Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Gearhead Delights > Repair / Camera Care

Repair / Camera Care This is a good place to discuss the care and repair of your photo gear. You can share Do-It-Yourself repair and maintenance, as well as your recommendations for pro repairs. This new forum was created 4/1/07. PLEASE title your thread wisely, so others searching for a certain make of camera or repair person can find your thread easily!

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

Strange change in exposure on half of negative
Old 05-07-2011   #1
ped
Small brown dog
 
ped's Avatar
 
ped is offline
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: England
Posts: 944
Strange change in exposure on half of negative

Guys

This has happened a few times now, on different types of film. Normally noticeable in lower light where I'm using a slower speed.

See the line on the left??

Any ideas what this could be? Something up with the speeds? Camera is an M4P.

Cheers
ped
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-07-2011   #2
ped
Small brown dog
 
ped's Avatar
 
ped is offline
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: England
Posts: 944
P.s the line is always at the top of each picture (it's on the left here as I rotated the camera)
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-07-2011   #3
sleepyhead
Registered User
 
sleepyhead's Avatar
 
sleepyhead is offline
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Posts: 1,638
Very strange that it's on the top. Probably not your shutter curtain hanging.

Did you process the film yourself, and if so, are you sure there was enough volume developer in the tank?
__________________
__________________
Film for B&W, digital for colour
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-07-2011   #4
ped
Small brown dog
 
ped's Avatar
 
ped is offline
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: England
Posts: 944
Could be. I really have no idea. It seems smooth but I guess it's a definite possibility. The line is always exactly the sane width and shows under exposure across it's width with slight overexposure shortly afterwards before the rest of the normal negative.

Anyone know for sure? Reckon a general CLA would fix the issue?

Cheers
Ped
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-07-2011   #5
ped
Small brown dog
 
ped's Avatar
 
ped is offline
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: England
Posts: 944
Quote:
Originally Posted by sleepyhead View Post
Very strange that it's on the top. Probably not your shutter curtain hanging.

Did you process the film yourself, and if so, are you sure there was enough volume developer in the tank?
Hi

Yes i developed myself and there was nothing wring with the method, other than the fact I dropped the negs! Only a test roll though.

9/10 shots are fine but when this line appears it seems to carry over 2/3 negs consecutively.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-07-2011   #6
mooge
Registered User
 
mooge is offline
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Austenite Bay, Canada
Age: 25
Posts: 908
edit (2017) - pretty sure this is from the light baffle in the lens throat, not a developing problem...
__________________
ravens racing on tumblr
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-07-2011   #7
Tim Gray
Registered User
 
Tim Gray is offline
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,834
Assuming it's not the scanner (it's actually visible on the negs themselves), it could be a light leak. Either in the camera or the canisters. It does NOT look like development to me.

I say a light leak because your shadows are compromised right to the right of the transition. Look at the camera in the background - the black is noticeably weaker.
__________________
flickr

Last edited by Tim Gray : 05-07-2011 at 17:37.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-07-2011   #8
Tim Gray
Registered User
 
Tim Gray is offline
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,834
Quote:
Originally Posted by mooge View Post
-it can't really be a light leak because the edge of the frame is dark, and then goes bright and fades to a normal exposure.
It's not really dark in the original exposure presented. It just looks that way. For example, the area under the picture frame on the wall on the left (in the 'dark' band) is about the same brightness as the area under the picture frame on the back wall in the middle of the frame. The black on the iPhone is actually lighter than the black surrounding the screen on the laptop, but I have no idea if those blacks are actually the same in real life. I assume the walls are painted the same color and that the lighting is roughly equal.

In fact, in the image you presented, the sky is LIGHTER in the 'dark' band on the left than it is in the darkish spot in the upper center of the frame.
__________________
flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-07-2011   #9
sanmich
Registered User
 
sanmich's Avatar
 
sanmich is offline
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 3,299
Doesn't look like a sutter problem since the shutter is moving horizontally.
how about not putting enough developper?
Because of the agitation, you still get development, but if the developper is short of covering the reel, you will get partial development on the top of the frames all along the film, leading to a dark band.
__________________
Michael

Gloire a qui n'ayant pas d'ideal sacro-saint se borne a ne pas trop emmerder ses voisins (Brassens)

My site
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-07-2011   #10
Eric L
Registered User
 
Eric L's Avatar
 
Eric L is offline
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Age: 42
Posts: 75
Similar dark band on my dear mother's hair. Only on this one frame from the roll. Hasn't happened since. I suspect development is at fault rather than anything from the camera. Though I'm scratching my head as to what as well.

  Reply With Quote

Old 05-08-2011   #11
ped
Small brown dog
 
ped's Avatar
 
ped is offline
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: England
Posts: 944
Thanks very much for the replies. I just poured 300ml into my tank over my reel, as suggested by the tank printed on bottom (though they actually says 290ml) and it JUST covers the reels, in fact leaving one section slightly dry, so I'm going to do this:

Shoot a 24exp roll at all shutter speeds and write these down as I shoot

Develop the roll in 400ml of chemicals to make sure

load the film into the tank UPSIDE DOWN to see if the band moves, if present at all

...and let you know what happens.

Cheers
ped
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-08-2011   #12
ped
Small brown dog
 
ped's Avatar
 
ped is offline
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: England
Posts: 944
OK just develped the test roll, no evidence of banding at any speed from what I can see on the negs, I'll scan them shortly and see if there's anything up close.

Hopefully it was the developing issue as that's something I can work on. Why would Patterson suggest 290ml of liquid though when it barely covers the roll? During inversion the reel could actually move up the central columb a little pulling it further out of the dev during the settling periods in betwen agitation.

It still doesn't really clear up why it's only on some shots but let's see how this test roll comes out...

Cheers
ped
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-08-2011   #13
ChrisN
Striving
 
ChrisN's Avatar
 
ChrisN is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Canberra
Posts: 4,440
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eric L View Post
Similar dark band on my dear mother's hair. Only on this one frame from the roll. Hasn't happened since. I suspect development is at fault rather than anything from the camera. Though I'm scratching my head as to what as well.

Eric - was this photo made immediately after you changed lenses?
__________________
Chris


"The mission of photography is to explain man to man and each to himself. And that is the most complicated thing on earth."
Edward Steichen

RFF Gallery

Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-08-2011   #14
sanmich
Registered User
 
sanmich's Avatar
 
sanmich is offline
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 3,299
Quote:
Originally Posted by ped View Post
OK just develped the test roll, no evidence of banding at any speed from what I can see on the negs, I'll scan them shortly and see if there's anything up close.

Hopefully it was the developing issue as that's something I can work on. Why would Patterson suggest 290ml of liquid though when it barely covers the roll? During inversion the reel could actually move up the central columb a little pulling it further out of the dev during the settling periods in betwen agitation.

It still doesn't really clear up why it's only on some shots but let's see how this test roll comes out...

Cheers
ped
I think you may face another processing issue:
when you process ONE roll in a TWO roll tank, do you put an empty roll above the one with the film?

If you don't, the inversions will most probably make your film roll slip upward a bit and for the rest of the procesing the roll will sit partially above the liquid level.
300cc IS enough if you take that precaution (you can check by filling the tank with water in daylight)
__________________
Michael

Gloire a qui n'ayant pas d'ideal sacro-saint se borne a ne pas trop emmerder ses voisins (Brassens)

My site
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-08-2011   #15
ped
Small brown dog
 
ped's Avatar
 
ped is offline
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: England
Posts: 944
The lines on mine aren't always after I have changed lenses, though once or twice they might be after I removed the lens and replaced with a body cap.

Interestingly my 4 recent rolls taken in Italy, with lots of lens removal (I shared the same lens with an R-D1) there are no lines on any of the shots, and I often changed lenses in very bright light!
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-08-2011   #16
ped
Small brown dog
 
ped's Avatar
 
ped is offline
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: England
Posts: 944
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanmich View Post
I think you may face another processing issue:
when you process ONE roll in a TWO roll tank, do you put an empty roll above the one with the film?

If you don't, the inversions will most probably make your film roll slip upward a bit and for the rest of the processing the roll will sit partially above the liquid level.
300cc IS enough if you take that precaution (you can check by filling the tank with water in daylight)
I only have one spiral but think you might be right about this. Strange, though, that the line is so straight and exact (no 'half frames' or anything)

As I use stock concentration I'm going with 400ml from now on but will order a second spiral, too...

ped
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-08-2011   #17
MartinP
Registered User
 
MartinP is offline
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 2,031
A leak round the shutter-track light-trap (sorry I don't know the proper name) across the width of the frame, at the lower side? It might only show up when there is something brightish there or when the camera is carried but not shot for a while, hence being intermittent.

EDIT: Sorry for the brain-fart.... If there was a leak as I described then the result on the scanned-and-reversed image would be lighter not darker.

Last edited by MartinP : 05-08-2011 at 02:46. Reason: Dohhhhh
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-08-2011   #18
ped
Small brown dog
 
ped's Avatar
 
ped is offline
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: England
Posts: 944
Well, a second reel is on the way.

Martin, it could be, but to be honest it's normally not part of the pattern that it happens after shooting in light areas or taking the lens off. A chap on the Leica camera forum suggested the same and it's possible, for sure - but I can test it being a problem by varying the way up the film is developed to see if the banding moves. Something to think about, for sure.

Cheers
ped
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-08-2011   #19
ChrisN
Striving
 
ChrisN's Avatar
 
ChrisN is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Canberra
Posts: 4,440
Here's one that I know was caused by a light leak when changing lenses in bright sunlight. (Leica M4.)

Attached Images
File Type: jpg BW131_04.jpg (79.7 KB, 535 views)
__________________
Chris


"The mission of photography is to explain man to man and each to himself. And that is the most complicated thing on earth."
Edward Steichen

RFF Gallery

Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-08-2011   #20
ped
Small brown dog
 
ped's Avatar
 
ped is offline
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: England
Posts: 944
Hm. The plot thickens. One of my shots with the banding is about 5 mins after the previous shot which showed banding too, and I didn't change lenses between the shots at all.

Man It's things like this that make me want to jack it all in, sometimes.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-08-2011   #21
sanmich
Registered User
 
sanmich's Avatar
 
sanmich is offline
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 3,299
Quote:
Originally Posted by ped View Post
I only have one spiral but think you might be right about this. Strange, though, that the line is so straight and exact (no 'half frames' or anything)

As I use stock concentration I'm going with 400ml from now on but will order a second spiral, too...

ped
next time, try to check if your reel is still on the bottom when you open the box.
also, try not to agitate too violently. If you reach inversion through a nice rotational movement, the friction should take care of keeping the reel in place.

Personally, I think that's the problem.
(don't ask me how I know that )
__________________
Michael

Gloire a qui n'ayant pas d'ideal sacro-saint se borne a ne pas trop emmerder ses voisins (Brassens)

My site

Last edited by sanmich : 05-08-2011 at 03:01.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-08-2011   #22
ped
Small brown dog
 
ped's Avatar
 
ped is offline
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: England
Posts: 944
Thanks for the advice. Hopefully my second reel will be here before I finish another roll for film so that should rule out that variable, at least!
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-08-2011   #23
alistair.o
Registered User
 
alistair.o's Avatar
 
alistair.o is offline
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 706
Hi Ped,

Hope these help:-

1. Make certain that all the tank components are clean and absolutely dry. Clean the reel with an old soft bristle toothbrush after each use (when it has dried that is).

2. Make certain the the film is loading onto the reel in the tracks and not off the track and touching onto another peice of film (the toothbrush 'trick' above should see to this.

3. I always make certain that the reel is at the bottom of the tube and mine does not move from there (it is quite tight on my Paterson)

4. Though 290mls is the prescription, I always do 300/320mls (it's cheap and its security)

Good Luck

Alistair
__________________
Best Wishes - Alistair
________________

  Reply With Quote

Old 05-08-2011   #24
Eric L
Registered User
 
Eric L's Avatar
 
Eric L is offline
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Age: 42
Posts: 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisN View Post
Eric - was this photo made immediately after you changed lenses?
Hmm... no. I had the same 35mm lens on for the whole roll. Don't think I took it off for any reason when I was inside. And the lighting was only florescent with whatever sunlight coming through the windows. Couldn't have been as strong as the example you show later of changing lenses in sunlight.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-08-2011   #25
ped
Small brown dog
 
ped's Avatar
 
ped is offline
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: England
Posts: 944
Souped two rolls today in 400ml and they look fine, no bands. Maybe I have solved the problem. Guess time will tell...
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-13-2011   #26
ChrisN
Striving
 
ChrisN's Avatar
 
ChrisN is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Canberra
Posts: 4,440
I took the M4 out for a stroll yesterday, in beautiful bright winter sunlight (ie low-angle direct sun).. Guess what? Three shots on a roll of 20 show this same light leak. I was carrying the camera slung diagonally, on my right hip. And for at least some of the time the sun was on my right. I used the one lens the whole roll.

Time for another CLA I guess, and make sure I get the shutter channel bottom seal replaced this time.





Attached Images
File Type: jpg BW306_09.jpg (89.9 KB, 334 views)
File Type: jpg BW306_14.jpg (118.5 KB, 336 views)
File Type: jpg BW306_16.jpg (63.0 KB, 336 views)
__________________
Chris


"The mission of photography is to explain man to man and each to himself. And that is the most complicated thing on earth."
Edward Steichen

RFF Gallery

Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-14-2011   #27
ped
Small brown dog
 
ped's Avatar
 
ped is offline
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: England
Posts: 944
Hi Chris

Looks strikingly similar. Looks like I might be best sending for a CLA at some point then just to be on the safe side. Did a studio job today with the M4P and haven't developed the negs yet so fingers crossed (used my R-D1 body too for backup just in case!

Cheers
ped
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-27-2011   #28
ped
Small brown dog
 
ped's Avatar
 
ped is offline
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: England
Posts: 944
Hi folks

Just had the call from the company who serviced my camera (RG Lewis, London)

They said it was the shutter bearing, basically the shutter was bouncing back after closing or something - I'll get more details when I call up to pay.

Looking forward to having it back!

Thanks for all the help and ideas

ped
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-27-2011   #29
nikon_sam
Shooter of Film...
 
nikon_sam's Avatar
 
nikon_sam is offline
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Alta Loma, CA
Age: 57
Posts: 4,729
It's interesting what you can learn in here...
__________________
Sam
"tongue tied & twisted
just an earthbound misfit...I..."
pf
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-27-2011   #30
sanmich
Registered User
 
sanmich's Avatar
 
sanmich is offline
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 3,299
Quote:
Originally Posted by ped View Post
Hi folks

Just had the call from the company who serviced my camera (RG Lewis, London)

They said it was the shutter bearing, basically the shutter was bouncing back after closing or something - I'll get more details when I call up to pay.

Looking forward to having it back!

Thanks for all the help and ideas

ped
Hi ped

not trying to argue, but as I said before, the shutter is moving horizontally.
A bouncing shutter is adding extra exposure at the end of the curtain trip, yielding a brighter image on the short side of the frame.

Your problem is under-developement or under-exposure (hard to understand how can that happen with such a shutter) over the long side of the frame.

To my knowledge, the only thing that could cause this is the development roll not fully covered by the chemicals.
__________________
Michael

Gloire a qui n'ayant pas d'ideal sacro-saint se borne a ne pas trop emmerder ses voisins (Brassens)

My site
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-27-2011   #31
ped
Small brown dog
 
ped's Avatar
 
ped is offline
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: England
Posts: 944
They have replaced all the light seals too so lets hope it's OK whatever it was. I'll call them again later as I need to pay them anyway and mention the point you rightly make, it slipped my mind.

ped
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-28-2011   #32
ped
Small brown dog
 
ped's Avatar
 
ped is offline
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: England
Posts: 944
OK just called again and paid (190 for full strip down and rebuild)

The guy agreed with the horizontal shutter vs dark like at top question but assures me the work is gauranteed for 6 months and if I have a problem I can send it back, however he also assures me that the tech can do it with his eyes closed and that he has replaced all the seals and debris and that there was nothing out of the ordinary to report and that it 'works perfectly'. The speeds were spot on, too, which is nice to know.

I'll have it tomorrow so will run a roll through it. Really excited to have it back, I've loved re-visiting my R-D1 but I have really missed film.

Cheers
ped
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-24-2011   #33
ped
Small brown dog
 
ped's Avatar
 
ped is offline
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: England
Posts: 944
Lines are still there. If I'm honest the camera feels and looks exactly the same as when I sent it away. Have emailed them and phoned, not expecting an email back to be honest so I'll call tomorrow. 200 down the drain, by the looks of it, and I was planning on taking the camera abroad on Tuesday. Great.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-24-2011   #34
ped
Small brown dog
 
ped's Avatar
 
ped is offline
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: England
Posts: 944
I can't even bloody sell it with this line thing.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-24-2011   #35
ChrisN
Striving
 
ChrisN's Avatar
 
ChrisN is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Canberra
Posts: 4,440
Man, that's disappointing, frustrating, and maddening! I hope the firm comes to the party and agrees to take the camera back and fix it properly.
__________________
Chris


"The mission of photography is to explain man to man and each to himself. And that is the most complicated thing on earth."
Edward Steichen

RFF Gallery

Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-25-2011   #36
ped
Small brown dog
 
ped's Avatar
 
ped is offline
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: England
Posts: 944
They have just offered to take it back for 'another look' so I'll keep you posted

Cheers
ped
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-12-2011   #37
pobe
Registered User
 
pobe's Avatar
 
pobe is offline
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Uppsala, Sweden
Age: 35
Posts: 212
I've had a similiar issue with my M4, on some pictures taken with bright sun from the side just as Chris described. Not only from the right though...

I'm planning on a CLA for it soon.
__________________
Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-18-2011   #38
ChrisN
Striving
 
ChrisN's Avatar
 
ChrisN is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Canberra
Posts: 4,440
Quote:
Originally Posted by ped View Post
They have just offered to take it back for 'another look' so I'll keep you posted

Cheers
ped
Hi Ped - did you eventually get it fixed?

Mine needed a new set of shutter curtains - fine now.
__________________
Chris


"The mission of photography is to explain man to man and each to himself. And that is the most complicated thing on earth."
Edward Steichen

RFF Gallery

Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-16-2017   #39
Ko.Fe.
Me. Write ESL. Ko.
 
Ko.Fe.'s Avatar
 
Ko.Fe. is offline
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: MiltON.ONtario
Age: 51
Posts: 4,948
I googled RFF for "light leak" and this thread came as perfect match for my M4-2 problem.






Attached image shows it most aggressive. It seems to show up if bright sun is in the front of the camera, but not all the time.

So, what was final conclusion? Curtains? It is not in the final invoice I have after recent CLA, but I seems remember to see recommendation for curtain change in the work sheet...
Attached Images
File Type: jpg M4_2_S35_MacoRPX400hcB_MoscowSeptOct2016126.jpg (28.3 KB, 11 views)
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-16-2017   #40
rick oleson
Ancient Wizard
 
rick oleson's Avatar
 
rick oleson is offline
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Lexington, KY USA
Age: 64
Posts: 368
Your mention of bright sun strikes a note that had been occurring to me: could it be that the lighter areas are seeing a reflection of stray sunlight from the floor of the interior between the lens and the shutter? How well is that area baffled/flocked? The darker band might be the part that's properly exposed, protected from the reflection by structure below the negative frame in the camera (this band is at the top of the image but the bottom of the film negative in the camera)
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 21:59.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.