KRaZiGLiTcH
Established
Hi everyone i got some 35mm c41 film developed at a local 1 hour lab and got back blank negatives with which looks like light leaks is this caused from the lab or from the camera ?
The film is 8 - 10 years old they were exposed all those years ago if that helps.
thanks for any help
sorry for bad quality photos
The film is 8 - 10 years old they were exposed all those years ago if that helps.
thanks for any help
sorry for bad quality photos
Attachments
Sid836
Well-known
Does that stripe repeat in regular spaces across the film? It looks like lip fog caused by light entering the film canister through the film slit. Do you recall exposing the film roll to strong light?
KRaZiGLiTcH
Established
Yes they do appear randomly across the whole film.
well im not to sure as these are 8 or 10 years old. my mother shot these, and just being able to get them developed them recently
mfogiel
Veteran
Are there any signs on the borders of the film along the sprocket holes? There should be some numbers, etc. And is the leader black? In this case you have simply not exposed the film. On the other hand, if everything is clear, including the leader, then something went wrong at the lab.
KRaZiGLiTcH
Established
No there isn't which i thought was odd, i'm trying to remember the brand of the film. Everything is clear no leader, they have developed another film that came out blank but all the frame numbers were there.
Sid836
Well-known
If it is old film that has been exposed long ago, it can be that the latent image has gone.
cmc850
Established
I doubt the image is gone - and it seems likely this film was never really exposed. The aging may well have caused the stripes of color, but I have exposed c-41 film and processed it successfully 15 years later. The base fog of the film increases with age, and the contrast decreases, but they are generally still usable images. It would be useful to know if any edge markings, frame numbering or branding is still evident along the sprocket edges, as those are latent exposures added at manufacture also.
The 1 hour labs can certainly ruin film, but if an exposed roll is light-fogged, that is an additive fog and generally incomplete, so some trace of the actual exposures would remain. If completely fogged, the film would process at full D-max and appear uniformly dark. The purplish streaks appear overall lighter to me than the base, which indicates these are not fogged. Also, these 1-hour shops usually run the film through a roller transport system, loaded through a dark box, and fogging is less common - scratching - that's another story!
Might it be that the camera used to expose these oh so long ago may have never passed the film through? I have had several camera over the years that would fail to properly engage the leader at load and had no indicator that the film remained in the canister while I happily snapped away and wondered why the film counter stopped at 36 and I kept going! The fully electric-wind models were sinister for this - they generally had no positive engagement for the leader and no external rewind crank to witness the film spooling off at wind.
Another thing I have found when processing rolls exposed long ago - I generally have no real recollection of what was actually shot, only that the leader is rolled up so must have been exposed.
The 1 hour labs can certainly ruin film, but if an exposed roll is light-fogged, that is an additive fog and generally incomplete, so some trace of the actual exposures would remain. If completely fogged, the film would process at full D-max and appear uniformly dark. The purplish streaks appear overall lighter to me than the base, which indicates these are not fogged. Also, these 1-hour shops usually run the film through a roller transport system, loaded through a dark box, and fogging is less common - scratching - that's another story!
Might it be that the camera used to expose these oh so long ago may have never passed the film through? I have had several camera over the years that would fail to properly engage the leader at load and had no indicator that the film remained in the canister while I happily snapped away and wondered why the film counter stopped at 36 and I kept going! The fully electric-wind models were sinister for this - they generally had no positive engagement for the leader and no external rewind crank to witness the film spooling off at wind.
Another thing I have found when processing rolls exposed long ago - I generally have no real recollection of what was actually shot, only that the leader is rolled up so must have been exposed.
newsgrunt
Well-known
If there's no edge markings on the film, then I would strongly suggest a lab error. The coding/branding are imprinted on the film at manufacture so it will be there regardless of whether the film was exposed or not.
KRaZiGLiTcH
Established
Thanks for the help everyone, yeah there is no frame number or brand which i thought was odd, is there such film that does not have them ?( I seem to have forgotten what the brand was T_T i just thought to ask about it here just now). I will most likely try to take the rest of films to another lab.
newsgrunt
Well-known
do you remember the cassette the film came from ? any particular colour ? what brand was the other film as it's probable that they were same brand. *most* people didn't throw different films into the mix and would stick to one film
cmc850
Established
So while there are a few bulk-load films that came without edge markings pre-exposed, those are rare. I'm assuming it is in fact c-41 or similar color neg stock based on the orange base. It is possible if a film was bleach/fixed but never actually placed in developer, this might be the result. The simple nature of one hour processing actually makes these kinds of errors rare. They have no other processor like e-6 to mistakenly run the film through, nor is it easy to bypass the developer tank for a film on its way through. The dev tank could have leaked dry, been filled with water, or so badly contaminated that there was no development. Likely this would have resulted in the ruin of more film than yours.
Regardless, this is all speculation - what is fact is that there are no images on this film and never will be - and that lab is if anything suspect. Reputable labs make mistakes, but inform the customer their film was damaged. They generally have a service agreement in fine print someplace that states they are only responsible for the cost to replace the film.
The on-site mini-labs are becoming very rare, and for those that remain, the utilization is getting lower all the time. This means exhausted chemistry sitting around in the tanks awaiting the rare customer, and operators with very little experience running them.
Regardless, this is all speculation - what is fact is that there are no images on this film and never will be - and that lab is if anything suspect. Reputable labs make mistakes, but inform the customer their film was damaged. They generally have a service agreement in fine print someplace that states they are only responsible for the cost to replace the film.
The on-site mini-labs are becoming very rare, and for those that remain, the utilization is getting lower all the time. This means exhausted chemistry sitting around in the tanks awaiting the rare customer, and operators with very little experience running them.
Dwig
Well-known
++
There is only an astronomically small change that it is anything other than a lab error.
KRaZiGLiTcH
Established
sort of forgotten lol
i have a mix brands, as my mother bought any film that was available. i think it was Black & Gold which is an Australian brand of no name products so not sure what it would show on the edges