i.e. no light getting to the film...have a look at the camera and see if it's working properly.
Click to expand...

I've done some searching and others have mentioned it could be an issue with the lens (leaf shutter?).

Asha said:
I have the etrs .....curiosity is getting the better of me tbh .

If I get chance this evening, I'll dig it out and have a play to see what can be done ( other than leaving the lens cap on which is not likely as you would see no image to compose!) to cause the problem that yu've experienced.
Click to expand...

If you do get a chance then I would greatly appreciate it.

StephenM said:
I've just done a little digging, as I don't have a Bronica (and have never handled one!). It appears that if the darkslide is only slightly out, the shutter can be fired, giving a blank frame. So, what did you do with the darkslide before the 6 blanks, and could this explain it?
Click to expand...

I took the darkslide out when I took the camera out of the bag, I walked around the site with the camera on a neck strap and only inserted the darkslide when I was home so that I could remove the back.

joxby said:
Do you think this is correct, or a typo
If its not a typo, they look pretty good for a stop and a half under exposure
Click to expand...

I used Iflord HP5+ 400 film and my Sekonic set at an ISO of 1000 to take the readings for correct exposures.
 
Last edited:
Asha said:
That's right so perhaps a battery problem ??
Click to expand...

IIRC no battery and it fires at 1/500 sec or is it that's the only speed it would work once set..so something would be on the film.
 
Last edited:
Dork Knight said:
I used Iflord HP5+ 400 film and my Sekonic set at an ISO of 1000 to take the readings for correct exposures.
Click to expand...


Well I'm not gonna boo a method that clearly works for you, but surely correct exposure is iso 400 for 400 speed film, if you're metering at 1000, that is under exposing 1 1/2 stops.
Film has plenty of latitude so, I dunno, whatever works I suppose...:)
 
If the battery is dead or not loaded then the shutter will default to its highest speed ( on the ETRS that is 1/500)

Depending upon the aperture you set, it is possible that this speed could result in nothing recorded on your film.

Also, if using the outfit in near or below freezing temperatures, the battery has a tendency to fail until it returns to a milder temperature, if it does this then the default speed kicks in automatically

If you remove the film back, ensure the battery is installed and set the multiple exposure lever forward ( horizontal), you will be able to set the shutter speed, fire the shutter and see that the iris opens correctly for the correct duration.
 
I read the fact sheet and it says the film is rated from 400 to 3200, as it was an overcast day I thought I would bump it up to 1000 as it was the first time I would be using the camera.

The next film I think I'll try is the Ilford XP2 Super 400 at 400, although Ilford say that one is rated at 50 to 800.

Looks like there will be lots of options for film types and ratings, lots to play about with.
 
joxby said:
Do you think this is correct, or a typo
If its not a typo, they look pretty good for a stop and a half under exposure
Click to expand...

Dork Knight said:
I used Iflord HP5+ 400 film and my Sekonic set at an ISO of 1000 to take the readings for correct exposures.
Click to expand...

joxby said:
Well I'm not gonna boo a method that clearly works for you, but surely correct exposure is iso 400 for 400 speed film, if you're metering at 1000, that is under exposing 1 1/2 stops.
Film has plenty of latitude so, I dunno, whatever works I suppose...:)
Click to expand...


I agree with John that for me 400 is the correct exposure for 400 film but clearly your metering has worked.

To have opened up andover exposed for a stop and a half, i would fully understand as sometimes i would do that to expose for the shadows ( as one typically does with negative film)
 
Asha said:
If the battery is dead or not loaded then the shutter will default to its highest speed ( on the ETRS that is 1/500)

Depending upon the aperture you set, it is possible that this speed could result in nothing recorded on your film.

Also, if using the outfit in near or below freezing temperatures, the battery has a tendency to fail until it returns to a milder temperature, if it does this then the default speed kicks in automatically

If you remove the film back, ensure the battery is installed and set the multiple exposure lever forward ( horizontal), you will be able to set the shutter speed, fire the shutter and see that the iris opens correctly for the correct duration.
Click to expand...

The shop put a new battery in the camera when I purchased it, that's not to say that it could be faulty but I seem to recall the red light being Ok when I was taking the shots.

It was pretty cold but it wasn't freezing on that day.

EDIT: I just grabbed the camera and used the battery test button, all appears to be Ok.
 
Dork Knight said:
The shop put a new battery in the camera when I purchased it, that's not to say that it could be faulty but I seem to recall the red light being Ok when I was taking the shots.

It was pretty cold but it wasn't freezing on that day.

EDIT: I just grabbed the camera and used the battery test button, all appears to be Ok.
Click to expand...

For themoment all I can suggest then is that you check the iris is functioning correctly using the method I mentioned in post 13 then, assuming that all appears ok, run another film through the kit and see what happens.

If the problem persists then returning it to the shop is probably on the cards ( assuming they offered an aftersales service / warranty with the sale)
 
I've just given it a go and all appears Ok, tested at a few speeds and up to 8 seconds so I'll run another roll of film through to see what happens.

Thank you for the help/info everyone.
 
Silly question but did you actually shoot to the end of the roll? The fact that it's the last 5 suggests that they weren't exposed at all. The etrs will shoot 15/16 images.
 
Yes, there were one or two pictures that I was looking forward to seeing.
 
It seem strange that it is the last 5 pics. I'd have to agree with Asha that it seems more likely to be a battery/temperature related issue.

...or you didn't actually take them! :)

How long were you out for from first to last pic?
 
Last edited:
I would guess the first images were taken up to 60 minutes outside, the last images were taken around 90 to 120 minutes (after a 20 minute spell indoors).

So the cold could possibly be a culprit.
 
Dork Knight said:
I read the fact sheet and it says the film is rated from 400 to 3200, as it was an overcast day I thought I would bump it up to 1000 as it was the first time I would be using the camera.

The next film I think I'll try is the Ilford XP2 Super 400 at 400, although Ilford say that one is rated at 50 to 800.

Looks like there will be lots of options for film types and ratings, lots to play about with.
Click to expand...

You can shoot HP5 faster than 400, yes. In fact, it's how I usually shoot HP5. That said, in my experience, and according to even Ilford's own data sheet for HP5, development must be increased to compensate for the underexposure. If you develop the film normally after shooting at EI 1000, you will be underexposing the negative, potentially sacrificing shadow detail and enhancing the appearance of grain (of course, there are some photographers who want this look and do this intentionally).
 
Dork Knight said:
I read the fact sheet and it says the film is rated from 400 to 3200, as it was an overcast day I thought I would bump it up to 1000 as it was the first time I would be using the camera.

The next film I think I'll try is the Ilford XP2 Super 400 at 400, although Ilford say that one is rated at 50 to 800.

Looks like there will be lots of options for film types and ratings, lots to play about with.
Click to expand...


Well......sort of, I apologize in advance if I'm teaching you to suck eggs..:)

Generally, a 400 speed film should be shot at iso 400, that is its native speed and one which gives, (give or take a bit) best exposure, its not variable, its iso 400 and that's that.
The fact sheet gives exposure data for the iso range at which useful images can be made, but if you are going to expose 400 film at 1000, you need to alter your development by increasing the strength of developer or increasing the time the film spends in it, this is called pushing.
Its the same going the other way, to over expose XP2 ie shoot it at iso 50 when its a 400 speed film, that's 3 stops over exposure, you need to adjust development, less time or weaker developer than the standard for iso 400, this is called pulling.
Whilst you can still get usable negs.....maybe.....without altering development, its hardly optimum, if you don't do your own developing you need to tell your lab what you shot the film at so they can adjust development accordingly.
I appreciate that if you're gonna scan negs and then process them in PS, you will be able to bring duff negs back from the dead, but it would be far better to begin with correctly exposed negs....well that's what I think anyway...:)
 
Indeed, I did have the lab expose for 1000 which they also noted on the returned paperwork.

The HP5+ was thrown in with the camera and loaded at the shop, so that was the film I had to roll with at the time although I've ordered a few different types to try out.

I didn't fancy lowering the shutter speed below the focal length of the lens for hand holding, as it was overcast I just jumped to 1000 although I should have opted for 800 thinking about it now.
 
Dork Knight said:
Indeed, I did have the lab expose for 1000 which they also noted on the returned paperwork.

The HP5+ was thrown in with the camera and loaded at the shop, so that was the film I had to roll with at the time although I've ordered a few different types to try out.

I didn't fancy lowering the shutter speed below the focal length of the lens for hand holding, as it was overcast I just jumped to 1000 although I should have opted for 800 thinking about it now.
Click to expand...

Excellent, well that's cleared that up, I wondered why they looked so decent....(y)
 
Great collection of shots from St Fagans, it's one of my favourite locations. Nice to see another local too. If it's any consolation, my mamiya RZ67 occasionally produces inexplicable blank shots, but thankfully not 5.

Kodak Tri-X 400 supposedly pushes quite well based on all I've read. I've only ever pushed HP5 and I had no issue with the results. Delta 3200 was a surprise as it was a lot less grainy than expected when shot at 1600.
 
Hi Kyle,
I've also heard that about Tri-X with people having good results at 1600, I've popped Tri-X in a Nikon L35AF that I picked up cheap which I'll keep in the car and I've set this to 800 (might be a while before I get through that film though) so I hope it will have a good result.

I picked up Delta 3200 to shoot indoors on New Year's Eve but I came down ill so I've not used it, I was going to shoot the Delta at 3200 but looked at the data sheet after new years and noticed that it's rated at 1600 to 6400 ~ It sounds like this will be one to try at 1600 then.
 
StephenM said:
I've just done a little digging, as I don't have a Bronica (and have never handled one!). It appears that if the darkslide is only slightly out, the shutter can be fired, giving a blank frame.
Click to expand...

Which is why I always leave my dark slides at home.

I had this problem with an ETRS and later with an RB67.


Steve.
 
Did you take the photographs with a WLF or an AEII prism finder?
 
Dork Knight said:
The next film I think I'll try is the Ilford XP2 Super 400 at 400, although Ilford say that one is rated at 50 to 800.
Click to expand...

Dork Knight said:
I picked up Delta 3200 to shoot indoors on New Year's Eve but I came down ill so I've not used it, I was going to shoot the Delta at 3200 but looked at the data sheet after new years and noticed that it's rated at 1600 to 6400 ~ It sounds like this will be one to try at 1600 then.
Click to expand...

Keep in mind that it's not quite as simple as just shooting these films at these various speeds.

Sure, XP2 can be shot at between EI 50–800, even without needing to alter the development because it's C41, but it will affect the negatives, which then has a knock on effect on the scanning, printing, and look of the final image. I can tell you from personal experience that darkroom printing an XP2 negative that has been shot at EI 50 or EI 100, for instance, can be a b***** because the negative is so dense that exposure times can be several minutes long. The scans at these speeds tend to be quite grainless though, so you will need to weigh up the pros and cons.

You can also have some issues regarding contrast, grain, etc., with some films.

Of course, I'm not saying not to shoot at these different speeds, as I do this myself, just to be aware that your decisions at the time of exposure have ramifications for what happens afterwards. It may take some experimentation to find the processes and results that you like.
 
If the shop loaded the film back for you, did they do it right? It is not hard to do, but if they were not used to loading removable film backs, they could have got the start point wrong.
 
It looked they it was loaded correctly as I checked the manual and youtube when I got home, but all the blank frames were at the end of the roll.
 
skysh4rk said:
It may take some experimentation to find the processes and results that you like.
Click to expand...

I think this is the key point, I will have to experiment with some films once I've found a few that I like and would regularly use.
 
Maybe I'll duct tape a hand warmer over the battery area on saturday as it's going to be pretty cold, it might help.
 
Dork Knight said:
Maybe I'll duct tape a hand warmer over the battery area on saturday as it's going to be pretty cold, it might help.
Click to expand...

Maybe you could leave the camera out in the cold (with no film in it) for say 30 mins then test it.
I have no idea how low in temp leaf shutters still work, but had no problem with my RB67 taking snow shots on a cold day.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top