greyhoundman
Well-known
What was the result? Did the shutter stay open till it was hit with light?
If a new roll from the store still looks that way. You'll need to pull the top.
If a new roll from the store still looks that way. You'll need to pull the top.
nervetonic
Member
greyhoundman said:
Shutter stayed open until it was hit with light. Answers are beginning to point mostly to bad film and underexposure. Have all the film answers, so last is to test out going way big with exposure to see if that is the problem and bring it back in step by step to see what the correct reading is...
If you have any last minute answers that come to mind let me know...I've been having this problem for 4 rolls (all rolls were from the same pack), so changing film will be the first step and while having it, finding one shot and going at different f stops and recording it on paper to see what is the result.
I will update when all is done for the benefit of anyone who reads this that has the same issue.
Thanks for all the input
Brian
owlsplace
Roger
You can also pull the battery and use the sunny 16 rule for a few frames. Your exposure would be 1/500 at f11 for a daylight shot with front lighting between the hours of 10am and 3pm using 400 speed film. Put the camera on a tripod and make two additonal exposures, one stop above and below for comparison...Roger 
bmattock
Veteran
Lens Flare.
ully
ully
Looks like lens flare to me. Do shots from lower contrast and lighting situations look the same?
nervetonic
Member
ully said:
I'll show you another shot that is overall too even in contrast between shadow and light. I may have been testing a UV filter I have that I want the camera to have on to protect the lens. I wasn't near direct light or positioned so I could get glare. Even without the UV filter, I have this problem. As I said earlier, I will be changing film from this stock I have. I was just thrown off, thinking that it had nothing to do with the film as I get very good shots when I have flash.
Is this new photo showing underexposure as well? To me, it looks overexposed.
If I need to make adjustments to expose it more, should I decrease the ASA setting or open the aperture?
Attachments
Last edited:
owlsplace
Roger
Maybe an easier way for you to approach this problem is to compare the density of the negatives. Compare the density of the images you like to the ones you don't. If the ones you don't like are thinner or less dense than the ones you do like, it means they were under exposed.
Also the traditional method for testing a camera was to use a fresh roll of slide film with bracketed exposures. You eliminate the variables of processing with this method. If you have a custom lab available you can have it processed without mounts which makes it easier to review the results.
Has the POD been replaced on this camera. A failing pod can cause eratic exposures...the contrast issues appear to be related to your film and/or processing....Roger
Also the traditional method for testing a camera was to use a fresh roll of slide film with bracketed exposures. You eliminate the variables of processing with this method. If you have a custom lab available you can have it processed without mounts which makes it easier to review the results.
Has the POD been replaced on this camera. A failing pod can cause eratic exposures...the contrast issues appear to be related to your film and/or processing....Roger
Last edited: