What's wrong here - is it me, the camera, or the lab?

stevebrot · 02-21-2012, 10:44 PM

Originally posted by hollywoodfred

But I may ask the folks at the min lab how they extract the film.

They fish it out of the through the slit.

Steve

**gofour3** · 02-21-2012, 10:50 PM

Originally posted by stevebrot

They fish it out of the through the slit.

Steve

In the last darkroom course I took a couple years back, we had a film canister opener that looked like a bottle opener. It just popped the end off in seconds.

Phil.

stevebrot · 02-21-2012, 10:55 PM

Originally posted by gofour3

In the last darkroom course I took a couple years back, we had a film canister opener that looked like a bottle opener. It just popped the end off in seconds.

Phil.

Does not work very well in a well-lit room where the minilab machine sits. For home use, I have a bottle-opener.

Steve

Wheatfield · 02-21-2012, 11:00 PM

Originally posted by stevebrot

Does not work very well in a well-lit room where the minilab machine sits. For home use, I have a bottle-opener.

Steve

Minilabs have machines that fish the film end out through the cassette opening. This is one of the reasons why I recommend leaving the film tongue out of the can. It makes for less handling of the film, which in turn gives less possibility of scratching or otherwise damaging it.

hollywoodfred · 02-22-2012, 04:26 PM

I suspected my local mini lab fishes it out. I've received some film from them with a single, non-linear scratch down the center of the first frame. So, in order to give them a hand, I think I'll leave the leader out when I know they will do the work.

At some point, once I think my shots are worth the wait, I want to start sending sending my film to a better quality lab, maybe like Parsons. Anyone have a recommendation? (Am I hijacking my own thread?)

The last time I developed my own film, the year was 1979. I'm not ready to re-learn that just yet.

Edit: I misread Wheatfield's post. "machines fish out the film...". So, in my case, I'm back to asking the lab about it. It's a bit frustrating trying to determine where the process fails.

westmill · 02-22-2012, 04:50 PM

My freind runs a DnP lab.... If you leave the leader out he winds it in anyway or it would jam the machine which opens the cassetes automaticly.
I used to leave the leader out only if i wanted to change film mid roll. As long as you write on canister frame number, you can reload it again.
I used to skip a frame though because its unlikely it will be in bang on alignment. The loss of one frame is a small price to pay for the conveiniance of
being able to change film mid roll though.
I always kept my film in the fridge too. It will last for donkeys years in the fridge.

westmill · 02-22-2012, 04:59 PM

Another simple tip ! Ask your local DnP lab for some black cannisters and swap them when you use the stupid idea clear fuji ones !
Also.... scratch marks down the film is normaly caused by grit or dirt on the film cassette light trap ! So dont keep film loose in your pocket,
or anywhere else for that matter.

TaoMaas · 02-23-2012, 08:58 AM

Originally posted by westmill

I used to leave the leader out only if i wanted to change film mid roll. As long as you write on canister frame number, you can reload it again.
I used to skip a frame though because its unlikely it will be in bang on alignment. The loss of one frame is a small price to pay for the conveiniance of
being able to change film mid roll though.

I used to do that, too, but I learned the hard way that I needed to let the lab know when one of my rolls had been reloaded. This lab apparently set up the film cutter based on the first frame or two, then let it do it's thing. It was fine until it reached the point where I'd reloaded the film. After my blank frame, it cut the rest of the slides in half.

hollywoodfred · 02-28-2012, 04:54 PM

Talked with the folks at the local lab. Yep, they fish out the leader. She seemed especially pleased if I would leave a bit of the leader, so she would not have to spend time fishing.

And on westmill's suggestion, I asked if she had any of the black canisters. Wow! She wanted to give me a bag full of them. But not wanting to seem greedy, I only took five. I'll just ask for its return after each developing job.

cheers!
Fred

westmill · 02-28-2012, 05:26 PM

Yup ! all labs have there different equipment and there own ways of working, but all of them disspose of the containers !
Your doing them a favour lol Glad you got them though. They are much safer !

tim60 · 03-03-2012, 02:23 AM

Originally posted by hollywoodfred

Just following up so others may learn (from my mistake)...

I loaded another roll of the same film using my normal procedures and shot the entire roll - 24 opportunities to practice technique. Next, I rewound the film into the canister, taking care to leave the leader out of the spool (as recommended by Wheatfield). While in a dimly lit room, I removed the canister from the camera and placed it into its plastic container (the white Fuji style). I put the container in my coat pocket and delivered it to the mini-lab. In a somewhat lucky coincedence, the min-lab employee who would process this roll also processed the previous one.

Forty minutes later, I had the developed roll, and there was no evidence of light leaks on the resulting negatives. The only procedural difference from this test roll compared to the previous roll was my handling of the canister after it was removed from the camera.

By neglecting to protect the film canister from light and not using a film container, I allowed the film to become compromised. Dumb, dumb, dumb to not use the container as I had always done in the past.

So, the lesson - watch the light and use the film container - that's why its in the box.

Appreciate the help!

Fred

That's why Kodak and Ilford used black plastic cnaisters - possibly more expensive, but the cannister does the job.

hollywoodfred · 03-03-2012, 04:17 AM

Originally posted by tim60

That's why Kodak and Ilford used black plastic cnaisters - possibly more expensive, but the cannister does the job.

Not to nit pick, but I have some recently purchased Ektar 100 that is in transluscent white-gray canisters.

tim60 · 03-03-2012, 02:05 PM

Originally posted by hollywoodfred

Not to nit pick, but I have some recently purchased Ektar 100 that is in transluscent white-gray canisters.

Ah! That nearly proves my point. (In this case 'proof' does not exist, only evidence to support an argument.)

Ektar is made by Kodak - a US company. US companies always look to cut cost, rather than making their product/service premium with a small price increment. Ergo, shift to clear canisters because they are cheaper, and the result is worse.

What we all need is a fundamental shift in US culture to be like east Asia, where people seek the best they can get, at whatever the price is.

stevebrot · 03-03-2012, 03:40 PM

Originally posted by tim60

That's why Kodak and Ilford used black plastic cnaisters - possibly more expensive, but the cannister does the job.

Originally posted by hollywoodfred

Not to nit pick, but I have some recently purchased Ektar 100 that is in transluscent white-gray canisters.

Kodak has been using the white containers for some time, though I am not sure that is universal across all products. Why is a good question, though I would expect that cost is probably pretty comparable for both materials. Would it be dumb to suggest that it might have something to do with being able to identify the film type through the canister? Remember that some packaging would result in the canisters being loose in the bag with no labels.

As an aside...I have several rolls of Rollei Retro 80s in the refrigerator and all are in dark cans including the 120 rolls. The reason being is the increased red and near-infrared response of this film. The package insert strongly suggests storing the unprocessed film in the opaque cans both before and AFTER exposure. Rollei (Maco) also labels the outside of the cans.

Steve

hollywoodfred · 03-03-2012, 04:50 PM

Originally posted by stevebrot

Kodak has been using the white containers for some time, though I am not sure that is universal across all products. Why is a good question, though I would expect that cost is probably pretty comparable for both materials. Would it be dumb to suggest that it might have something to do with being able to identify the film type through the canister? Remember that some packaging would result in the canisters being loose in the bag with no labels.
...
Steve

Steve, I think your suggestion is reasonable. I've purchased Velvia 50 from Adorama that arrived in loose translucent containers. Even though each container had an adhesive label affixed, outside the container there was no useful information for me, just a barcode. The only way I knew its contents was seeing it through the container.

02-22-2012, 04:26 PM	#20
hollywoodfred Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: Vinton, Iowa Photos: Albums Posts: 358 Original Poster	I suspected my local mini lab fishes it out. I've received some film from them with a single, non-linear scratch down the center of the first frame. So, in order to give them a hand, I think I'll leave the leader out when I know they will do the work. At some point, once I think my shots are worth the wait, I want to start sending sending my film to a better quality lab, maybe like Parsons. Anyone have a recommendation? (Am I hijacking my own thread?) The last time I developed my own film, the year was 1979. I'm not ready to re-learn that just yet. Edit: I misread Wheatfield's post. "machines fish out the film...". So, in my case, I'm back to asking the lab about it. It's a bit frustrating trying to determine where the process fails. Last edited by hollywoodfred; 02-22-2012 at 05:01 PM. Reason: Mis-read previous post.

02-28-2012, 04:54 PM	#24
hollywoodfred Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: Vinton, Iowa Photos: Albums Posts: 358 Original Poster	Just to follow up (again)... Talked with the folks at the local lab. Yep, they fish out the leader. She seemed especially pleased if I would leave a bit of the leader, so she would not have to spend time fishing. And on westmill's suggestion, I asked if she had any of the black canisters. Wow! She wanted to give me a bag full of them. But not wanting to seem greedy, I only took five. I'll just ask for its return after each developing job. cheers! Fred

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Wrong ISO set on camera	PeteStump	Film Processing, Scanning, and Darkroom	7	05-06-2011 05:01 AM
New Camera - Something Wrong - Advice Needed Please !	NCGirl	Pentax DSLR Discussion	12	11-26-2010 07:06 PM
What's wrong with my camera?	jeenyus	Photographic Technique	4	02-23-2009 10:58 AM
K20 In-Camera JPEGs vs. Pentax Photo Lab	shiner	Pentax DSLR Discussion	12	01-24-2009 09:20 PM
3 artistic shots. Sorry 2 from the wrong camera	little laker	Post Your Photos!	6	02-04-2008 10:25 AM

02-21-2012, 10:44 PM	#16
stevebrot Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Vancouver (USA) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 42,007	Originally posted by hollywoodfred But I may ask the folks at the min lab how they extract the film. They fish it out of the through the slit. Steve

02-21-2012, 10:50 PM	#17
gofour3 Site Supporter Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Vancouver, Canada Posts: 8,092	Originally posted by stevebrot They fish it out of the through the slit. Steve In the last darkroom course I took a couple years back, we had a film canister opener that looked like a bottle opener. It just popped the end off in seconds. Phil.

02-21-2012, 10:55 PM	#18
stevebrot Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Vancouver (USA) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 42,007	Originally posted by gofour3 In the last darkroom course I took a couple years back, we had a film canister opener that looked like a bottle opener. It just popped the end off in seconds. Phil. Does not work very well in a well-lit room where the minilab machine sits. For home use, I have a bottle-opener. Steve

02-21-2012, 11:00 PM	#19
Wheatfield Moderator Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: The wheatfields of Canada Posts: 15,986	Originally posted by stevebrot Does not work very well in a well-lit room where the minilab machine sits. For home use, I have a bottle-opener. Steve Minilabs have machines that fish the film end out through the cassette opening. This is one of the reasons why I recommend leaving the film tongue out of the can. It makes for less handling of the film, which in turn gives less possibility of scratching or otherwise damaging it.

02-22-2012, 04:50 PM	#21
westmill Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: Stoke on Trent Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,146	My freind runs a DnP lab.... If you leave the leader out he winds it in anyway or it would jam the machine which opens the cassetes automaticly. I used to leave the leader out only if i wanted to change film mid roll. As long as you write on canister frame number, you can reload it again. I used to skip a frame though because its unlikely it will be in bang on alignment. The loss of one frame is a small price to pay for the conveiniance of being able to change film mid roll though. I always kept my film in the fridge too. It will last for donkeys years in the fridge.

02-22-2012, 04:59 PM	#22
westmill Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: Stoke on Trent Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,146	Another simple tip ! Ask your local DnP lab for some black cannisters and swap them when you use the stupid idea clear fuji ones ! Also.... scratch marks down the film is normaly caused by grit or dirt on the film cassette light trap ! So dont keep film loose in your pocket, or anywhere else for that matter.

02-23-2012, 08:58 AM	#23
TaoMaas Pentaxian Join Date: May 2007 Location: Oklahoma City Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,574	Originally posted by westmill I used to leave the leader out only if i wanted to change film mid roll. As long as you write on canister frame number, you can reload it again. I used to skip a frame though because its unlikely it will be in bang on alignment. The loss of one frame is a small price to pay for the conveiniance of being able to change film mid roll though. I used to do that, too, but I learned the hard way that I needed to let the lab know when one of my rolls had been reloaded. This lab apparently set up the film cutter based on the first frame or two, then let it do it's thing. It was fine until it reached the point where I'd reloaded the film. After my blank frame, it cut the rest of the slides in half.

02-28-2012, 05:26 PM	#25
westmill Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: Stoke on Trent Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,146	Yup ! all labs have there different equipment and there own ways of working, but all of them disspose of the containers ! Your doing them a favour lol Glad you got them though. They are much safer !

03-03-2012, 02:23 AM	#26
tim60 Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2011 Photos: Albums Posts: 8,755	Originally posted by hollywoodfred Just following up so others may learn (from my mistake)... I loaded another roll of the same film using my normal procedures and shot the entire roll - 24 opportunities to practice technique. Next, I rewound the film into the canister, taking care to leave the leader out of the spool (as recommended by Wheatfield). While in a dimly lit room, I removed the canister from the camera and placed it into its plastic container (the white Fuji style). I put the container in my coat pocket and delivered it to the mini-lab. In a somewhat lucky coincedence, the min-lab employee who would process this roll also processed the previous one. Forty minutes later, I had the developed roll, and there was no evidence of light leaks on the resulting negatives. The only procedural difference from this test roll compared to the previous roll was my handling of the canister after it was removed from the camera. By neglecting to protect the film canister from light and not using a film container, I allowed the film to become compromised. Dumb, dumb, dumb to not use the container as I had always done in the past. So, the lesson - watch the light and use the film container - that's why its in the box. Appreciate the help! Fred That's why Kodak and Ilford used black plastic cnaisters - possibly more expensive, but the cannister does the job.

03-03-2012, 04:17 AM	#27
hollywoodfred Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: Vinton, Iowa Photos: Albums Posts: 358 Original Poster	Originally posted by tim60 That's why Kodak and Ilford used black plastic cnaisters - possibly more expensive, but the cannister does the job. Not to nit pick, but I have some recently purchased Ektar 100 that is in transluscent white-gray canisters.

03-03-2012, 02:05 PM	#28
tim60 Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2011 Photos: Albums Posts: 8,755	Originally posted by hollywoodfred Not to nit pick, but I have some recently purchased Ektar 100 that is in transluscent white-gray canisters. Ah! That nearly proves my point. (In this case 'proof' does not exist, only evidence to support an argument.) Ektar is made by Kodak - a US company. US companies always look to cut cost, rather than making their product/service premium with a small price increment. Ergo, shift to clear canisters because they are cheaper, and the result is worse. What we all need is a fundamental shift in US culture to be like east Asia, where people seek the best they can get, at whatever the price is.

03-03-2012, 03:40 PM	#29
stevebrot Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Vancouver (USA) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 42,007	Originally posted by tim60 That's why Kodak and Ilford used black plastic cnaisters - possibly more expensive, but the cannister does the job. Originally posted by hollywoodfred Not to nit pick, but I have some recently purchased Ektar 100 that is in transluscent white-gray canisters. Kodak has been using the white containers for some time, though I am not sure that is universal across all products. Why is a good question, though I would expect that cost is probably pretty comparable for both materials. Would it be dumb to suggest that it might have something to do with being able to identify the film type through the canister? Remember that some packaging would result in the canisters being loose in the bag with no labels. As an aside...I have several rolls of Rollei Retro 80s in the refrigerator and all are in dark cans including the 120 rolls. The reason being is the increased red and near-infrared response of this film. The package insert strongly suggests storing the unprocessed film in the opaque cans both before and AFTER exposure. Rollei (Maco) also labels the outside of the cans. Steve

03-03-2012, 04:50 PM	#30
hollywoodfred Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: Vinton, Iowa Photos: Albums Posts: 358 Original Poster	Originally posted by stevebrot Kodak has been using the white containers for some time, though I am not sure that is universal across all products. Why is a good question, though I would expect that cost is probably pretty comparable for both materials. Would it be dumb to suggest that it might have something to do with being able to identify the film type through the canister? Remember that some packaging would result in the canisters being loose in the bag with no labels. ... Steve Steve, I think your suggestion is reasonable. I've purchased Velvia 50 from Adorama that arrived in loose translucent containers. Even though each container had an adhesive label affixed, outside the container there was no useful information for me, just a barcode. The only way I knew its contents was seeing it through the container.