Mishandled film processing or something else?

[lee_j1]

<p>I've just picked up some film from a local lab, the first time i've used them. Usually i drive a good hour or so to get my colour film developed. Anyway, can anyone diagnose this? I suspect the film has been loaded incorrectly into the processing machine (it's clearly a roller machine as there are also scratches on the negatives), perhaps at a slight angle because the overexposed section of the left slowly tapers off over the whole role whilst the overexposed section on the right slowly appears over the whole role. Left and then right side of a frame:<br>

<img src="https://leejo.github.io/images/temp/left.jpg" alt="" width="66" height="600" /></p>

<p><img src="https://leejo.github.io/images/temp/right.jpg" alt="" width="61" height="600" /><br>

(Film is colour, i've converted it to B&W to show the issue).<br>

This is in no way a problem with the camera, i shot another roll the same day - same camera, same back, same film, same shooting conditions, same ISO, same lens, same handling of the film, and the film has processed with absolutely no signs of problems (apart from aforementioned scratches).<br>

It's clearly not a light leak due to the hard edge of the "leak" and the fact it continues outside the frames. I don't think it's due to poor handling causing the film backing paper to unroll slightly, because again the hard edge. The film was loaded correctly into the back as the frame spacing is fine, frames are straight, and i recall no resistance advancing the film either at the start or during shooting.<br>

The only other possibility is the backing paper being oversized and bending over the film, but again - i wouldn't expect a hard edge.</p>

[glen_h]

<p>Can you explain what you are showing? Are they positive or negative? Which parts are film, and which parts are off the edge of the film?</p>

<p> </p>

[wogears]

<p>Looks like 4x5? You need to post a whole image, not a tiny sliver. BTW, if it IS 4x5, it was not processed on a roller transport machine.</p>

[lee_j1]

<p>It's 6x6, hence being the <a href="/medium-format-photography-forum/">Medium Format</a> > <a href="/medium-format-photography-forum/?category=Hasselblad">Hasselblad</a> forum. I spoke to the shop today, they agreed that it was probably the film being misloaded into the processing machine.<br /></p>

[rodeo_joe1]

If the fogging only occurs between frames, then it's

highly unlikely to be a processing fault. The

chances of a continuous processing feed only

affecting the inter-frame spaces is almost nil.

 

Also an over tightly wound film can cause "cinch"

marks along the length of the film. So while I have a

low opinion in general of small scale processing

labs; in this case I think the blame for the frame

edge fogging lies elsewhere. Most likely with the

camera magazine.

[lee_j1]

<p><em>If the fogging only occurs between frames, then it's highly unlikely to be a processing fault. The chances of a continuous processing feed only affecting the inter-frame spaces is almost nil.</em><br>

<em> </em><br>

The fogging starts at the film leader and runs all the way along both edges, in the frames and between the frames. It starts thicker on the left edge and tapers away, while it starts thin on the right edge and gets thicker. It's as if the film was loaded into the processing machine at a slight angle causing, for whatever reason, the edges to be exposed during processing.</p>

<p><em>Also an over tightly wound film can cause "cinch" marks along the length of the film. So while I have a low opinion in general of small scale processing labs; in this case I think the blame for the frame edge fogging lies elsewhere. Most likely with the camera magazine.</em><br>

<em> </em><br>

If that were the case then this is not how it would look because those parts of the film would be unexposed and far less uniform than they are here. Given the state of the other film they developed: half moons, scratches, inconsistent development, and droplets, i'm putting the blame on a poorly calibrated or poorly operated machine.</p>

[paul ron]

<p>cant tell whats going on from teh example photos. Is that an entire film strip or just an edge? Can you post a better pic of the frame or strip? maybe a larger one?</p>

<p>From what I see it has no frames n is one long exposure but that picture is not very clear. Im guessing thats a picture of an edge?</p>

[rodeo_joe1]

It's still not clear from the examples and description

what exactly we're looking at. From the example

images it looks like the sides of the frame edges.

But you're now saying it's the top and bottom edges

of the whole roll?

That sounds like a loosely rolled film, where light

has got in between the spool cheeks and the

backing paper.

A scan or digital snap of a few consecutive frames together would

really help here.

[Robin Smith]

Why not show the whole frame? You're making it so difficult to interprete this.

[lubos_soltes]

<p>looks like the roll was not rolled correctly and the edges of the film were either lose or the backing paper was a hair narrower and did not cover the whole film ...</p>

[ondebanks]

<p>Lee,</p>

 

<ol>

<li>Are you saying that at the start of the roll, the leak is all on one edge (call it the top) with no leak on the bottom edge; and at the end of the roll it's the other way round?</li>

<li>If so, is there some point roughly midway along the roll where there is no leak at all?</li>

<li>Or is there instead some point in the middle of the roll where the top and bottom leaks are both present, but equal?</li>

</ol>

<p>What I'm getting at with these questions is that if your theory about the processing machine being loaded at an angle is correct, then the answer to question 2 would surely be "yes". If 2 is "no" but 3 is "yes", then I would suspect the handling of the roll itself - possibly by the machine operator - before it was loaded. </p>

 

[lee_j1]

<p>Ray - 1) Yes, 2) No, 3) Yes.</p>

<p>The thing i don't understand is the hard, clearly defined, edge of the "leak" in the first image i posted, which means it's not a "leak" as leaks do not have hard, clearly defined, edges. The suggestion that the backing paper wasn't cut correctly is now sounding like the reason, although i'm dubious - i suppose it depends on how 120 rolls get loaded into those automatic processing machines.</p>