Carusoswi

Of 72 images shot on my Minolta Maxxum 9, two showed the symptom that is apparent in the photo to which I have supplied a link below. I have experienced this in past photos shot on film using each of my three film SLR's, two Maxxum 9's and my trusty Maxxum 9000.

The 9000 dates from 1985, the two 9's from around 1998 or so.

I've inspected the light seals, and all appear to be fine. This effect shows up from time to time on images shot on each of these wonderful film bodies. I've asked over on the Dyxum forum. The replies were, as always, respectful and full of knowledge, but no definitive cause was cited. While I suspect light leakage, the result doesn't look much like the typical light leakage to me. Could it be in the film? Could it have something to do with the processing (my color film is processed by a respected LCS).

Suggestions most welcome.

Thanks.

Caruso (link follows)

https://www.dropbox.com/s/k4rnylbb1zej8dh/trinity060.tif?dl=0

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

Is it always on the first one or two shots of the roll? Clearly looks like light leakage to me, and since it's on the short side of the film, I would expect light leakage on the take-up reel end of the camera or possibly that you're not winding off enough of the exposed leader after loading and before shooting (hence the reason for my question). I usually "waste" the first 3 shots to wind off the leader that's exposed when loading, before shooting images. Just a thought...

boncrayon

Could it be the environment in which your film was stored, or the age of the film? Also, are you reloading your film canisters? That may be a cause of an orange band on one edge.

twowindsbear

Fogged film

Probably the very beginning of the roll of film, frame number 00 or 0, before frame 1.

Or, the camera was opened in the middle of the roll and this frame was only partially fogged.

To confirm, post a pic of the strip of negatives showing the frame numbers on the film and the frames both before and after this image.

hightor Loc: Portland, Maine

That is quite the mystery, especially since three cameras are involved. I agree that inspecting the whole film strip is a necessary step. Whether the effect extends beyond the picture frame is important to know. Processing would affect all or most of a roll, and would usually affect areas outside of the exposed film, even sprocket areas.
Lets see other examples and whole strip of negative.
There MUST be an answer! WE will find it!

erinjay64

It could be light leakage from an improperly fitted cover...on three cameras...or ionizing radiation from something the film was stored on / under, or something else. Take a Geiger Counter to the area the film was stored in, and see if the area is radioactive. If it is not, have your camera examined for improper fittings. Perhaps the film is just so old that it is degrading chemically. Buy new film from a new source....or switch to a digital photo system.

Carusoswi

Ok, I looked at the negative strip. The band clearly shows at the top of that frame, but it is confined only to that frame, does not extend beyond the image border, does not extend to the sprocket areas. The affected photo is the fourth one in on the roll. No other frames of the 36 on the roll are affected.

While I suspect a light leak of some sort, having posted sample photos on other websites have garnered responses that suggest something other than a light leak, especially because the problem extends between three different cameras.

A link to my photos (having been lightly edited in PSCC) is posted below. My half-hearted attempt to clone out the offending band will be evident (I'll go back and re-do it to make a better end product). None of the other photos in the group were affected in this way.

The film was Kodak 400 something or other (I no longer have the box or canister), but I have experienced this problem using Ektar 100. I'm currently into roll #6 on a brick with an expiration of 2/17. I shot a roll following the Kodak 400 and none of the images exhibited this problem. Ektar images on which I did find this issue were shot prior to expiration, so, go figure.

I generally just crop out the affected portion of the frame, but chose not to crop this particular image of my son with his bike.

Have a look at the following link. Glad to have any opinions or suggestions.

As to switching to digital, well, I have a DSLR but often opt to shoot film because I enjoy that medium. My film is stored in my refrigerator, and, while I didn't check for the expiration date on the "Kodak 24", none of my film is all that old. None of it has been through an airport scanner, and, hopefully, my house is relatively free from radiation.

Thanks. I appreciate all the replies here.

Caruso

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0BwTp9qz3IiX4eHhhOHdMUEVQMTg

twowindsbear

The type of film is exposed onto the very edge of the film, similar to the frame numbers.

Carusoswi

Just to clarify, all my cameras require me to expend a certain number of frames before they will begin shooting a newly loaded roll of film. The 9000 requires a couple of advances of its manual advance lever, the 9's automatically advance film to the first frame.

This issue rarely occurs on the first or second frame.

I did not inadvertently open the camera with film loaded. The 9000 requires the simultaneous lifting of its rewind knob along with an inward press of a release switch to accomplish opening of the back.

The 9's will not allow you to open the back when film, not rewound, is loaded.

I do appreciate all of the replies, but request you to proffer some respect to an old dinosaur who has been shooting mostly film all his life (now stretching to more than 66 years).

I would not post such a question if I had opened the back of the camera with film loaded.
I do not expect that I should have to override the design of the camera to throw away three or four frames of a 24 or 36 exposure roll just to insure that I will not have light pollution on an early frame or two.

Furthermore, this issue is not limited to the first frame or two on the film. I count my last experience as a lucky one as only one frame (#4) was affected.

On other shoots, half a dozen or more frames were affected, none of them at the beginning of the roll.

Like many of you, I suspect some sort of light leak, even though the results are inconsistent with what we normally view as the result of light leaks.

My problem is that I cannot begin to chase down the cause and make corrections until I determine the exact nature of the problem.

As mentioned earlier, I do appreciate and respect all replies. I welcome further comments. There is no way I am going to give up on these exquisite film bodies. There is an answer for this problem, and I am determined to find it.

Sincerely, respectfully,

Caruso

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

A conundrum. Seems to me there are 3 variables involved: the camera, the film and the developing process. Since all 3 bodies have tha same issue, and as you've stated, it's not operator error of some sort, that leaves the film and the development. It sounds like you have tried several different films, although I saw that you mentioned a block, so assuming you sometimes buy your film in block batches, so hard to imagine both the 400 and 100 were equally affected. That leaves the developing, unless of course, as has been previously mentioned, there's a radiation source nearby (you don't store your film on top of a CRT- type color TV do you?). Have you spoken to your lab? Is it possible they could have an issue? Might be worth trying a different lab to see if the same problem occurs. I guess that it could occur in transit - not sure if the USPS or commercial carriers ever use X-ray to scan packages before air freight shipments (and why would it affect only one or two frames?), but might be worth hand-carrying to a local lab, just to rule out the processing. I'm out of other ideas, but do let us know if/how you solve the issue - very curious indeed...

Carusoswi

Well, the brick of Ektar was purchases at a local camera store. I store my film in my refrigerator. Development is performed by one of two local camera store, always hand carried by me. I'm too impatient to mail away.
There has to be a reason, and I intend to discover it.
Thanks for the reply.
Caruso

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

Well, so much for all those theories 🤦‍♀️ - let us know when you discover the answer. Good luck.