One problem leads to another...

[Jehu]

I was having trouble figuring out some lighter areas on my prints. They were 16 minute exposures at f16 & f22. Both looked about the same. I thought they may be from city lights over the hills.

It was suggested to me that I may be having problems in my developing so I set up a grey card on a grey paper backdrop in a studio setup. I used two monoheads with soft boxes and shot a series from f8 to f22. I carefully metered the flash to a tenth of a stop.

The result was an underexposed f8 and progressively worse shots up to f22. In other words, I don't believe the flash was going off at the same time as the shutter. They all look like the modeling lamps were all that came through. I was using 1/30 seconds because I thought that would be the most reliable. Both strobes fired every time.

What could cause this?

[Skorzen]

what shutter are you using? Many old shutters would actually trigger the flash before the shutter opened. This was because it took time for the flashbulbs to reach their brightest so the built a slight delay into the flash sync. Look for an X setting on the sync, that should be the electronic flash sync.

[ic-racer]

In that first picture is that extra density and mottling on the negative or just on the print?

[Jehu]

what shutter are you using? Many old shutters would actually trigger the flash before the shutter opened. This was because it took time for the flashbulbs to reach their brightest so the built a slight delay into the flash sync. Look for an X setting on the sync, that should be the electronic flash sync.

It's a Rodenstock 210 lens - copal No. 1. Beyond that, I'm clueless.

I checked for that X setting. It's there. The previous owner put black tape over the markings to keep the lever on the x-setting. It had worn out and it slipped into the M setting. I'll try that again tonight. Just another two hours, $5 in developer and $8 in film. No problem... X setting... that'll do it. Thank you!

[Jehu]

In that first picture is that extra density and mottling on the negative or just on the print?

I took another look at the negative. I don't see it. I wonder if the scanner is causing some of this... I'll rescan them.

The scanner is an Epson V750. I'm just using the utility that came with it. I'm pretty sure I didn't have any corrections or ICE options on. Can this kind of stuff cause the effect I'm getting? Thank you for the help. I love this forum :)

[Jehu]

I just looked at the ground glass with a dark cloth on and fired the lens. There's a distinct difference between the X and M settings. I'm sure that's the problem with the gray card shots.

I checked the scanner settings. No matter what I do, the light streaks are still there. If my development process doesn't expose the problem, I'll go recreate the shot. Virginia City isn't that far away. I figure that I'll shoot it both landscape and portrait. If the streaks turn with the frame then I've got processing problems. Otherwise, the lights of Reno are getting in the picture.

[venchka]

I'm voting for Reno lights. You may not notice them, but I bet the film will after 16 minutes.