|
|
|
Kevin Salter
{K:649} 9/12/2002
|
Jus a guess, but they may be drying marks, if the film wasn't wiped cleanly after processing you may get drying/water marks. You may try washing the film (carefully)by running it through a bowl of water and then running it through some very clean tissue when it is hanging to dry...? other than that I don't know.
|
|
|
|
|
Matt Oulman
{K:1052} 9/12/2002
|
It is not likely to be the camera. It is probably your development technique or equipment. This appear to be uneven development.
Shoot a roll and send it out for processing and see if it comes back with similar marks.
|
|
|
|
|
Becky V
{K:9699} 9/12/2002
|
I am not a camera expert at all (so let me know if I'm wrong here, more experienced people!), but I'd like to offer another alternative. I've shot a roll of film with similar streaks and was told by the developer that they were tension lines from the film being loaded into the camera too tightly, and subsequently stretched. (Rewinding the film the wrong way will do it too.)
I know nothing about home developing, and I admit that may be the more likely problem. Just thought I'd throw the possibility out there. :)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Keith © 2002
{K:99} 9/12/2002
|
Well. I washed it and the marks are still there. so i've taken a photo of the negative. the bands seem to line up with the spocket holes. It's either my camera or the developing of the film i think but it could be film stretching of the film. Anyone got any ideas ?
Thanks
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bob Jarman
{K:3142} 9/12/2002
|
Has it done it to more than one roll of film?????
|
|
|
|
|
Keith © 2002
{K:99} 9/12/2002
|
yeh quite a few films have the banding effect but it only realy stands out when the bottom of the photo is bright/uniform colour.
|
|
|
|
|
Keith © 2002
{K:99} 9/12/2002
|
Actualy it's happening on a lot of the photos now im realy looking for it. And its happening in both light and dark photos so light level doesnt seem to make a diference. This photo was shot in the shade and it looks to me as thought the effect if happening right across some of the photo's. :(
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kevin Salter
{K:649} 9/12/2002
|
I'm not sure what else to suggest, your theory of the film being too tight may be an cause but what the answer may be i am not sure. Suggest you put your query & pic in the forum, there is a lot of tech. knowledge & experience out there. Sorry i can't help more.
Kev
|
|
|
|
|
Dean Cochrane
{K:335} 9/12/2002
|
They look like surge marks to me. They come from excessive agitation. I should caution you that I've only developed b+w, but I've developed a few rolls that looked like this, and in every case I found that I was agitating too agressively.
|
|
|
|
|
Dean Cochrane
{K:335} 9/12/2002
|
They look like surge marks to me. They come from excessive agitation. I should caution you that I've only developed b+w, but I've developed a few rolls that looked like this, and in every case I found that I was agitating too agressively.
|
|
|
|
|
Frank Hettick
{K:119} 9/12/2002
|
Keith - If you are doing your own processing then agitation (or lack thereof) could contribute! But if the denser stripes on your pic align WITH the sprocket holes (instead of with the space BETWEEN the sprocket holes - and I can't tell in your shot of the film), then perhaps you have some film that has been exposed edgewise to light-leaks (do you by chance load bulk-film into 35mm cannisters yourself?)
Have you tried another brand of film straight from the photo shop (and not bulk-loaded) in your camera and compared results?
|
|
|
|
|
Greg McMillan
{K:163} 9/12/2002
|
Kieth, first I would like to commend you on taking on the task of developing on your own. I don't think I could do it. The first thing that came to my mind is not the film, developing, or scanning, but perhaps the camera itself. I may be way out in left field here but you mentioned you just got into photography. Did you just get the camera and are noticing this right away? I think Becky is on the right track, but the film may only be tight on one side. Perhaps the camera has a slight misalignment between the side where the canister sits and where the film gets taken up. It may not be noticeable to the eye so I would take the camera to a service shop and get it checked. Good luck with this, it must be maddening.
|
|
|
|
|
Keith © 2002
{K:99} 9/12/2002
|
Good News. My camera is fine I think, it MUST be the developing thats making the bands (I hope).
A friend developed an identicle roll of film that he had shot with his camera in my developing tank using the same developer etc etc and his photos also have the banding.
I think that it must be the agitation thats causing the banding because when I showed my friend how I was developed my negatives he said "OH your shaking it around to much". So when he developed his negatives he didnt agitate the film as much and the banding in his negatives is only slightly noticable.
I'd just like to thank everyone for their prompt and helpfull comments. Now im off to try some night photography on some motorway bridges and see if carefull development cures the banding problem.
Thanks again,
Keith.
PS. I'v been using TETENAL "Colortec phototabs" to develop my negatives. Their BIG chunky pills that desolve in water and are realy realy easy to use.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jeff Cable
{K:3599} 9/13/2002
|
Hi Keith. I would be prepared to bet that nothing is wrong with your really fine camera. The marks are almost certainly caused by uneven devlopment. They are aligned with the sprocket holes and are the same width as well which strongly suggests a problem with agitation during development.
I am not sure about the tank you are using but these marks can occur with inversion agitation. That is where you first tip the tank upside down and then turn it right side up at each of your agitation points. It looks as if you may be inverting the tank too quickly so as to force the developer through the spocket holes at speed. This leads to too much development taking place at that point on the film as it receives more developer than the rest of the film.
You can try to turn the tank over in a gentle motion that perhaps doubles the time you are using now. [say from a quick motion that is completed in 1 second over and back to a slower movement that you complete each half of the inversion in about 2 seconds. The important thing is that the fluid is moved...gently. You can think of it as developer that becomes exhausted because of the work it has already done needing to be moved to make way for developer that is less exhausted because it has not yet worked as hard. (Technically speaking it is more complex than that but it helps to visualise it this way) Another method is to use the centre stick (often provided with a developing tank) to rotate the film in the tank although if you turn it too fast another set of uneven development marks will show. I usually jujst swish it back and forth very gently.
To be really certain, shoot a roll of film and have it commercially processed. It will show up any camera faults but I really doubt that your camera will have any. If a film is wound too tightly in a cassette and the weather conditions are very hot or very cold you may see some effects on the negative. This negative looks normal apart from the sprocket marks.
Hope this helps.
Cheers!
Jeff
|
|
