View Full Version : What went wrong here? and here... and here... and here... and here....
Hello everyone.
I recently returned from a 10 day trip to Tokyo where I took my new Chamonix 045N-1 along with a large box of Ilford Delta 100. The experience of walking around Tokyo with a 4x5 for 10 hours a day was fantastic but the negatives, unfortunately, have tons of problems and I'm hoping that photographers with more experience will be able to provide some guidance.
I'm going to post the images up with my own guesses on what seems to have happened.
Thank you all for your help!
Randhir
The two images below have tree branches visible in the sky areas. There were definitely no trees up there! My guess is that the trees are reflecting off my grad ND filter. At both locations, there were trees behind me. Is this even possible?
scan110.jpg - tree branches plu some strange dark spots on the right side of the image. Any thoughts on what would cause the spots?
scan111.jpg - tree branches and obviously I used too much rise.
130698130699
scan124.jpg: This image has cloudy spots all across the sky area along with some dark spots.
scan128.jpg: too much shift and rise along with weird tree branches in the sky.
scan129.jpg: more trees and too much rise plus what appears to be a light leak.
scan130.jpg: this might just be the worst negative i have ever made... is the dark smudge across the bottom of the neg caused by too much rise?
scan122.jpg: strange white spots across the top. I'm not sure what is going on in the top right hand corner of the frame. plus there appear to be light leaks on both sides...
scan 137.jpg: there are streaks across the sky area. is this a developer issue?
scan138.jpg: more uneven-ness across the top. can i do anything to get rid of the spots?
scan131.jpg: WTF!! Is this light leak appear to be in the bellows? perhaps the film holder is not sitting correctly when inserted into the camera?
any help in diagnosing or fixing these problems would be greatly appreciated!!
in the meanwhile, i will drink my sorrows away....
randhir
djdister
13-Mar-2015, 04:30
Please describe the lens(es) used (make, model and focal length), and how you used the grad ND filter. Are all your film holders in good condition? You clearly seem to have overused front rise based on the heavy vignetting at the top of many of your shots. The unexposed areas along the bottom of several shots could be from bellows sag or from it being stretched too much from the front rise use. Really would help to know what lens was used though.
The ND Grad ia rectangular (can't remember the manufacturer) was used on a Cokin P series filter holder. The film holders look fine to me. I have not had any such issues using these holders on my Sinar F2. They are a combination of Fidelity and Lisco holders purchased off Ebay.
I've used two different lens for these shots. One is a 90mm Grandagon and a 150mm Apo Sironar. The breakdown per shot is below in sequence to the images above.
scan110 : 90mm
scan111: 90mm
scan124: 150mm
scan128: 90mm (my notes indicate "lots of shift)
scan129: 90mm
scan130: 90mm
scan122: 90mm
scan137: 90mm
scan138: 90mm
scan131: 150mm
One thing is apparent, I need to get a wide angle bag bellows for this camera. I thought the regular one would work fine but clearly it does not for the wider lens.
Bill_1856
13-Mar-2015, 05:22
Well, my dear, you've got a mess.
My guess is that you've got a BAAAD box of film. Perhaps too old, stored in too much heat, zapped with high intensity X-rays..?
I'd start by taking a fresh sheet of film in your best holder and process it in new, freshly mixed developer.
djdister
13-Mar-2015, 05:56
Well, my dear, you've got a mess.
My guess is that you've got a BAAAD box of film. Perhaps too old, stored in too much heat, zapped with high intensity X-rays..?
I'd start by taking a fresh sheet of film in your best holder and process it in new, freshly mixed developer.
Bad film? I don't think so. If so, there would be consistent, repeated issues on every sheet, in the same place, which is not the case here. I'd chalk it up to a series of errors in the shooting process, although the bubbles in the upper left corner of scan124 looks like a processing/washing/drying problem.
I suppose it is possible to have an in-focus reflection bouncing off the back of the filter into the lens. Protecting the sides, top, and bottom of the filter and it's holder from external light might help.
I thought about pinholes making an exposure on the film, but now have discounted that theory.
djdister
13-Mar-2015, 06:12
Something to consider. You might be getting a pinhole exposure and then a normal exposure from your lens. Look for pinholes in the bellows and near the lens board. Some of these look like double exposures to some degree. Multiple exposures on the film.
This is a good call - especially for those "ghost trees" in the sky...
Tobias Key
13-Mar-2015, 06:18
The first thing I would do is take the camera into a dimly lit room and shine a torch inside the bellows to check for light leaks. It's not the only issue but the easiest one to diagnose.
I had the pinhole problem happen to me. But now that I think about it, these branches are too "in-focus" and sharp, I do believe. Reflections sound plausible. Also regarding the vignetting . . . a Cokin filter holder might block part of a lens if it's too small. These filters and filter holders come in different sizes.
mike rosenlof
13-Mar-2015, 06:33
My first thought for the tree branches, and possibly the white spots was "pinholes". As Mr. Key suggests, dark room, light inside the bellows and search. Especially at the corners.
The scan 131 is some other light leak. Maybe the film holder itself, maybe not seated in the back correctly, maybe the lensboard was not attached to the camera correctly.
The unexposed band at the bottom seems to go along with the too much rise. Probably getting a little cutoff from the bellows. This is a little more of a guess on my part.
Louis Pacilla
13-Mar-2015, 07:36
I agree w/ DannL that most all your trouble is using the regular Cokin P holder w/ wide angle lens and the employing as much movement as standard bellows allow. That is extending part of the Cokin holder holder into the light path causing the cut off. I doubt that you could get the bellows blocking the light path as your using the standard bellows and it would be nearly impossible to get them in the way. Particularly when using a 90mm lens as the standard bellows will be compacted and have little chance to get in the way of the light path.
Now if you buy bag bellows it will allow for easier/more movement but that bag bellows can get into the light path if not careful.
***If you notice the light cut off is really most noticeable when your using your Cokin P holder w/ the 90mm FL. also notice there is barely any of this cut off when your FL increases because the lens sees a narrower angle so its barley catching the front slots of the Cokin P holder. Which makes me think this could be your main trouble here.
You could try all the same variables w/out the filter/Cokin P holder and see if the problems disappear. If so, you could then try cutting the 2 slots off and try again w/ 1 ND filter and the movements and see if the problem is gone or most of them anyhow.
You can also try the wide angle Lee holder which will stop the light cut off w/ wide angle lenses and up to 3 filters may be used.
Keep in mind this is just one mans suggestion. :)
Bill_1856
13-Mar-2015, 11:45
Those "tree limbs" look like static electrical discharges to me.
The fact that there are so many different kinds of problems is why I thought of bad film (I presume that the problems show up on the negatives).
Old-N-Feeble
13-Mar-2015, 12:09
Yes, the "tree branches" are definitely static discharge. This could have happened at any time from loading the film in the holders to unloading it to process. I don't know if they can be caused by too rapid dark slide removal or too quickly operating a Grafmatic back. Static electricity could also cause tiny light spots during exposure because the film will attract dust. A humidifier will help with static problems.
Static should not show up as dark on a positive image though. For B&W film you should not need a grad ND filter. The film can handle a dynamic range that exceeds the media that grad-ND filters were made (slide and digital)
A curved dark area indicates leaving the coverage area of the lens. A flat dark area could be the bellows in the way.
djdister
13-Mar-2015, 12:40
Yes, the "tree branches" are definitely static discharge. This could have happened at any time from loading the film in the holders to unloading it to process. I don't know if they can be caused by too rapid dark slide removal or too quickly operating a Grafmatic back. Static electricity could also cause tiny light spots during exposure because the film will attract dust. A humidifier will help with static problems.
I know static discharge. Static discharge is a friend of mine. And that sir, is not static discharge. They are the result of multiple exposures on the film.
Static discharge will result in additional density on the negative, and show up as clear areas on the print, not the other way around. This is how static discharges look in the positive (print) view:
130730
Old-N-Feeble
13-Mar-2015, 13:05
I know static discharge. Static discharge is a friend of mine. And that sir, is not static discharge. They are the result of multiple exposures on the film.
Static discharge will result in additional density on the negative, and show up as clear areas on the print, not the other way around. This is how static discharges look in the positive (print) view:
130730
Umm... duhh... yep, yer rite. Silly me.:o
It's strange that the shapes look like static marks.
Umm... duhh... yep, yer rite. Silly me.:o
It's strange that the shapes look like static marks.
Anti-static discharges? :cool:
fishbulb
13-Mar-2015, 13:37
Well, how about some good news. You can fix a lot of these with some work on the files in Photoshop. So, you may not get the best darkroom prints unless you crop a lot or do some fancy multi-exposure work with the enlarge to fill in the missing skies. But if you make so high quality scans of these negatives, you can definitely repair a lot of it in Photoshop and then print from a file.
110 (http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=130698&d=1426235623): tree branches cloned out of sky, or use content aware fill (CAF). most likely caused by a reflection from the filter, or possibly you've got something inside the camera reflecting. everything inside the camera should be matte black. you may want to check inside for any kind of manufacturing defect (unpainted metal etc.). also recommend testing the bellows extensively just to be safe. check for light leaks around the lens board and around the ground glass too, by shining a light outside the lens and looking through the other end of the camera with the back taken off (and vice versa, with a film holder installed, for checking the back for leaks).
111 (http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=130699&d=1426235643): same, clone/CAF and/or crop the top off
124 (http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=130700&d=1426236116): clone out the spots with clone stamp. spotting is probably from development (old developer maybe, or a poorly-mixed powder-based developer, or not enough washing, or air bubbles on the negative, or anything, who knows).
128 (http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=130701&d=1426236243): crop off the left, clone/CAF the trees out, maybe CAF the upper left corner of the sky, or crop down from teh top
129 (http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=130702&d=1426236359): clone/CAF the upper corners. the weird banding may be more reflections, not a light leak. This looks like bad reflections or bad flare to me, and it has the same bright spot down the middle as #131. The light leak on the right side (if it is one) would likely be the film holder where you pull the darkslide, but you never know. Could be the camera too.
130 (http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=130703&d=1426236465): crop the top and bottom, clone out the reflected power lines in the upper right. i would say the dark smudge is indeed the bellows getting in the way, or possibly you didn't remove the dark slide all the way (maybe your dark slide has a curved edge? a lot of mine do). do you remove your dark slides all the way?
122 (http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=130704&d=1426236752): clone out the spots. probably reflections or development issues like before.
137 (http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=130705&d=1426236826): crop. sure looks like a dark slide on the bottom there.
138 (http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=130706&d=1426236944): crop or CAF the skies. again, is that a dark slide on the bottom?
131 (http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=130707&d=1426237085): light leak or bad reflection or bad flare? odd to have a leak right across the middle like that, so i'd say reflection or flare, but who knows. it's unlikely to be a film holder issue since #129 has the same type of issue. this one would be hard to salvage in Photoshop.
All in all:
* check the camera for light leaks etc.
* stop using the filter for a while and see if you still have the same flare/reflection issues
* salvage your pics in photoshop
Joe Smigiel
13-Mar-2015, 18:11
How and where did you load/unload the film? Changing bag or darkroom? The images with tree limb shapes in the sky definitely look like double exposures, but maybe this happened before or after exposing the scene. IDK. It's weird.
The only thing I've ever seen similar were inverted double exposures of night scenes in a 35mm SLR camera where most thought a reflection off a flat filter from light originating from the viewfinder with a bad foam seal might have been the cause. Never did figure it out. But, if interested, here's the link to that discussion on APUG.
http://www.apug.org/forums/forum52/123327-weird-exposure-problem.html
Thanks for all that great advice everyone! As usual, the members of this forum have been incredibly helpful.
I'm going to investigate the bellows and camera for leaks. And also will check how the holder is seating in the camera.
May have to invest in a bag bellows for wide angle use. I'll also look into vignetting caused by the Cokin P holder.
All my holders are numbered but, for some reason, I haven't been keeping track of the numbers in my exposure notes. That information would have been really useful!
And photoshop will "fix" a number of the issues so all is not lost.
But for some of the developer related issues (spots or streaks), can I take the negs back and have them clean them? Is that even possible?
Thank you all again.
Randhir
Andrew Plume
14-Mar-2015, 04:10
Hello Randhir
I really hope that you're able to salvage images from your trip, must have been a very sad moment to realise what had happened
good luck and regards
andrew
Jac@stafford.net
14-Mar-2015, 07:06
Hello Randhir
I really hope that you're able to salvage images from your trip, must have been a very sad moment to realise what had happened
good luck and regards
andrew
Oh, do not repair or retouch the negatives. Make good, straight prints and consider them genuine photographic artifacts so that they are not a shame or sad, but a real thing. File under Mistakes for the Better.
.
guyatou
19-Mar-2015, 21:20
Yes, a bag bellows is a good idea with a 90mm on 4x5. I can't even get my regular bellows to compress enough for indoor photos to be in focus with a 90mm, let alone at infinity. Once you add movements, it's a recipe for disaster. Bag it up! ;)
Nice photos, though. Definitely spend a little time to salvage them. What you have is quite nice. The swirly building in scan 111 looks like it could be the big brother of a house I've shot here in Oklahoma City. (The house was built for Dr. Nazih Zuhdi, first doc to do open heart surgery successfully.)
131116
(Unedited scan, 120)
Rory_5244
19-Mar-2015, 21:49
Well, well, well, I have the answer for you: the Cokin filter. I have been using its special tendency to reflect scenes behind it into the lens and, naturally, onto the film for many years now. I use it for my 'Transmigration' series (I'm a spiritual guy) at Hindu cremation sites in my country. Observe the 2 images below:
http://i1114.photobucket.com/albums/k532/moobie1/tran6_zpsv4iovids.jpg
http://i1114.photobucket.com/albums/k532/moobie1/tran3_zpso9mz05zz.jpg
The sun, exemplified by the bright arc/light in the sky is, in actuality, 180 degrees behind the camera. This happens with any brightly lit object, or silhouetted object, behind the camera if the angle of incidence between it and your filter is accurate enough. Just shade the top of the filter / lens and the oddities will cease. Your camera, film, bellows etc. etc. are perfectly fine. I also love your images just fine too!
ImSoNegative
20-Mar-2015, 06:25
the tree limbs like others have said is a light leak, I had the same thing happened to me on an 8x10 one time, I had a home made lens board that didn't seat tight in the camera and when I took the shot it came out like a double exposure
Yeah, I'm convinced that most of these problems are caused by the cokin holder or the filter itself. I guess I have to be careful to prevent reflections!
Well, well, well, I have the answer for you: the Cokin filter. I have been using its special tendency to reflect scenes behind it into the lens and, naturally, onto the film for many years now. I use it for my 'Transmigration' series (I'm a spiritual guy) at Hindu cremation sites in my country. Observe the 2 images below:
http://i1114.photobucket.com/albums/k532/moobie1/tran6_zpsv4iovids.jpg
http://i1114.photobucket.com/albums/k532/moobie1/tran3_zpso9mz05zz.jpg
The sun, exemplified by the bright arc/light in the sky is, in actuality, 180 degrees behind the camera. This happens with any brightly lit object, or silhouetted object, behind the camera if the angle of incidence between it and your filter is accurate enough. Just shade the top of the filter / lens and the oddities will cease. Your camera, film, bellows etc. etc. are perfectly fine. I also love your images just fine too!
Nice images by the way! Is this series online somewhere?
It occurred to me this morning that this problem is also partly due to the smaller size of the Linhoff style lens boards. My older Sinar never exhibited this problem because the lens boards are much larger and prevented light from hitting the filter.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.