What Caused This? Film Overlap?

[railhead]

Just developed a roll of 120 and this hasn't ever happened before:

<br><br>

<center><img src="http://img150.imageshack.us/img150/1864/033ft1.jpg"></center>

<br><br>

I'm totally clueless as to what could cause the "line" you see -- and it's on more than 1 frame.

Any ideas?

[larrydressler]

Looks like a bulky shutter to me. the shutter did not move evenly across frame.

 

Larry

[leicaglow]

It looks like it might be processing too.

[robert_martin5]

If your camera has a shutter that travels from side to side rather than top to bottom I guess it could be a shutter issue. My medium format camera has leaf shutters in the lens, so it's impossible to get this problem due to a shutter problem. If you were processing more that one roll of film on a reel and they overlap it could cause this problem - I have seen this on some film I processed.

[bueh]

This is easy. Check out if the lighter area extends onto the edge of the film. If is does, it's a light leak that was caused by light entering the camera/back from the side or above while the film was not moving (so it comes out pretty sharp and defined). See <b><a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00EXWD">this thread</a></b> for more info and an easy solution.

[railhead]

The area outside the frame looks normal to me. When I woke up this morning, I had the

thought that maybe this is due to the developer sitting on the film too long after I pour it

into the tank? I'm doing this on my CPE-2 without the JOBO Lift (I'm still waiting for it to

arrive).

 

Of course, I haven't noticed or done this on any of the other film I've developed in the CPE,

but maybe I was slow moving and didn't realize it?

 

Since the the dark/light half is covering all the film, I can see how just the area covered

with the developer while the tank was upright could leave this line.

 

Is this a possibility?

[andre_noble4]

Is that the whole frame? What were you shooting?

[railhead]

Yes, that's the whole frame, and all the frames have the identical separation mark (or

whatever you want to call it).

 

Further, I know it's not the camera, as far as lenses or anything goes, because I've processed

B&W film from this camera with no problems.

 

So, the only thing I can think of is that I didn't have the door closed all the way, or it's a mark

from the developer sitting too long. COULD the developer do this?

[James G. Dainis]

Extended or more development would cause the highlights to get darker than the mid tones and the shadows <I>on the film</I>". I assume the left side of the above photo is what was in the developer longer? I see very little change on the sky highlight in the middle and bottom of the photo. There should have been more of a change in that area than there is in the top area where the sky is more toward mid tone. And since the overdeveloped highlight would be darker on the film, the overdeveloped sky section should print lighter. <BR>

 

You don't have a line there, it looks more like a band to me, about 1/2 inch wide on my monitor.

[railhead]

Yes, a band is a better descriptor. I have no idea why i couldn't think of a good word to use.

 

So, we're back to square one: none of us can really figure it out?

[James G. Dainis]

What make and model camera were you using?

[railhead]

It's a cheapie: a Seagull 105. But like I said, I've developed B&W from this camera with no

issues whatsoever -- which is one reason why I was thinking it was a developer issue and my

lack of a JOBO lift (still waiting for it to get here).

[James G. Dainis]

Okay, the 105 has vertical feed of the film. I was thinking that perhaps a horizontal feed like the Pentax 67 might offer a clue. The band looks to be in proportion to the clear area between frames of a horizontal feed. A faint light entering the developing tank would cast light through that clear area onto the frame beneath it on the reel, giving a dark band. If that were the case, very unlikely indeed, with the 105 the band would be running side to side on your picture not up and down.

[mpo]

Yes Maury, the developer sitting too long in the tank may have caused this. And I think that was the cause of your problem. BTW, you never told if this was a reversal or a negative film, but that really doesn't matter, the lighter side will always be the overdeveloped one (i.e. at the bottom of your tank).

 

As your camera runs the film from top to bottom, the sides of your photos will be at the top and bottom of your tank when the film is loaded in a reel, that is consistent with the sitting developer theory.

[railhead]

It was Fuji Pro film. Man, I didn't think I let sit that long -- just long enough to pour it in and

cap it. I've done other film like this (including 120) and it came out with no probs. I guess I

was just moving extra slow or maybe had the CPE's temp too high (though I was watching the

thermometer the whole time from within the bottle).

[James G. Dainis]

Marcelo,<BR>

"<I>...the lighter side will always be the overdeveloped one"</I><P>

 

That is true but in the above photo that is not what I am seeing. The band at the top where the sky is more to a mid tone is darker than the band in the middle and bottom where the sky is lighter.<P>

 

And, I wish people who have a question about film would show a photo of the film and not a photo of a photo made from the film.

[railhead]

The image is a scan of the negative. The only thing "missing" are the frame's borders.

[James G. Dainis]

Maury,

<BR>Your photo is a positive image. What is missing is the negative image. On the negative, the band at the top would be lighter, not darker. Overdevelopment would make the highlights appear darker <I>on the negative</I> not lighter, lighter which would print darker as is the case above. You can look at the negative to check.

 

<P>And it would be nice to see the frame borders as well, to see if the band extends into that area.