Help diagnose strange markings on negs

[froyd]

I just received a processed roll of 120 XP2 from the lab and I notice a variety of issues. I'm looking four your opinion on whether these might have been caused by a faulty transport mechanism, poor film loading, poor sealing of the finished 120 roll, or if the lab and processing were at fault. The roll was shot on a Rolleiflex mx-evs.

The first issue I noticed were what appears as light leaks at the edges of most of the frames --though not all. Previous rolls had much less pronounced light burns at the edges of the film, but never something this pronounced. The first few frames were mostly OK:

[/url]PXL_20210526_111304813 by kafe-pic, on Flickr[/IMG]

but other sections of the roll were far worse:

[/url]PXL_20210526_111226890 by kafe-pic, on Flickr[/IMG]

The second and most troublesome issue is that a the light leaks on a few of the frames (I keep calling them light leaks, but I'm not sure that's what they are) are encroaching on the photographic image AND feature some sort of numbers, almost like what you would have gotten from a data back.

PXL_20210526_111241092~2 by kafe-pic, on Flickr

PXL_20210526_111425576~2 by kafe-pic, on Flickr

PXL_20210526_111408405~2 by kafe-pic, on Flickr

Is there any chance the numbers showing up on my negs came from my improper handling of the roll or did the lab make a mistake?

 

[Rayt]

I have gotten those. Its doesn’t look like camera leak because it happens irregularly. It’s light leaking through the backing paper from the edges. It can happen during loading when the spool loosens up a bit when you dislodge the tape. I grip the spool to make sure there is no slack in the loading process. It can also happen when you finish the roll and open the back. The film spool is loose and there is no way you can take up the slack at the moment. Since during processing the spool is opened in a darkroom or bag there is little chance of light leaks.

 

[froyd]

I have gotten those. Its doesn’t look like camera leak because it happens irregularly. It’s light leaking through the backing paper from the edges. It can happen during loading when the spool loosens up a bit when you dislodge the tape. I grip the spool to make sure there is no slack in the loading process. It can also happen when you finish the roll and open the back. The film spool is loose and there is no way you can take up the slack at the moment. Since during processing the spool is opened in a darkroom or bag there is little chance of light leaks.

I'm inclined to agree with your assessment about the burned edges on the negative strip, but what's the source of the number 5s showing through as well as the dotted circles between two of the frames (all circled in red)?

 

[Rayt]

That the impression from the backing paper. I think it’s either the film is very old or it’s a defect in the paper. I get a lot of those with cheap Eastern Europe and Chinese films. That’s why I stick with Kodak Ilford and Fuji. From time to time the Kodak and Ilford have defective batches. But it should happen along the entire roll not just one section. I would say it has something to do with leakage as per my initial response where light has projected the image onto the film.

 

[Rob-F]

There also seems to be uneven development on some frames, as can happen if the emulsion is in contact with the back side of the film on the next layer of the developing reel. The image is exposed in those areas, but underdeveloped. That's a lab problem. There are also blank streaks on some frames that are harder to explain.

 

[Muggins]

Just seconding Rayt's view - definitely light coming through the backing paper. You are getting the same number on opposite sides of the image because it's printed on different sides of the paper depending on which format is being used.

Does your red window have a cover? If not, it's time to get the insulating tape out.

 

[Out to Lunch]

Load some fresh film and you will know.

 

[froyd]

Just seconding Rayt's view - definitely light coming through the backing paper. You are getting the same number on opposite sides of the image because it's printed on different sides of the paper depending on which format is being used.

Does your red window have a cover? If not, it's time to get the insulating tape out.

My Rollei does not have a film window, So that's one possible culprit that's easy to rule out 🙂


I never looked at Ilford backing paper, but it surprises me to hear that they have numbers printed vertically spanning the whole height of the spool, as opposed to a series of numbers printed horizontally for the whole length of the backing paper, for those cameras that do have film windows.

Also, why the circles made up by dots (4th pic between the frames)?

 

[froyd]

Load some fresh film and you will know.

It's already in the camera, but it's Kodak not Ilford, so there's one variable already different. Hopefully I'll work through that quickly and load some more XP2.

I've shot with this camera for many years and while I occasionally get the burn marks at the edges due to less than optimal loading/unloading of the reel, I've never seen "dot matrix marks" and "555" superimposed on my frames. At least it was not 666 or I'd have to add some holy water to the developer before processing the next roll!

 

[KenR]

I have had both problems which were caused by separate issues, none of which were camera related. Kodak had bad backing several years ago which caused the imprinting of the number from the paper onto the film. Ilford recently has had a similar issue, so I would contact them to see if has been noticed with the XP2 film previously. They want to know about these issues and will likely replace the processed film and any unused film that you have from the same lot.
The edge fogging is likely due to a light leak around an loosely wound film spool. It happened to me a few weeks ago - when I opened my Fujica GW690 I noticed that the film was not tight around the take up spool. Despite being in the shade of a tree and working as quickly as I could to get the film into my pocket, the last frame on the roll was ruined. The next two frames had edge streaks similar to those that you found and were usable. The other frames were fine. I made sure to hold the new rolls tighter when starting the next rolls and they turned out fine. I assume it was my haste to take some photos that led to the problem as it didn’t seem to be a systemic issue, but only time will tell.

 

[Coldkennels]

Also, why the circles made up by dots (4th pic between the frames)?

Those circles are wind-on guides. Most 120 backing papers have those, or something similar, to tell you how close you are to the next number when using a camera with a red window. They typically start small and get bigger until the next number appears.

Based on the "burns" you're getting, I'm guessing this was a "fat roll" - i.e. one that hasn't been tightly wound around the spool as you advanced the film. Light gets around the paper, and that can cause everything you're seeing here. It would also explain why the first frames on the roll were unaffected, and the problem got worse as the roll went on - the first frames you shot were closer to the centre of the spool, and therefore better protected.

 

[Rayt]

Here's an example of what defective backing paper can do:
HCMC by ray tai, on Flickr

 

[froyd]

Thank you all, for the sleuthing! I'll pay more attention to my film loading technique next time!

 

[rfaspen]

And unloading technique.
All of this is not uncommon, especially the light on film edges. The transfer of backing paper markings not common but part of being a film user. I just loaded my rolleicord, let the adventure begin.

 

[Coldkennels]

I'm pretty sure in this case the backing paper numbers are basically "burned in" due to light passing through the backing paper in places, rather than transferred onto the image with dye. If it was a backing paper defect, you'd be seeing them across the whole image like RayT's post (which was on Shanghai GP3, I'm guessing - I had a lot of similar problems with that film years ago) instead of just in "flares" coming in from the edge.

 

[Pete B]

Top is Kodak, bottom is Ilford.
Pete

 

[froyd]

View attachment 110659

Top is Kodak, bottom is Ilford.
Pete

The fingerprints match! Thanks Pete!