Neutronarmy
Member
Well, I have managed into a rather frustrating issue. About six months ago I won an ebay auction on what appeared to be a relatively beat up Olympus OM1. I managed to get a pretty good deal and was happy when it arrived. I didn't honestly have a chance to shoot it for quite some time and when I finally did I noticed some serious light leaks. I assumed that all it needed was new seals and put it to the back of the pile. Now, even after replacing the seals I still can't manage to get rid of the light leaks.
After the first roll post-resealing came back with light leaks, I went about patching any minor things I thought might help (including adding an additional undocumented light seal). Once another test roll was shot (of C-41 film), the results looked promising: I didn't spot any leaks. Assuming I had won the battle, I loaded up two rolls of bulk loaded TriX. After removing these rolls from the final rinse I noticed that the light leaks were back and worse than ever. Since the film is still drying I don't have any scans of those negatives, but they appear to show similar light leaks to the examples given, only it is on nearly every frame and much more apparent.
I honestly don't know what to do from this point. I plan to triple check everything tomorrow and try to run a couple of rolls through it. Hopefully the collective minds at RFF can help me diagnose this issue. I included several images of the camera and some light leak samples on this website:
OM-1 Light Leaks
Thanks for any help that you might send my way.
-Chris
After the first roll post-resealing came back with light leaks, I went about patching any minor things I thought might help (including adding an additional undocumented light seal). Once another test roll was shot (of C-41 film), the results looked promising: I didn't spot any leaks. Assuming I had won the battle, I loaded up two rolls of bulk loaded TriX. After removing these rolls from the final rinse I noticed that the light leaks were back and worse than ever. Since the film is still drying I don't have any scans of those negatives, but they appear to show similar light leaks to the examples given, only it is on nearly every frame and much more apparent.
I honestly don't know what to do from this point. I plan to triple check everything tomorrow and try to run a couple of rolls through it. Hopefully the collective minds at RFF can help me diagnose this issue. I included several images of the camera and some light leak samples on this website:
OM-1 Light Leaks
Thanks for any help that you might send my way.
-Chris
marcust101
Established
Chris,
Am I right in saying you used bulk loaded film before and after the C 41 roll. The C41 had no leaks, it sounds to me like the problem is your bulk loader or the cassettes the film is moved too.
Another possiblility is your development technique on, is it possible your development tank is leaking light?
My first guess is the loader though
Lets see what the experts say
Marcus
Am I right in saying you used bulk loaded film before and after the C 41 roll. The C41 had no leaks, it sounds to me like the problem is your bulk loader or the cassettes the film is moved too.
Another possiblility is your development technique on, is it possible your development tank is leaking light?
My first guess is the loader though
Lets see what the experts say
Marcus
You definitely have a light problem somewhere. Consider that the film as it goes through the camera is turned 180 degrees from the orientation seen in the print. Therefore the mark is toward the right side of the camera as you look at the back, and tends to be low. The color shot shows an amazingly bad unwanted exposure!
Consider also that the unwanted light may not be causing the effect at the time the frame is in position for exposure from the lens... it could occur when the film is in position to be next-up, or in the position at the takeup spool having just been exposed to the scene. Imagine how that might possibly be happening...
But on the water tower shot, for instance, the series of regularly spaced light areas along the bottom of the frame are not from light leaks, IMO. I'll bet the spacing corrresponds with the sproket holes, and this look can result from overly-vigorous agitation during development. The developer surges through the sprocket holes, and the extra localized turbulence causes extra development action.
Consider also that the unwanted light may not be causing the effect at the time the frame is in position for exposure from the lens... it could occur when the film is in position to be next-up, or in the position at the takeup spool having just been exposed to the scene. Imagine how that might possibly be happening...
But on the water tower shot, for instance, the series of regularly spaced light areas along the bottom of the frame are not from light leaks, IMO. I'll bet the spacing corrresponds with the sproket holes, and this look can result from overly-vigorous agitation during development. The developer surges through the sprocket holes, and the extra localized turbulence causes extra development action.
Mark Wood
Well-known
As it's an MD version of the OM-1, is the cover for the motor winder coupling missing?
There seem to be varying opinions on this and I've never put it to the test but I've read somewhere that light can get to the film if the cover is missing. In fact, I'd be intrigued to know if this is actually true or not!
As Doug says, the marks corresponding to the sprockets look very much like an agitation problem.
There seem to be varying opinions on this and I've never put it to the test but I've read somewhere that light can get to the film if the cover is missing. In fact, I'd be intrigued to know if this is actually true or not!
As Doug says, the marks corresponding to the sprockets look very much like an agitation problem.
oscroft
Veteran
Not a definitive answer, but I've used an OM with the winder cover missing with no problems.
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
check the shutter curtains to see if they have thin spots where light can get through. I doubt that's the problem though, i think its the seals you put in. I had an OM-G that have a similar leak, but mine was putting that line repeated all over the whole film, not just in one place like you got. The problem was the hinge edge seal had fallen off completely. You have a seal but maybe its too thin? Also it could be too thick, that can make the back not close right and could cause a light leak in an OM.
cmedin
Well-known
Have you emailed Jon Goodman (interslice) to ask his opinion? He's pretty experienced to say the least. 
clintock
Galleryless Gearhead
I'd tighten the loose latch-that being loose has gotten me before.. My leaks were random based on how the light hit the camera and how I held it..
Remove the door and the undocumented seal by the latch and peel back the body covering just a bit on that end of the front to reveal the screws over a small end plate. That plate covers the sliding latch and once off you can get to the two screws that have the brass sleeves on them who live in the slots in the latch plate.
Once the screws and tiny brass sleeves that were around those screws are out, the latch plate will be loose, but still won't come out. That's ok, note how the back of the plate (the edge facing the front of the camera) is resting on a cast ridge in the cast shell of the camera body. That ridge is strong enough to take the force needed to beat the hook side of the latch into adjustment by bending slightly. If you were to hammer on the hook while the brass collars and screws were in place, I think the brass and/or screws could be damaged.
I put a block of soft wood under the front of the camera near the latch while the body was face down on the workbench, then used a small hammer and drift of hardwood to carefully beat the drift to get the latch hook to bend slightly (in my case maybe a mm)-all the while holding the latch plate firmly in place.
Be sure not to let the block of wood under the front of the end of the camera be touching the end of the strap lug, but rather just next to it.
Go slow, as too much bend might be quite hard to get out. I checked my progress by first having a good idea of how much the end of that hook needed to move towards the camera front to make the hinge side and the latch side of the back appear the same level as the rest of the camera, then checking by putting the brass collars and screws back in and closing to check the action.
I would not try to bend the hook on the door, it's spot welded to the thin door metal and the spot weld might break.
I did this to an OM-4 but I assume the 1 is the same.
Remove the door and the undocumented seal by the latch and peel back the body covering just a bit on that end of the front to reveal the screws over a small end plate. That plate covers the sliding latch and once off you can get to the two screws that have the brass sleeves on them who live in the slots in the latch plate.
Once the screws and tiny brass sleeves that were around those screws are out, the latch plate will be loose, but still won't come out. That's ok, note how the back of the plate (the edge facing the front of the camera) is resting on a cast ridge in the cast shell of the camera body. That ridge is strong enough to take the force needed to beat the hook side of the latch into adjustment by bending slightly. If you were to hammer on the hook while the brass collars and screws were in place, I think the brass and/or screws could be damaged.
I put a block of soft wood under the front of the camera near the latch while the body was face down on the workbench, then used a small hammer and drift of hardwood to carefully beat the drift to get the latch hook to bend slightly (in my case maybe a mm)-all the while holding the latch plate firmly in place.
Be sure not to let the block of wood under the front of the end of the camera be touching the end of the strap lug, but rather just next to it.
Go slow, as too much bend might be quite hard to get out. I checked my progress by first having a good idea of how much the end of that hook needed to move towards the camera front to make the hinge side and the latch side of the back appear the same level as the rest of the camera, then checking by putting the brass collars and screws back in and closing to check the action.
I would not try to bend the hook on the door, it's spot welded to the thin door metal and the spot weld might break.
I did this to an OM-4 but I assume the 1 is the same.
Last edited:
Jon Goodman
Well-known
Some leaks can be puzzling, and all leaks are not because of foam/fabric seals. The "other" (translated as mechanical) leaks can be some of the hardest to trace. In this case, light is striking the film from behind...the leak damage will manifest itself in odd colors. Maybe I missed it, but does the leak damage extend all the way to the edge of the negative? It should if light is striking the back side of the film, but it doesn't hurt to know this. By the way, light striking the front side of color film will simply wash it out...exactly the same effect as overexposure.
With mechanical leaks, I start by looking for missing screws, loose plates, things like that. Also, it appears the light is strongest on the lower right side of the camera (in the color photo...I'm not sure about the B/W shots...may be a developing problem here).
Also...large problem that can be overlooked: Is the door bent? It doesn't take much. Any damage can allow light in, and any light is a bad thing.
I'll look back in or please feel free to e:mail or PM me.
Jon
With mechanical leaks, I start by looking for missing screws, loose plates, things like that. Also, it appears the light is strongest on the lower right side of the camera (in the color photo...I'm not sure about the B/W shots...may be a developing problem here).
Also...large problem that can be overlooked: Is the door bent? It doesn't take much. Any damage can allow light in, and any light is a bad thing.
I'll look back in or please feel free to e:mail or PM me.
Jon
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
The "undocumented" seal on the hinge end is a problem, IMO. It looks way too thick and it could be causing the door to not line up properly in other spots.
As for the MD cover, I concur that it shouldn't be a problem. The current OM-1n I use is missing the cover and I use ordinary transparent tape to keep dirt out. The original seals are shoddy and need to be re-done, but I haven't noticed any leaks at all:
As for the MD cover, I concur that it shouldn't be a problem. The current OM-1n I use is missing the cover and I use ordinary transparent tape to keep dirt out. The original seals are shoddy and need to be re-done, but I haven't noticed any leaks at all:
nikon_sam
Shooter of Film...
Hey...I just got my Re-seal Kit from Jon Goodman today...
I have a Mamiya m645 that needs the rear door done...it doesn't leak but they are gummy and starting to fall apart...I also have a Nikon F2 sitting in the closet that could use new seals too...
I have a Mamiya m645 that needs the rear door done...it doesn't leak but they are gummy and starting to fall apart...I also have a Nikon F2 sitting in the closet that could use new seals too...
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
OT, but I discovered my RC is so gummy that the residue STUCK to the cartridge of last roll of film I took! And it was a nice Adox 100 roll that Gene donated at that. No harm done, but it was pretty funny.
cmedin
Well-known
Have fun... most cameras are easy to re-seal, it's fun and you get a sense of accomplishment.
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
CMEDIN: I've resealed several cameras, the most recent being a black OM-2 with some nice brassing.
Neutronarmy
Member
Wow, thank you all immensely for the wealth of replies. I have taken in some of your suggestions and things appear to be improving.
After a close inspection of my last two rolls of film, I think the bulk loading may be at least partly at fault; I haven't had any issues previously, but this time may have been my mistake. The light leaks appear to be consistent throughout each frame and seem to vary from what I had posted previously (which were not bulk loaded but rather retail Arista.EDU Ultra 400). Development issues were cited as possible reasons for the bottom sprocket hole light leaks. With all of the issues I have had recently with development, I am tempted to agree. However, a second roll processed during that same session came out without any flaws (it was from my Bessa R). The same sprocket whole leaks are also on the two most recent rolls. I agitate two inversions over five seconds twice a minute - a total of four slow inversions per minute. The development time was 13 minutes in Rodinal 1+50. I know some agitate less, but I wouldn't think that routine would cause any ill effects from over agitation.
The additional "undocumented" light seal was an attempt to easily remedy the problem and appears to have been a not so intelligent idea. As such I have removed it and at the same time I replaced my hinge end seal (for a second time...I was worried my first attempt wasn't satisfactory). I also used a bit of gaffers tape under the hinge to cover some peeling leatherette (this does not disrupt the light seal past the hinge, but I thought I would add it for the sake of detail).
Additionally I bent the latch help the door seal a little tighter. I didn't go to quite the effort detailed by clintock (thank you by the way, I will use your directions if the current solution does not solve the issue), but the door does close significantly tighter now.
Jon: The light leaks do extend to the edge. They do not always cover the entire frame, but they always terminate on the edge of the film. I don't know if the door is bent or not - it doesn't appear to be significantly. This is my first OM-1, so I don't know what is and is not normal. I do notice a gap between the door and the back of the camera (on the bottom of the door I can see the light seals inside the camera), but I don't know if that is standard or not. On an semi-related note, your light seal kits are excellent.
After today's work I shot a roll of 400 ISO color film indoors (as it was raining outside), intentionally trying to bring about light leaks by pointing harsh light sources around the door. Upon developing the film I did notice one frame with a vertical line, but it looked much different than previous leaks (and made me think perhaps it was from something unrelated). Tomorrow I am going to shoot a roll of 400 ISO color and a roll of FP4+ and report back. I am hoping for the best, but if you notice any horrendous errors in my solutions please reply.
Thanks again for all of the help.
After a close inspection of my last two rolls of film, I think the bulk loading may be at least partly at fault; I haven't had any issues previously, but this time may have been my mistake. The light leaks appear to be consistent throughout each frame and seem to vary from what I had posted previously (which were not bulk loaded but rather retail Arista.EDU Ultra 400). Development issues were cited as possible reasons for the bottom sprocket hole light leaks. With all of the issues I have had recently with development, I am tempted to agree. However, a second roll processed during that same session came out without any flaws (it was from my Bessa R). The same sprocket whole leaks are also on the two most recent rolls. I agitate two inversions over five seconds twice a minute - a total of four slow inversions per minute. The development time was 13 minutes in Rodinal 1+50. I know some agitate less, but I wouldn't think that routine would cause any ill effects from over agitation.
The additional "undocumented" light seal was an attempt to easily remedy the problem and appears to have been a not so intelligent idea. As such I have removed it and at the same time I replaced my hinge end seal (for a second time...I was worried my first attempt wasn't satisfactory). I also used a bit of gaffers tape under the hinge to cover some peeling leatherette (this does not disrupt the light seal past the hinge, but I thought I would add it for the sake of detail).
Additionally I bent the latch help the door seal a little tighter. I didn't go to quite the effort detailed by clintock (thank you by the way, I will use your directions if the current solution does not solve the issue), but the door does close significantly tighter now.
Jon: The light leaks do extend to the edge. They do not always cover the entire frame, but they always terminate on the edge of the film. I don't know if the door is bent or not - it doesn't appear to be significantly. This is my first OM-1, so I don't know what is and is not normal. I do notice a gap between the door and the back of the camera (on the bottom of the door I can see the light seals inside the camera), but I don't know if that is standard or not. On an semi-related note, your light seal kits are excellent.
After today's work I shot a roll of 400 ISO color film indoors (as it was raining outside), intentionally trying to bring about light leaks by pointing harsh light sources around the door. Upon developing the film I did notice one frame with a vertical line, but it looked much different than previous leaks (and made me think perhaps it was from something unrelated). Tomorrow I am going to shoot a roll of 400 ISO color and a roll of FP4+ and report back. I am hoping for the best, but if you notice any horrendous errors in my solutions please reply.
Thanks again for all of the help.
Another experimental approach would be to put gaffers tape around the back to cover all the "cracks" and see if the light leaks go away. Then for the next roll put the tape just over the crack along the bottom of the door and see what happens, and so forth. This would be a way to determine if the foam is insufficient in some areas, maybe due to a warped back or some such.
Xmas
Veteran
The manual said dont operate the camera without a motor coupling cover, for leak exposure, the OM10 were ok without aa cover because they had more baffles, and some OM1 may have additional baffling.
BLACK PVC tape is cheap.
Noel
BLACK PVC tape is cheap.
Noel
nikon_sam
Shooter of Film...
Fun & Easy...
Fun & Easy...
Define "Fun" for me....
and while you're at it "Easy" too...
It wasn't that bad...just a lot of work getting all the old seal-crap out of all the hidding spots...
Accomplishment...yeah...I feel so much better knowing that the back seals are clean, dry and working...I know it's now done and I don't have to look at gunk everytime I change out a roll...
Fun & Easy...
cmedin said:Have fun... most cameras are easy to re-seal, it's fun and you get a sense of accomplishment.
Define "Fun" for me....
and while you're at it "Easy" too...
It wasn't that bad...just a lot of work getting all the old seal-crap out of all the hidding spots...
Accomplishment...yeah...I feel so much better knowing that the back seals are clean, dry and working...I know it's now done and I don't have to look at gunk everytime I change out a roll...
Jon Goodman
Well-known
There have been some very good suggestions and ideas here...if the hinge end seal is too thick, it will cause a misalignment problem and that could be a culprit. If the door is bent, you'll generally notice this, and that actually isn't too common, but occasionally happens. It sounds to me like we have plenty of ammo...we just need to hit the target.
Camera re-sealing as fun? I think it can be. Actually it is the one aspect of camera repair which has some positive reinforcement, and it can be fun in that way....if you enjoy that sort of stuff, I suppose. Thanks very much for the compliments on the seal kits, by the way. Everyone has been a great supporter of the "light seal project" here for years, and I appreciate that very much.
I must head off to do some work, but will be checking back to see on this.
Jon
Camera re-sealing as fun? I think it can be. Actually it is the one aspect of camera repair which has some positive reinforcement, and it can be fun in that way....if you enjoy that sort of stuff, I suppose. Thanks very much for the compliments on the seal kits, by the way. Everyone has been a great supporter of the "light seal project" here for years, and I appreciate that very much.
I must head off to do some work, but will be checking back to see on this.
Jon
nikon_sam
Shooter of Film...
Jon,
I must say that the kit you sell is well done...the variety of materials makes doing the job easier...It takes some of the scary factor out of resealing a camera...
Actually looking forward to doing another camera...
Thanks,
I must say that the kit you sell is well done...the variety of materials makes doing the job easier...It takes some of the scary factor out of resealing a camera...
Actually looking forward to doing another camera...
Thanks,