White linear marks on B&W negs

<p>Hi everyone,<br>

As a newbie, I developed my first 2-rolls in a long time. ;) I'm mostly satisfied with the outcome except some strange white lines appeared on the negatives. They appear on some but not all of them. I'm wondering what could be the cause? And possible rescue (they are important footages)? Your input is much apprieciated!Thanks a lot!</p>

<p><img src="http://img3.douban.com/view/group_topic/large/public/p9072312.jpg" alt="" width="500" height="336" /></p>

<p>http://img3.douban.com/view/group_topic/large/public/p9072312.jpg </p>

<p>your photo does not show.</p>

<p>Are you using any kind of squeegee after washing your film?</p>

<p>+1 photo does not show. Looking at the actual negative, is the line white, or is it like a scratch? Is it narrow? Is it parallel to the film edge?</p>

<p>@peter carter : Thanks for letting me know. I'm re-uploading it. Can it be seen now? <br>

@Jacques Brodeur: No I didn't use any squeegee. It did end up with some water marks after dried. I simply wiped them off with a dry cloth and it worked. <br>

@John Stockdale: I've uploaded the photo again. Can you see it now? I did not notice at first when I examed the negatives. It came out obviously when I got them scanned. <img src="https://scontent-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-frc1/t1/1743690_10151888223896227_1235559627_n.jpg" alt="" width="960" height="645" /></p>

 

<p>I see white lines on the positive which must mean that the lines on the negative must be conspicuous and black. Black lines on a negative are occasionally pressure marks that become visible after development. But mostly black defects in a negative are the result of a light leak in camera or a light leak in the developing tank.</p>

<p>@Maris Rusis: Thank you for responding! I agree that a light leak is probably the case. I'd investigate it but I suspect it might be the developing tank. </p>

<p>I, too, am most inclined to think that it is a light leak.</p>

<p>It looks more like a reflection. I light leak tends to be much thicker and less in focus. But BonW might be on to something too.</p>

<p>"I did not notice at first when I exam[in]ed the negatives. It came out obviously when I got them scanned." Did you see the lines on the negatives later? Can you scan the same negatives on a different machine?<br>

<br>

The lines are not straight. That can be taken to rule out a mechanical mishap or a leak into the camera body. The lines are relatively sharp, which suggests that the film was in contact with the source of light, or close to it, or that the light was in some way focussed.</p>

<p>Looks like there is a shift of the set of lines, like a geological fault (see the arrow), the right side going upward. And the fault is located precisely at the edge of the pillar, mmm very strange.</p><div></div>

<p>Just a long shot, but were you wearing a glow in the dark or lighted watch when you were loading the film? Might not be a problem from across the room but could be an issue when it's up close to the film. Can't say for sure whether it would produce this pattern of marks.</p>

<p>Thanks to everyone who responded! <br>

@<a href="/photodb/user?user_id=1187343">Mukul Dube</a>： Yes after paying close attention, I can see the dark lines on the negatives. I'll scan them again on a different machine later on and see how they will turn out like. Why it can be ruled out a leak into the camera body? <br>

@<a href="/photodb/user?user_id=959573">Didier Lamy</a>: It indeed look like a fault. Thanks for the precise observation! I'm attaching another photo from the same roll - there's a similar 'fault' on the left. So I would think the 'fault' located at the edge of the pillar is merely a coincidence. But how interesting! <br>

<img src="https://scontent-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/t1/1013480_10151889856776227_1769959551_n.jpg" alt="" width="960" height="645" /></p>

<p>@Craig Shearman: I wasn't wearing a low or lighted watch - I don't think so. </p>

<p>Here's a photo from another roll which was developed at the same time. The lines on some photos look sharper. Seen below:<br>

<img src="https://scontent-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-prn2/t1/1607129_10151889866266227_1975295195_n.jpg" alt="" width="960" height="645" /><br>

This is a highly underexposed photo and we can see clearly how the marks appear like: (I'm wondering can it be caused by the developer or fixer which wasn't been mixed well enough?)<br>

<img src="https://scontent-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/t1/1660526_10151889866481227_1297245883_n.jpg" alt="" width="960" height="645" /></p>

<p><em>"Why it can be ruled out a leak into the camera body?"</em> As has been said, light leaks are typically diffuse. These "linear marks" are relatively sharp, so they cannot have come from leaks unless the film was close to the leaks: but camera bodies have edges that are straight, while the lines are not. I think further detective work must focus on the last photo, in which the lines are broken but overlapping.</p>

<p>What camera and lens were in use for these problem photos?<br>

You have eliminated the scanner as the corresponding lines are on the negatives. Scanner lines are always straight along the scan path, they never bend. Scan lines can start, stop and restart in a scan but will be in the same or parallel lines.<br>

Very doubtful that chemistry will cause such a problem. Improperly mixed chemicals would produce poor negatives not streaks.</p>

<p>They can be caused by excess pressure on the film, called pressure exposure, especially during advancing the film or rewinding it in the case of a 35mm camera. Check the transport rollers in the film path, they should turn freely with the weight of a 1/4 inch wide x 3/8 inch long down feather applied to them. The rollers should be smooth as should the pressure plate. Any buildup on any of the rollers or pressure plate could cause these marks.</p>

<p>Static sparks can occur in dry winter conditions, but it usually looks just like you'd think - sparks, mini-lightning flashes - and tends to occur mainly with rapid wind cameras or quickly rewinding the film.</p>

<p>The fact that the lines appear to be the result of a back and forth movement in the last frame point to a mechanical action making the the mark after exposure since the image is not jerky. Is the mark visible on the negative? That would mean either backwinding into the film can or loading into the developing tank is making the mark. Processing maybe ten frames of unexposed film could show the marks. If you cannot see damage to the negative then the scanner is the only other thing that could cause it so a rescan on a different scanner might remove the problem.</p>

<p>Good luck</p>

<p>how about a film too loose during rewinding that gets progressively tightened with jerks, each one causing a ~fault?</p>

<p>I didn't see whether of not the marks were on the plastic or emulsion side. This would give you a clue of were to look. Check for debris inside the camera.... for example: the film pressure plate and the box. From my experience, I've had that happen to me from dusty film boxes to sponges not fully soaked. Also, if you are reusing film cassettes, make sure the lips are straight. And to that thought, check your film loader. </p>

<p>Just to throw a little dark light on this. I have seen X-Ray damage look just like that.</p>

Thank you everyone for your input!

I developed 4 rolls the past week(2 at

each time). And one of them came out

with the same marks. The problem film

is ILFORD PAN 400 as these two

previous ones. The other two rolls

(Chinese brand called Lucky) came out

underdeveloped and there's no sign of

marks.

I start to suspect the cause might be

from the film. These problem rolls are

shoot with two different cameras

(Minolta hi-Mac and Pentax mz-10)

and neither of them produced problems

like this before. Add the fact that

problems appeared on ILFORD films

but not the other brand.

These ILFORD films I bought from a

different supplier. I think the source

might be suspicious and a possible x-

ray damage could be the case if they

are imported illegally.

I will buy more ILFORD film with my

original supplier and if no problem

comes out, I can almost assume the

above thoughts are true.