liljuddakalilknyttphotogra Posted January 1, 2009 Author Share Posted January 1, 2009 <p><strong>Hi Tito</strong> ,<br> I will locate more rolls as they've been displaced due to remodeling. I will try again after cleaning the camera better. And I will try to use my D300 to compare exposure. Thanks for caring & trying to help....<br> <strong>Hi Robert</strong> ,<br> I have to admit I was out on a strange day with really strange light. I will try on a better & with more even light day. I actually don't recall exposure. I was juggling three cameras that day.<br> I will test. :-)</p> <p>Best wishes for 2009 - I wish for you Golden light & willing subjects :)<br /> <br /> Lil :)</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjferron Posted January 1, 2009 Share Posted January 1, 2009 <p>I consistanty get scratched fims back from labs. I know it's not my cameras because I shoot B&W and develop it myself with no problems. My most recent print film experience was film sent to a Kodak contractor from a Target store. Prints were great and the low res scans on the CD were fine. When I decided to scan one of the negatives myself I was horrified at it's condition. Scratches and hair-like particles everywhere. What in hell do the lab folks do them anyway? A few years back I remember seeing a young woman yank a negative strip out of the machine and whip it around like a cheap ribbon.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
liljuddakalilknyttphotogra Posted January 1, 2009 Author Share Posted January 1, 2009 <p>I had written a long answer & now it's gone due to pressing some button I shouldn't have....<br> <strong>Hi Michael</strong> ,<br> I've just run some tests in between the FM, N90s & the D300. The FM meters differently than the N90s & the D300.<br> It wanted a f/11 where the others wanted a f/8 - - yet that doesn't make sense either..... I think it needs service.... I'll continue running this roll of film & see what I end up with. I will continue to run it against the others as I can. Hummmmmm I should have a spot meter somewhere.... Finish the roll & develop it at another place & see how the prints look. Once I've done that I will determine if it needs an overhaul or not.<br> Thank you for all your help...<br> Best wishes for 2009 - I wish for you Golden light & willing subjects :)<br /> <br /> Lil :)</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thomas_hardy1 Posted January 1, 2009 Share Posted January 1, 2009 <p>That fine line could be the lab's fault. I've seen these lines in prints returned from the lab but not there in BW I've done myself.</p> <p>There was that one camera I had which scratched the film though. </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
liljuddakalilknyttphotogra Posted January 1, 2009 Author Share Posted January 1, 2009 <p><strong>Thanks Thomas</strong> ,<br> I will run a second roll through it & see what happens when I take it to a different lab. I've cleaned the camera out & checked for anything which could explain the lines - I find nothing.<br> Best wishes for 2009 - I wish for you Golden light & willing subjects :)<br /> <br /> Lil :)</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john_cox7 Posted January 1, 2009 Share Posted January 1, 2009 <p>Lil, Have you examined the negatives with a loupe for any scratches that appear to coincide with the same position on the prints?<br> If the negatives are scratched, then examine the flim pressure plate on the camera back.<br> If the pressure plate is clear, then possibly the light trap on the film canister could have been the culprit, or otherwise the lab process equipment.<br> Are the lines on the prints "fine" as in their width, or are the broad? Fine lines suggest scratches to the negatives, a broad line suggests a problem with the lab process equipment.<br> Also, are these lines black or are the colored (green, magenta, yellow)?<br> The graininess of the prints suggest underexposure, more obvious with 400ASA color print film.<br> Can you compare light meter readings with the FM and any of your other cameras to check the accuracy of the FM's shutter and ASA dial?<br> Hope the above helps to solve your problem.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark_davidson Posted January 1, 2009 Share Posted January 1, 2009 <p>A lot of great answers here.<br> An observation I would make as a lab owner is that it is true that good processing is hard to find anymore. This is because the shift to digital has driven the bulk of labs in America out of business. This shift has driven the talented people that used to work in the field away. Even the best labs in the large cities have a very difficult time attracting people to a field that has the smell of death around it.<br> As for film processing, the quantity of film processed is microscopic and a film machine cannot be kept in control with such low volume. Because of this, we discontinued our C-41 processing last year.<br> Regarding the quality of scans: Scans produced for CDs at the time of processing are a compromise between speed and ultimate quality. A good lab will correct for color and density and occasionally contrast. Bear in mind that a roll of 36 exposure film will be analyzed, scanned and exported to a folder in 3 minutes. Real quality scans are still available from dedicated scanning shops and a few custom labs offering reproduction grade scans. What I always noticed was the tremendous price sensitivity of those seeking scanning services. A true quality scan in a production environment takes time and real expertise. That doesn't come cheap.</p> <p>Cheap is what everyone wanted , cheap is all that is now available. (for the most part)</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jorge Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 <p>Lil, I wouldn't fault the camera for the appearance of the photos, unless it's an obvious fault of the shutter. Most likely factors are: film choice; processing; lens.<br> The two faint lines across the pictures are probably scratches. They can be caused by piece of dirt on the film gate, the film casette lips or -most likely- the processor. Check if they are apparent in the actual film.<br> The FM is a great camera, only bested among the Nikon film lineup by the FM2n. It will be hard to beat for shooting film, except maybe by a Leica M. :-)<br> My suggestion would be to find first a good processor and then get a decent film scanner. If you can find a used Minolta 5400, they're the best, but Epson has some great flatbeds that do wonderful film scans too.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sjmurray Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 <p>I can't resist: as someone who has shot film since the 1960's, welcome to the world of film! If you are serious about shooting film, I would suggest getting a film scanner and doing your own black and white developing of negatives. That's the only way to consistently get a decent negative and scan. For color negs, still do your own scanning. You can get very wonderful results this way, and PS is still very handy for post processing. There is still a certain quality of the black and white negative that seems to be elusive with digital, so far. For color work, I would much rather use digital unless doing serious landscapes, in which case a 4x5 would be in order. BTW the learning curve for working with black and white film and developing is rather steep. </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
liljuddakalilknyttphotogra Posted January 2, 2009 Author Share Posted January 2, 2009 <p><strong>Hi John</strong> ,<br> I've been looking like a mad woman all over the house. I know we have a lope I just can't find it. I saw it about a week ago. But we've just done the floors in most of the house & nothing is where it's supposed to be. I have tried my best to inspect the negative, needless to say not in the best manner possible, but I can't find any scratches what so ever on the negatives. Reality is - the negative looks fine. I will ask my now sleeping husband if he remembers where he put the lope. But I can honestly say that where I see lines/streaks on the prints I don't see anything on the negative on any of those I've examined. The lines are approximately 1mm each on 4 x 6 " prints. They're all going horizontally & there are several of them. Color - I'd say they're blue/magenta but I have to admit upon closer examination I also see a lighter line which I feel we could call a very light pale yellow. In total the two connected lines are about 2mm. OK so maybe the light fooled the FM. We had really strange light all day that day... I've compared the FM to the N90s & the D300. The FM wanted a f/11 on the same location & subject the others wanted a f/8 at the same shutter speed. I will test further... N90s had a 50mm f/1.8 while the FM had the 50mm f/1.2<br> Does this tell you anything more?<br> <strong>Hi Mark</strong> ,<br> thank you for your input. I want to point out that I bought the FM for sentimental reasons & yes I'd like it to work, but it's not a disaster if it doesn't work for me. I have the N90s & the D200 & D300. I have cameras. But, since the FM was my first Nikon & my very first slr & I'd lost two to theft I really wanted one for sentimental reasons & I wanted it for some artistic shots. If that makes sense...<br> <strong>Hi Jorge</strong> ,<br> film - I got what my camera store had in for my daughter about a year ago. They had Kodak PORTRA 160vc. I was told it's supposed to be pretty good film. But that may well have been a sales pitch... All I can say is that I see tiny lines on the negatives, but they do not match up on the prints & they're not on the emulsion side. I've cleaned the inside of the camera to the best of my ability today & I've put another roll into the camera. I'll continue to test the camera to see if it repeats & I will get the roll developed at another place this time. I'll go to one of the larger camera stores to get it developed. They have the equipment. I'll go to Samy's or Bel Air Camera. that should tell some more... I will work on this some more. I may just have gotten lousy prints.<br> <strong>Hi Steve</strong> ,<br> as much as I appreciate your comment & see where you come from.... Please understand this. This roll was simply a test to see if the camera worked. That it does. metering may be off. In that case it will get service. I doubt I'll get heavy into film again as I love what I can do with my D300. But I do want the camera to work & I want to solve this problem. The problem of the lines through the shots. I'm sure I'm imagining the slightly "belittling attitude" in your response towards me & I'm thrilled to hear you've been shooting film since the 1960's - I was a very little girl back then & was not. Also, I wish to thank you for talking me out of trying to shoot B&W. I guess I'll just play with the rolls I just bought. :-) nothing wrong in playing. :-)<br> Best wishes for 2009 - I wish for you Golden light & willing subjects :)<br /> <br /> Lil :)</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johncrosley Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 <p>Each film camera has a plate that presses the film into place from the back of the camera.<br> When I bought my Nikkormat back in 19XX, a brand new camera, and eventually got around to looking very closely at the film that went through it, I always noticed it had two horizontal lines through it, but it did not seem to affect the reproduction quality.<br> I wondered periodically about what was causing my film to be damaged, and inspected my camera's insides periodically for the cause, but never could find it. Years later, when I had more sense and more maturity about such things, I found out the plate that presses the film from the back had two significant imperfections (defects) that were in the nature of small protruberances which scratched the film as it passed by. It never did scratch the emulsion, so mostly it went unnoticed in reproduction, thank goodness and never truly was so noticeable as to need a repair (because if it did, it would have been sleuthed right away), but sometimes very, very tiny things like that can cause a problem and be overlooked.<br> I'm not suggesting this is your problem, but it pays to investigate each and every surface over which your film is dragged during its journey from film cannister to the take-up reel, then back, with a very sensitive device -- your most sensitive finger, and do so several times, then have someone you trust who has time, do the same.<br> Sometimes the best camera manufacturers let defects pass by, and they can cause defects that will cause things such as 'horizontal lines' and any 'horizontal line' that repeats -- I reiterate -- that 'repeats' over and over as you shoot -- probably is a result of some friction point in your camera as the film is being dragged over what should be smooth surfaces, and if it's the emulsion side, disaster can result, even from the tiniest imperfection. If it's the other side, it can take a rather substantial scratching before it will affect image quality AND it will be visible to the naked eye, if held at the appropriate angle under bright, reflective light.<br> But it doesn't appear you've exhausted your sleuthing opportunities. It appears you have two separate issues -- or at least the possibility of two separate issues.<br> It is entirely possible that a film processing lab which gives shoddy results on dragging film through a mechanical scanner also has some point of friction on its scanner device that is scratching your film. Take one test canister to them to them, again and see if it has the same problem and another to a different lab and see if it has an identical problem. That will give you a quick answer to your question. It's worth the price of two rolls of film (short rolls) and scanner processing for them to find the problem, I think.<br> Don't you?<br> Of course, you'd be best advised to do the same for the exposure issues - and any dirt on a processed film once was common in the 'custom 'mini-labs' that were common 20 years ago, but nowadays, it's totally unacceptable.<br> If you find dirt anywhere, it should be time for a redo to perfection or money back and if film is ruined, regrettably, under general industry disclaimers, all you;ll probably get is blank film (and maybe not even the good stuff you were shooting unless you holler loudly in front of customers), and many mini-labs no longer have customer at all, as we're all shooting digital, these days and they're going out of business at an increasing rate.<br> Hope this helps.<br> John (Crosley)</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
liljuddakalilknyttphotogra Posted January 2, 2009 Author Share Posted January 2, 2009 <p><strong>Hi John</strong> ,<br> excellent suggestions. Second roll in the camera & I will be bringing it in to another lab for developing. I'll go to a larger place which deals with professionals. They should be more on their toes.<br> I felt the plate which presses the film before I loaded the second roll. I could not feel any problems. I cleaned every which should be cleaned inside leaving the shutter alone - that is I did not touch it. I felt no edges & nothing sharp.<br> In regards to dirt.... The prints would not have dirt on them, but the scans did & so did the negatives when I looked at them. I will continue to look for the lope & see what happens with the second roll. I will also keep working it against the N90s & my digital cameras.<br> Thanks<br> Best wishes for 2009 - I wish for you Golden light & willing subjects :)<br /> <br /> Lil :)</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peter_kervarec Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 <p>Hi Lil<br> a couple of posters have already suggested the film pressure plate at camera back. Your fingers may not feel these scratches so you need a loupe to inspect. This pressure plate should be quite springy to depress. If it doesnt depress slightly, that could be your problem as it is supposed to be spring loaded to give a little. Otherwise it is jamming harder than normal onto the film. If the pressure plate has collapsed or weakened slightly on one side then that could also be the problem. Check the film roller also, that it has no burrs and rotates freely. If this is all good there is a possibility that the lab is scratching it between processing and printing stage. As the film is printed, it remains in a straight line so there is a possibility there is some grit or burring on/in the carrier. If the film was not kept in its container until usage there could be some grit embedded in the felt light trap. Any single burr or grit on the abovementioned items will create a perfectly parallel line, 2 burrs - 2 lines etc. Any operation in the whole process where the film is held in a straight line would be suspect.<br> One of the main reasons I went to digital was because of lazy, indifferent labs who scratch and mishandle film. If you buy a neg scanner and scan your negatives, you will probably be surprised by the damage to your precious negs and how little some processing people cared for your films.<br> Peter ( Australia )</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luca_stramare2 Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 <p>Hi Lil, I can understand you sadness... I think people gave a lot of useful advice, here. My 0.02 is that when comparing the N90 to the FM2, keep in mind that the first uses matrix metering and the second uses center weight. Therefore remember to switch the N90 to center weight mode as well and, if possible, meter against a uniformly lit surface. I use the wall in my bedroom, and all the tools I use (cameras and the manual exposure meter) give me the same reading.<br> In case you need to service your camera, there is no real problem, it is true that most FM parts are no longer available, but FM2 ones can be used, some parts can be made new with the right tools and most can be fixed instead of replaced. Any camera repair shop that has 20+ more years experience can put the hands inside a mechanical camera, and the FM2 is not that much different from all the mechanical cameras of the same period. Maybe all your camera needs is a cleaning, light gasket change and lubrication.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sjmurray Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 <p>Lil, if you want to experiment with black and white without having to develop it yourself, try Ilford XP2, which is black and white film that is processed with color chemistry. I've heard it scans beautifully, although I've never tried it myself. I hope your camera can be fixed to work properly. I sold a mint FM a couple years ago and have kept my ancient Nikon Ftn (meter doesn't work) and Nikkormat (still meters OK). I keep them because they represent so many years of pleasurable use and great results. I had to go through a grieving process as I switched from film to digital. I still have my developing gear and chemicals sitting on shelves in the basement, but I don't think I'll ever use them again. It's just hard to "let go" of an entire process that I've been doing since I was a teenager. I'm getting ready to purchase CS4 though, and am excited witht the results I'm seeing with my raw conversions. Ah, progress. </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
liljuddakalilknyttphotogra Posted January 2, 2009 Author Share Posted January 2, 2009 <p><strong>Hi Peter</strong> ,<br /> I did feel the pressure on the pressure plate & it did feel springy. I have rather sensitive finger tips, but I'm still in search of our lopes. I checked the film roller & I could neither feel nor see any problem. Also, since the problem carries throughout the film roll I'm more inclined to think it's got nothing to do with the roller. It behaves just as any film roller I've ever had to deal with. This was a nostalgic notion I had to follow. If it doesn't work - then so be it. Thanks for your help & my trouble shooting will continue.<br /> <strong>Hi Luca</strong> ,<br /> The FM uses like the FM2 center weight metering? I thought it used matrix - but it's so long ago I simply forgot. OK I'll redo the test at center weight. I will try to find a better metering surface & use it. Thanks for all your help & suggestions. It's given me a lot to think further about.<br> Best wishes for 2009 - I wish for you Golden light & willing subjects :)<br /> <br /> Lil :)</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
liljuddakalilknyttphotogra Posted January 2, 2009 Author Share Posted January 2, 2009 <p><strong>Hi Steve</strong> ,<br> Ilford XP2 got it. As soon as I've figured out the metering & the horizontal lines to see what the problem is. Once that's done - I'll try it out. Thanks for caring. :-)</p> <p>Best wishes for 2009 - I wish for you Golden light & willing subjects :)<br /> <br /> Lil :)</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john.l Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 <p>Lil</p> <p>I have not checked out the last few posts but a couple of pointers to look for</p> <p>1. Do you consider the negs to be thin ie look underexposed, because 1 stop will not produce a poor neg-print situation.<br> 2. The wording/numbers on the film strip - do they look bold or thin as in density? If they are bold and the negs look thin denoting it could be more than a stop underexposed. If the wording/numbers are thin then that denotes under development. If you have some images underexposured added to under development then the neg/print could be horrid and very grainy<br> 3. The scratches. Do they go across from one neg to another in a near continuous line, this would point to a camera or development scratch. A camera produces a continuous scratch because the pressure plate is in a static position at all times against the film; if they do not cross from frame to frame that usually points to a processing fault ie the machine grabs and holds each frame lightly while moving from A to B but releases the pressure slightly while doing so.</p> <p>A couple of things to look for :-)</p> <p>Best of luck with the FM</p> <p>regards JohnL</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
liljuddakalilknyttphotogra Posted January 2, 2009 Author Share Posted January 2, 2009 <p><strong>Hi John</strong> ,<br> Some look a tad underexposed, while other look just fine. Overall, I've compared it to prints I have since Andrea was about 6 years old - - these prints look horrible. Just a lousy print job.<br> The wording & numbers look just like I've always seen them. So either I've underexposed every film shot I've ever taken or......<br> I have yet to locate the lope so I have to say that at this time I can't even see the lines on the negative. I only see them on the print. The "scratches" I do see on the negative do not match what I see on the prints & those there is no logic to. They're all over the place. I've just looked at the negative again - - I can not find a single horizontal line which matches up with what I have on the prints.<br> Thanks for your suggestions. I will keep up my trouble shooting.</p> <p>Best wishes for 2009 - I wish for you Golden light & willing subjects :)<br /> <br /> Lil :)</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asher_lev Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 <p>I am thinking along with Dennis that the lab did this (if run through a machine.) The other problems too sound like the lab. My experience is that CDs are always horible. I cannot think of a way that a FM or the lens can do these weird things. If the prints are made with an enlarger there is something that labs put on the negative that renders the scratches not visible. Don't recall what.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
liljuddakalilknyttphotogra Posted January 2, 2009 Author Share Posted January 2, 2009 <p>Hi Asher,<br> thank you for voicing in. I will continue to trouble shoot. :-)</p> <p>Best wishes for 2009 - I wish for you Golden light & willing subjects :)<br /> <br /> Lil :)</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
walterh Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 <p>Lil - not really a chemical :-) Just use a water that you would use for cleaning glasses in your kitchen sink. A small amount of detergent in water. If uncertain how much detergent use less rather than more. Wetten the cloth and remove most of the water again. This should be enough to get rid of tiny bits of dirt from the surfaces while avoiding that any water might get into hidden places.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
liljuddakalilknyttphotogra Posted January 2, 2009 Author Share Posted January 2, 2009 <p>Thank you Walter,<br> I will do. :-)<br> Best wishes for 2009 - I wish for you Golden light & willing subjects :)<br /> <br /> Lil :)</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert_Lai Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 <p>Lil,<br> It would help if you showed us one of the scans, as lousy as they are. They would help to diagnose the problem. Were you out shooting in fog or snow? If you were, then the high light reflectivity will cause your FM's meter to suggest overexposure for every frame. This may be a problem with your subject, rather than your meter. Incident light metering, if you have such a meter, or the old standby of metering off your palm then opening up one stop may help in these situations.</p> <p>Most common cause of scratches that I have encountered are due to dirt in the camera's film chamber, or dirt in the velvet light trap of the film cartridge. Once you have cleaned out the interior of the camera, and wiped off the pressure plate, another film may show no problems with scratches.</p> <p>As others have suggested, when testing a camera, slide film will tell you the unadulterated truth.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
liljuddakalilknyttphotogra Posted January 2, 2009 Author Share Posted January 2, 2009 <p>Robert,<br> I actually think I'm better off scanning one of the prints & posting that. OK I have pulled a few of the prints & I will scan them & see if it carries through.<br> I live in the Los Angeles area so snow is not all that much of a problem. Most were shot under heavy storm clouds. I do have an incident meter available from Spectra which my husband got for his film photography. I can use that.<br> OK I'll try scanning some of the shots which show what I'm talking about.</p> <p>Best wishes for 2009 - I wish for you Golden light & willing subjects :)<br /> <br /> Lil :)</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now