farlymac
PF McFarland
You all may have remembered how enthusiastic I was about taking my IIIf out for a test run earlier this year after getting it back from Don in the spring. I finally did that in the first week of July and sent the film off to Dwayne's the first week of August (I've had quite a few distractions this year). I just got the film back yesterday after three months of waiting and suffice it to say I'll be looking for another lab. Besides the extreme wait time, crappy communication when I queried them about my order, and them cutting the film when I distinctly chose the Do Not Cut option, the negs have some sort of yellowish contamination on them that looks like it was done with a dirty squeegee which affected the scans as to exposure (light streaks where the contamination was not as heavy).
Overall, I'm satisfied with the operation of the camera, and even the flash sync works properly (take that, Ulrich!). I may send my other IIIf to Don to sort out after what Herr Fuchs did to it, but that's for another time further down the road. The two lenses used were the Summaron 3.5/3.5 with a yellow filter, and the Elmar 50/2.8 unfiltered. Film was Kodak Tri-X 400 24 exp. And I forgot the fact it was only 24 frames, so I wasted some trying to get better compositions when the first one was sufficient.
Here are some samples from the test roll. If you want to see all the photos and commentary, go to Leica IIIf Post DAG Overhaul Test on Flickr.
Here I opened the lens a stop to properly expose the front of the log cabin.
Exposure Adjustment by P F McFarland, on Flickr
This was the most affected frame when it came to the yellow contamination being more streaked in this part of the film strip.
Lab Fault by P F McFarland, on Flickr
No problems with exposures unless I chose wrong or forgot to set the aperture.
New Castle Farm Market by P F McFarland, on Flickr
PF
Overall, I'm satisfied with the operation of the camera, and even the flash sync works properly (take that, Ulrich!). I may send my other IIIf to Don to sort out after what Herr Fuchs did to it, but that's for another time further down the road. The two lenses used were the Summaron 3.5/3.5 with a yellow filter, and the Elmar 50/2.8 unfiltered. Film was Kodak Tri-X 400 24 exp. And I forgot the fact it was only 24 frames, so I wasted some trying to get better compositions when the first one was sufficient.
Here are some samples from the test roll. If you want to see all the photos and commentary, go to Leica IIIf Post DAG Overhaul Test on Flickr.
Here I opened the lens a stop to properly expose the front of the log cabin.
Exposure Adjustment by P F McFarland, on Flickr
This was the most affected frame when it came to the yellow contamination being more streaked in this part of the film strip.
Lab Fault by P F McFarland, on Flickr
No problems with exposures unless I chose wrong or forgot to set the aperture.
New Castle Farm Market by P F McFarland, on Flickr
PF
Last edited:
Ororaro
Well-known
Botched development, quite appaling
Retro-Grouch
Veteran
I'm currently at seven weeks and counting for an order of 12 rolls of Ektachrome. When contacted by email three weeks ago regarding my order's status, Dwayne's replied (quickly and apologetically) with the explanation that they were sent improperly labelled ECN-2 film; the remjet layer contaminated the line and messed up their machinery. It subsequently took two months to order new chemistry from their supplier.
So, in a nutshell, communication has been good, though I'm going to contact them again in about a week. Processing itself has always been good, and clean, so I'm willing to give them another chance. However, if my film looks like yours when it arrives, that would be unacceptable. Likewise, cutting your film contrary to instructions is also unacceptable.
Problem is, if they do continue to drop the ball, I have 15 Fuji processing mailers that I've purchased (at $12.99 each), which go to Dwayne's. I'm hoping I don't have to bite the bullet and choose not to use them.
However, on the bright side, the Leica seems to be working perfectly. Be grateful! We seem to have entered a world, post-COVID, where proper functioning of institutions and systems can no longer be taken for granted. Example: we just got local landline service back after a 28-day outage that was not due to any natural disaster or any other visible problem. Our provider offered no explanation, just run-around promises of imminent service restoration, and (insult to injury) a $4.30 credit for the lost service!
So, in a nutshell, communication has been good, though I'm going to contact them again in about a week. Processing itself has always been good, and clean, so I'm willing to give them another chance. However, if my film looks like yours when it arrives, that would be unacceptable. Likewise, cutting your film contrary to instructions is also unacceptable.
Problem is, if they do continue to drop the ball, I have 15 Fuji processing mailers that I've purchased (at $12.99 each), which go to Dwayne's. I'm hoping I don't have to bite the bullet and choose not to use them.
However, on the bright side, the Leica seems to be working perfectly. Be grateful! We seem to have entered a world, post-COVID, where proper functioning of institutions and systems can no longer be taken for granted. Example: we just got local landline service back after a 28-day outage that was not due to any natural disaster or any other visible problem. Our provider offered no explanation, just run-around promises of imminent service restoration, and (insult to injury) a $4.30 credit for the lost service!
Last edited:
rfaspen
[insert pithy phrase here]
Glad I develop all my own BW film at home. If it gets messed up I can complain directly to the person who is at fault. Speaking of institutions that no longer function: IRS made a bizarre mistake on my taxes and thinks I owe them money. So far I've spent 42 hours of my life (actual hours, not estimated) on a phone (on hold, listening to awful music) and still haven't reached a person who can help. After hours-long waits and multiple drops, I managed to talk to 3 actual humans during my ordeal. Not one said they could help me (not their department) and each one hung up on me instead of transferring to someone who possibly could help me. I continue to attempt calls, I have written letters, and now I just received a letter in the mail informing me they're taking me to collections! "Infuriating" is so very much too weak of a word! The incompetence and stupidity of this new world is going to kill me. I can't believe I may have to pay a substantial amount of money that I don't owe just to save my house. And people wonder why the IRS is so hated....
But all my Barnacks work great. All of them have made trips to Don/DAG at some point in their lives. Of course I may not get to keep them as I become destitute and homeless, but someone at the IRS might appreciate them? Yeah. Right. 😠
But all my Barnacks work great. All of them have made trips to Don/DAG at some point in their lives. Of course I may not get to keep them as I become destitute and homeless, but someone at the IRS might appreciate them? Yeah. Right. 😠
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
Did Don put new shutter curtains in it? The dark lines across the sky in the last photo are a symptom of bad curtains on a screwmount Leica; the problem only shows up when high shutter speeds are used. He has a page on his website explaining it: Shutter Curtain Problems in the Screw-Mount Cameras
Retro-Grouch
Veteran
About 20 years ago, I ran the shipping and receiving department at the bike shop where I worked. I received a high-end wheel that was shipped by a customer to our address, via UPS. Despite careful packing, it had been mangled in transit; of course, I instituted a claim. Things went back and forth for months, with UPS totally stonewalling. Our UPS driver, a loyal customer, got me aside and explained very much off the record that this was standard procedure with claims. Only people who were total bulldogs, and hung in relentlessly, got their claims approved. UPS had a formula for hours invested in the claim vs. claim amount; at a certain point, it cost them less to settle. The decision to settle had nothing to do with the validity of the claim. I played the bulldog, and finally succeeded.
This seems to be standard procedure in the corporate bureaucracy these days (and let's not even discuss the medical industry!). Perhaps some sort of twisted algorithm like this is at work with IRS in your case. Hang in; you have my sympathy! But yeah, what a world...
dab
Electromagnetic waves sensor
Thanks for sharing this! I was wandering what's wrong with some of the shots from my IIf, now I know the reason and how to fix it.
farlymac
PF McFarland
I have found it better to go to a professional tax preparer and let them do the heavy lifting at the IRS.
PF
farlymac
PF McFarland
If you mean the third photo in my post, Chris, those black lines are overhead power and or telephone wires. My first IIIf had bad curtains, and Ulrich Fuchs replaced them while botching the flash sync, and not getting the speeds set correctly, plus leaving a piece of the old curtain in the camera where it was jamming the shutter until finally working itself out of wherever it was hanging after six exposures.
I explained that there is some sort of yellowish contamination on the negatives, quite possibly applied with a dirty squeegee. The unevenness of the contamination causes the streaking as it affects the scanner exposure by allowing more light to pass through in the lighter areas. There is no problem with the shutter curtains on this camera. If there had been, Don would have replaced them. I know because I discussed that possibility with him. The streaking in the images is actually lighter than the rest of the image, which is the opposite effect when the shutter curtains are old and cracking.
PF
Last edited:
farlymac
PF McFarland
The only Internet service I could get from Verizon up here was via DSL, and that was crappy to say the least because I was beyond the normal range (though they were happy to have me paying for it) and the land line had been patched together so many times because of contractors severing it there was a lot of noise. When I asked them about their new Home Internet Service, they told me there were no plans to put it in my area, so I switched to T-Mobile. Other than slow resets of the cell towers when there are power drops, I've had no issues to complain of.
PF
Retro-Grouch
Veteran
Received my film today from Dwayne's. An appalling mess! Several rolls had the same yellow contamination that farlymac reported. Additionally, the uncut 120 rolls are now returned unsleeved, merely rolled up in individual cardboard tubes (they were sleeved and in heavier tubes in the past). It's almost guaranteed your film will get scratched in the process of removing it from the tubes. On top of that, the still-wet yellow goop adhered to the emulsion on the portion of the film that contacted it as it was rolled up, smearing itself and causing the emulsion to stick to the frame it was in contact with.
Altogether completely unprofessional. I will be contacting Dwayne's to demand a credit, and will NOT be using them in the future. I'm hoping I can return my mailers to B&H, but, if not, I'll take the loss. Stay away from Dwayne's and Fuji prepaid mailers!
farlymac
PF McFarland
Oh, that's really rough. At least my negs were good and dried before they tossed them in the envelope.
PF
Godfrey
somewhat colored
If you're doing B&W film, there's very little reason not to develop it yourself. Send off to a processor that takes months? Ridiculous!
It takes 25 minutes to process a roll of B&W film and requires just the bare minimum of equipment and chemistry, and costs pennies per roll. A daylight loading tank (like an Agfa Rondix, Rondinax 35 or 60, or a Lab Box). A thermometer. Some cheap plastic beakers to mix and measure out the developer and fixer, and developer and fixer. That's it.
Color neg or slide ... yeah, I send that off. Or I used to. It's been a long time since ...
G
It takes 25 minutes to process a roll of B&W film and requires just the bare minimum of equipment and chemistry, and costs pennies per roll. A daylight loading tank (like an Agfa Rondix, Rondinax 35 or 60, or a Lab Box). A thermometer. Some cheap plastic beakers to mix and measure out the developer and fixer, and developer and fixer. That's it.
Color neg or slide ... yeah, I send that off. Or I used to. It's been a long time since ...
G
rfaspen
[insert pithy phrase here]
When I last shot color film (C-41), I think I sent it to The Darkroom in San Diego. At least back then, they did a fine job.
Retro-Grouch
Veteran
I've been doing a little research, and they look like the best option out there, with consistently favorable reviews. Next E-6 batch goes to them!
farlymac
PF McFarland
I understand what you are saying, Godfrey, but I have my reasons for doing so. I've got the equipment, chemicals are no problem to procure, but I have doubt whether the pipes in this place (circa 1946) would hold up to the onslaught of stop bath and fixer. So, I'll keep looking for a decent lab to do the work.
PF
Godfrey
somewhat colored
Hmm. There's no need for a stop bath (I haven't used one for processing film in thirty years... a water rinse before fixer is perfectly sufficient and saves the fixer life), and if you mix your exhausted developer and fixer before discarding, the result is near neutral pH and not injurious to plumbing.
The pipes in my place are a bit younger (1973) but just as fraught since this is a 102 unit condominum building, and there's been no negative impact from 15 years of my B&W development work. Of course, when I was growing up, I lived in a house that was built in the 1890s, and the darkroom there had been in use by my father and his two brothers for thirty years before I came on the scene... No impact on the plumbing was ever evident.
G
Retro-Grouch
Veteran
For some, like me, it's not just the plumbing that's of concern. Septic systems are, in a sense, living things. The network of microorganisms that enable them to do their work can be severely damaged by toxic chemicals.Hmm. There's no need for a stop bath (I haven't used one for processing film in thirty years... a water rinse before fixer is perfectly sufficient and saves the fixer life), and if you mix your exhausted developer and fixer before discarding, the result is near neutral pH and not injurious to plumbing.
The pipes in my place are a bit younger (1973) but just as fraught since this is a 102 unit condominum building, and there's been no negative impact from 15 years of my B&W development work. Of course, when I was growing up, I lived in a house that was built in the 1890s, and the darkroom there had been in use by my father and his two brothers for thirty years before I came on the scene... No impact on the plumbing was ever evident.
G
Then there's the water itself. Our water, from local wells, has such a high mineral content that, while not toxic, it's not drinkable. That would entail the purchase and transport of significant amounts of distilled water in addition to the de-ionized drinking water that we already purchase.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
I can't answer to the septic tank issues, but B&W chemistry (developer and fixer) isn't particularly high in toxic stuff, not much more so than most household cleaning agents like dishwasher soap and laundry detergent. I wouldn't consider offering them up for a drink, but in the amounts and concentrations needed to process, what, maybe 10 rolls of film a week, I don't think they'd be a significant threat to the ecosystem of a septic tank.
Of course, you could just move to processing in caffenol (essentially Vitamin C in high concentration).
It's always best to mix chemistry using distilled water, but I ignore that. My water here is pretty mineral rich (to the extent that I only cook or drink bottled water) but I haven't seen it prove a major issue with my B&W developing chemistry. What are "significant amounts" of distilled water? You only really need it for mixing the developer and fixer from concentrates, and for me 250ml of working solution each is about 5 or 6 rolls of film before I chuck it and mix up a fresh batch. That amount of film is basically what I shoot in a month or two, so a quart of distilled water per month is all I'd need if I was being rigorous about it. (I'd do the wash in whatever passes for tap water anyway.)
All said, there are always reasons to want to keep doing things the way you always have. I don't trust any of the outside labs to process my B&W film the way I like, never have, and do whatever it takes to process my film myself. To send film off to a lab for processing and wait weeks or months for nearly always substandard results would make me completely discard film photography ... I don't have the patience for that.
G