farlymac
PF McFarland
I think I've seen this before in a thread somewhere, but I'm thinking the cause is uneven emulsion layering.
The Time It Was by P F McFarland, on Flickr
PF
The Time It Was by P F McFarland, on Flickr
PF
Tri-X Striation
- Thread starter farlymac
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 19
- Views 2K
retinax
Well-known
Tell us more! Is this new film? Developed yourself?
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
What camera did you shoot that in? I have ever seen any Kodak film like that, and uneven development would not give such perfect lines.
charjohncarter
Veteran
PK, I had this once almost 50 years ago. I could never figure it out. I did shoot this picture through a window: PlusX, D-76. The other frames on the roll were not affected. A little harder to see than yours, but look at the street. It shows best if you click on the image.
PANAMA' 1970 by John Carter, on Flickr
PANAMA' 1970 by John Carter, on Flickr
wwfloyd
Well-known
I'll guess that you were using a FILTER on the camera lens. I've had this effect, and narrowed it down to one bad filter. It was a Hoya UV, just like the other Hoya UV filters I was using at the time, with no problem. Since I was working with digital, I could turn the filter, and immediately revue, and see the rotation on the images.
Larry H-L
Well-known
Was the film or camera cold, and then put in a warmer or humid environment? That could dampen and soften the emulsion, and then cause the marking streaks as the film is advanced through the camera.
maddoc
... likes film again.
I have obtained similar striped pattern but it was scanner related in my case.
farlymac
PF McFarland
retinax: New, expiry 05/2021, developed and scanned by Dwayne's
Chris: Leica IIIf with Yashikor 5cm 1:2.8
John: No windows involved (unless you count my computer operating system)
wwfloyd: No filter in use
Larry H-C: I keep my cameras at the same temp as the environment I'm operating in
maddoc: Yeah, I've seen scanner faults similar to this, but it definitely is in the negative.
If you click on the photo you can check out the other photos on Flickr from that roll, and also see the flare that came from the front of the camera somewhere as the film gate blocks it from getting into the sprockets.
It's on almost every frame (even the ones where I had the lens cap on), and varies in intensity. I used an LED flashlight to see if I could recreate the flare, shining it at the film gate, and into the rangefinder/view windows. Couldn't see it getting through anywhere.
I first thought it might be a lens fault, but I've used that lens on a couple other cameras before without issues. I'll include the worst image here as on most of the others I cropped the flare out.
Gated Alley by P F McFarland, on Flickr
PF
Chris: Leica IIIf with Yashikor 5cm 1:2.8
John: No windows involved (unless you count my computer operating system)
wwfloyd: No filter in use
Larry H-C: I keep my cameras at the same temp as the environment I'm operating in
maddoc: Yeah, I've seen scanner faults similar to this, but it definitely is in the negative.
If you click on the photo you can check out the other photos on Flickr from that roll, and also see the flare that came from the front of the camera somewhere as the film gate blocks it from getting into the sprockets.
It's on almost every frame (even the ones where I had the lens cap on), and varies in intensity. I used an LED flashlight to see if I could recreate the flare, shining it at the film gate, and into the rangefinder/view windows. Couldn't see it getting through anywhere.
I first thought it might be a lens fault, but I've used that lens on a couple other cameras before without issues. I'll include the worst image here as on most of the others I cropped the flare out.
Gated Alley by P F McFarland, on Flickr
PF
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
Didn't you say your IIIf had a light leak (in my thread about my Leica IIIf)?
farlymac
PF McFarland
charjohncarter
Veteran
I clicked on your photostream, am I wrong or are some of the frames un-effected? You a jarring my memory. My window shot was with a Pentax Spotmatic, when I saw IIIf (in your post) I remember that was my first sign of the need of a new shutter on my IIIf
Solinar
Analog Preferred
To add to what John Carter wrote, that Barnack needs its shutter curtains replaced.
Timmyjoe
Veteran
I've seen two things cause that effect. As mentioned above, if the lines are visible on the bare negative, it's probably shutter curtain timing. Especially on higher speeds, the second shutter curtain is catching the first curtain.
The second cause I've seen is in scanning. With a Nikon Coolscan 9000 I get that effect on negatives, especially negatives that have a smooth gradation like sky, when doing a normal scan (the quicker option). I'm sure I have the terminology wrong, as I am not at my scanning computer right now, but it has something to do with the three different scan heads used in the scanner for normal scanning. By using the single pass, or single head, or some term like that scan, it takes much longer to scan the negative, but those lines will disappear.
Hope that's a little clearer than mud.
Best,
-Tim
The second cause I've seen is in scanning. With a Nikon Coolscan 9000 I get that effect on negatives, especially negatives that have a smooth gradation like sky, when doing a normal scan (the quicker option). I'm sure I have the terminology wrong, as I am not at my scanning computer right now, but it has something to do with the three different scan heads used in the scanner for normal scanning. By using the single pass, or single head, or some term like that scan, it takes much longer to scan the negative, but those lines will disappear.
Hope that's a little clearer than mud.
Best,
-Tim
Godfrey
somewhat colored
Yes. Uneven exposure like that is almost without a doubt a focal plane shutter running irregularly, in need of at least a good CLA if not shutter curtain replacement.
G
retinax
Well-known
I'd expect stripes orthogonal to the shutter's direction of travel, not parallel. The only way I can see a shutter causing this is if there is fuzz overhanging the small opening at fast speeds, i.e. the cloth desintegrating, or leaking tons of light right next to the opening, i.e. the cloth pulling away from the metal metal thingy at the ends of either curtains.
Is it visible on the leader? In between frames?
My hunch is that parallel lines like this are likely caused while the film is moving along a light leak (or maybe even mechanically stressed) at constant speed, if not during manufacture, then likely during processing, just maybe during rewinding in camera, but seems unlikely that you could do that at such constant speed in a Barnack Leica. If they processed it in some kind of linear device, that could be it.
farlymac
PF McFarland
John: I didn't post all the photos from the roll, just the better ones. Almost all of them show some degree of the striation, but it seems to get worse towards the end of the roll.
Solinar: Could be. The second curtain looks older than the first, and may be letting light through.
Tim: Timing? No, the exposures are basically correct. Scanning? No, it's in the negatives.
Godfrey: The timing is good, but second curtain shows cracking, first curtain looks like it was replaced recently.
retinax: Hard to say. The more I look at the negatives, the more confusing it becomes. In frames where the lens cap was on (four out of twenty-four) I see no occurrence of the striation, but the light leak is evident in two of them. I also see no evidence of striation between frames.
I have another roll of Tri-X in 36 exposures from a different batch, so I'll shoot that first with all the LTM lenses just to see which lenses are operating correctly, as I promised one of them to Chris Crawford. If I get the striations again, then I'll send it off to DAG for curtain replacement.
PF
Solinar: Could be. The second curtain looks older than the first, and may be letting light through.
Tim: Timing? No, the exposures are basically correct. Scanning? No, it's in the negatives.
Godfrey: The timing is good, but second curtain shows cracking, first curtain looks like it was replaced recently.
retinax: Hard to say. The more I look at the negatives, the more confusing it becomes. In frames where the lens cap was on (four out of twenty-four) I see no occurrence of the striation, but the light leak is evident in two of them. I also see no evidence of striation between frames.
I have another roll of Tri-X in 36 exposures from a different batch, so I'll shoot that first with all the LTM lenses just to see which lenses are operating correctly, as I promised one of them to Chris Crawford. If I get the striations again, then I'll send it off to DAG for curtain replacement.
PF
Godfrey
somewhat colored
You're right.. I'd forgotten that the shutter runs horizontally in the III series Leica's. Gotten too used to the vertical shutter run of the digital Ms. 🙂
Porosity of the shutter curtains is most likely.
G
Ronald M
Veteran
I replaced the shutters on my 3F`s and problem went away.
DAG had the cameras 6 months and tried every test and could find nothing wrong. I sent them to ? down south and he replaced the shutters & fine ever since. He worked for Yashika in his youth.
The problem only showed at higher speeds. 1/125 and up if I remember correctly.
DAG had the cameras 6 months and tried every test and could find nothing wrong. I sent them to ? down south and he replaced the shutters & fine ever since. He worked for Yashika in his youth.
The problem only showed at higher speeds. 1/125 and up if I remember correctly.
farlymac
PF McFarland
If I had any experience in replacing shutter curtains, and the proper tools, I'd do it myself. But I don't feel like using a IIIf for a learning experience.
PF
farlymac
PF McFarland
Okay, got the test roll back today where I mounted every LTM lens I have (well, all but the Canon ones), and I've solved the flare issue. Apparently whoever replaced the one shutter curtain didn't get it right, or they damaged the other curtain to where it lets light leak onto the frame from the rear of the lens.
This was proved by the fact that every time I changed lenses there was a big flare, but when I took a series of frames with just one lens the flare was very minimal.
That meant every time the interior of the camera was exposed to the elements more light was able to get past the shutter in that one spot, and that it was not something inherent to just one lens, such as damage to any paint on the side of a rear element.
To the shop it will go.
PF
This was proved by the fact that every time I changed lenses there was a big flare, but when I took a series of frames with just one lens the flare was very minimal.
That meant every time the interior of the camera was exposed to the elements more light was able to get past the shutter in that one spot, and that it was not something inherent to just one lens, such as damage to any paint on the side of a rear element.
To the shop it will go.
PF
