Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2011/11/15

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] OT: lens shutters suck
From: images at comporium.net (Tina Manley)
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2011 18:00:49 -0500
References: <80734B3E-B2A7-4B6A-B736-2CB611D8F3F9@frozenlight.eu> <4dcd69c4d31225f3327df849ee7d2570.squirrel@emailmg.globat.com>

If you Google "x-ray damage to film" and click on images, you will see
examples of what x-ray damaged film looks like.  I've seen quite a bit of
it!

Tina

On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 5:48 PM, <afirkin at afirkin.com> wrote:

> > Just got back 3 rolls of MF film from the lab in Barcelona, shot with my
> > Fuji 6x9. Of the 24 pictures in total, 14 are blank frames. And no, I did
> > not accidentally photograph the inside of my camera bag this many times,
> > since I follow the standard Leica RF practice of not advancing the film
> > before putting the camera in the bag. I guess the lens shutter is
> > sticking, i.e. not opening about half the time. Given that I only paid
> > $300 for this camera, the fact that it has turned into a paperweight is
> > annoying but not devastating. But it does mean that I am on the lookout
> > for a reliable 6x7 or 6x9 MF outfit.
> >
> > Or I should just stop this film foolishness and get on with life in the
> > 21st century.
>
> Hi Nathan, I'm having trouble keeping my eyes open, having just arrived in
> the USA today, but this comment 'perked' me up. I am here in Carmel about
> to start a workshop in the darkroom with John Sexton. To do this, I
> prepared by taking film in the X pan to Kenya and also to the Mono lake
> workshop I attended a few weeks back. Then when I got home I dusted off
> the darkroom (pleasingly the dust was the least of my troubles) and began
> processing.
>
> Having given my Jobo away, I only had the CPE to keep the temperature
> right, and that died half way through: I can't complain, I bought it in
> the early 80's, but I did 'regret' giving the ATL 3 away -- I will never
> buy another and it took me so long to get it BUT I have been convinced
> that if I'm to work in the darkroom than constant agitation is not ideal
> for film processing and that paper is better processed in trays -- less
> 'trauma' for the fibre based paper in some ways, though I soon found my
> 'sloppy' habits led to stains and creases on the edges.
>
> For the first time in 20 years, the darkroom smelt of chemicals and I
> realized what others here have complained about: the Jobo sat under a
> strong exhaust and I never 'smelt' anything.
>
> I 'labored' for 5 days and produced about 30 prints, 10 of which I had to
> choose to take to the workshop. They were 'ok' but I was using Grade 4.5
> to 5 for almost all the prints: I think the films were all fogged. The
> spectrometer tells me the base celluloid is one whole zone above the
> density I used to have on the Ilford film a few years ago. Now it was not
> 'pristine' new film, but it was not terribly old by my standards, and has
> been fridged so I'm pretty sure it was the 'scanners'. (ISO 80 and 250
> BTW).
>
> Then I started the Kenyan films: I was very excited about these. African
> panoramas. The first one I printed (after processing all 6 rolls and
> contact printing) had strange densities that I had 'tried' to ignore on
> the contact sheet, hoping it was the plastic I used to hold hte film flat
> BUT no. The next shot (almost identical) was also 'scarred'. I immediately
> blamed my processing: did I agitate enough? BUT the more I looked at them
> the less I was convinced. This 35mm film is of course in small metal
> containers, they were 'bunched' together in the handluggage and there is a
> potential weak point where the felt stops light, but not X rays, so this
> could explain why the patterns were somewhat irregular: I really don't
> think my processing would have scarred across the film like this: the 120
> rolls did not have the same pattern, so once again I think the entire
> project was ruined by radiation. Helen asked me if I could 'rescue' any
> and I said "maybe, if I scanned them and 'patched' them up in PS" but in
> the end why have film and digitize it when you can use digital capture in
> the first place.
>
> So if this is true then you cannot carry film when you travel by air, and
> this is my major interest in photography. If I cannot use film on my
> travels I will soon lose any skills I have.
>
> I rang a friend last week before come to the USA and he just said: "you
> should think about getting one of those new digital camera things". I will
> enjoy the darkroom workshop, but there is a sword hanging over the
> darkroom and the thread holding it is very thin!!
>
> Perhaps I need to GROW UP ;-)
>
> That became longer than I expected, but kept me awake!!!
>
> Alastair
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>
>


-- 
Tina Manley, ASMP
www.tinamanley.com


In reply to: Message from photo at frozenlight.eu (Nathan Wajsman) ([Leica] OT: lens shutters suck)
Message from afirkin at afirkin.com (afirkin at afirkin.com) ([Leica] OT: lens shutters suck)