 Trisha Langill |
negatives with one half of two different pics on o processed negatives showed 1/2 of different pictures in one frame. this occurred in both 35mm roll film and throw away cameras. A total of 2 disposable cameras and 3 rolls 35mm print film were processed with the same result described above. It's not likely that equipment malfuntioned, more likely it occured in the lab. Rep from photo lab is telling me he is sending the negatives to his "expert" with no guarantee this can be remedied. Any info is greatly appreciated. Thanx.
|
|
|
|
||
|
robert G. Fately |
Trisha, in normal 35MM film, each image frame (24x36MM rectangle) is separated from the next by a space of a few MMs (how many depends on the mechanics of the camera). From your description, it sounds like a single frame (between those gaps) has 2 halves from 2 separate images - is that right? If so, that's quite strange - I can't even see how it can happen. On the other hand, if you're saying that the prints themselves are halved, then that certainly sounds like a miscalibration in the automatic printing machine. Can you scan and post a sample?
|
|
|
|
||
|
Trisha Langill |
Hi Bob, and thanx for a speedy reply. Negatives have not yet been printed and are still with processor. I haven't viewed them yet either. Photo guy described the split frames. Said he is sending them to his "expert" at another store to see if they can be fixed. I'm waiting it out till early next week. Photos are of a recent trip to Seaworld, Universal Studios w/ daughter and grandson (a once in a lifetime event for us.)He is trying to blame it on airport xray machines. Of 6 rolls of film one came out perfect. I suspect a calibration error at the lab as you mentioned. Sorry not able to scan as I don't have prints yet.
|
|
|
|
||
- Gregory LaGrange Contact Gregory LaGrange Gregory LaGrange's Gallery |
Wouldn't happen at the lab. Only ways that could happen is the camera isn't advancing the film properly. Or with the regular camera, a roll was taken out and reshot.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Alan N. Marcus |
With almost 50 years of experience I can claim to be a veteran of the photofinishing industry. If you are looking at strips of film and find multiple images on a frame, these are double exposures and the fault is always the advance mechanism of the camera or perhaps improper advance technique on the part of the user. Most likely, you are looking at improperly cut film strips. The 35mm film is about a yard long and is normally cut into strips for easy packaging. The cutting can be manual or automatic. Cutting should be exactly between frames. Sloppy cutting cuts at the wrong place destroy the image. Examine the frames if cut wrong, part of the image will be on one strip and the remaining part will be on another strip. This is faulty cutting and you are the looser. If the double image is on a single frame it’s the camera’s advance mechanism or perhaps improper advance technique on the part of the user.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Trisha Langill |
Thanx Alan M. for your reply. Though I have not yet had a chance to examine the negs in question I don't believe they are double exposures. Most likely it's not faulty advance mechanism. Improperly cut film strips sounds more likely since film involved includes (3 rolls) roll film in the canaster and (2) disposable cameras.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Christopher A. Vedros |
Trisha, At first it sounded like you were describing what the negatives looked like, then in your last post, you said you had not yet had a chance to examine the negs. It makes a BIG difference if the problem shows up on the negs or the prints. Also, it makes a big difference if this is with a couple of frames per roll or with every frame. I was as stumped as the others at first, because I couldn't see how this could happen either. When a roll of film is first put in a camera, there are no dividers between the spots where the images go. The divider gaps are a result of the camera advancing the film so that a strip of a few millimeters never gets exposed. If the camera wasn't advancing the film properly, you would get double exposures, where the images were overlapping each other. I don't think there is any way for two halves of an image to be split onto two frames of a negative. The "frames" are put there when you expose the film. If the same problem ocurred across different cameras, then like you said, it is unlikely that a film advance problem is the cause. I HAVE seen prints that had half of one image on one side, a black stripe in the middle, and half of the next image on the other side. This was a result of a problem with the way the negative strip was loaded into or fed through the print machine. It was also a result of a lazy operator not bothering to check if the prints were done correctly. It sounds like you need to talk to the lab some more. Get them to show you the negatives to see what the problem really is. Chris
|
|
|
|
||
|
Nobu Nagase |
Interesting subject but take a look at this, "Half Frame 35's are often pretty much forgotten today, but they sold in the millions during 60's to mid 70's. Half frames use regular 35mm film, but get twice as many pictures per roll because the film format is 1/2 the standard size." For more info, go to
|
|
|
|
||
|
Christopher A. Vedros |
Hey Nobi, I have an old Olympus Pen half-frame camera in a display case with my other antiques. I've never actually used it, though. I found it in a garage sale many years ago. One of my photo professors back in college said he liked to carry an Olympus Pen when he traveled on photo trips. He would pack his 4x5 camera in a backpack, and keep the Pen in his shirtpocket for snap shots. Chris
|
|
|
|
||
|
- Gregory LaGrange Contact Gregory LaGrange Gregory LaGrange's Gallery |
Somebody isn't describing them right. If the negs aren't cut right, the ones on the end of the strip would show because you don't cut at each image. Only every 4 or 5 usually. Otherwise, they're double exposed on the frames from not being advanced right. Be the camera or the person. Other possibility is very old film that's not coming out of the canister smoothly so the sprocket holes got torn and the film isn't advancing all the way to the next frame.
|
|
|
|
||
|
- Gregory LaGrange Contact Gregory LaGrange Gregory LaGrange's Gallery |
Somebody isn't describing them right. If the negs aren't cut right, the ones on the end of the strip would show because you don't cut at each image. Only every 4 or 5 usually. Otherwise, they're double exposed on the frames from not being advanced right. Be the camera or the person. Other possibility is very old film that's not coming out of the canister smoothly so the sprocket holes got torn and the film isn't advancing all the way to the next frame.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Alan N. Marcus |
Most likely the negatives were printed before being cut into strips. Consider that modern highly automated photofinishing automatically advances uncut roll through the film gate. The printer scanner looks for frame lines. The automatic logic attempts to center each negatives in the printing gate. This logic can become confused if improperly calibrated or if the film has an unusual pattern of fogged or blank frames. Underexposed indoor flash shots sometimes produce a pattern that will resemble a frame line. These are just a few of the pitfalls of highly automated equipment. The good news is: Misidentification of frame line can be corrected when the frame is manually reprinted. I once owned an Olympus PEN half-frame. Good little camera.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Mark Feldstein |
If your lab rep really thinks this problem was caused by airport x-rays, tell him he's on drugs and send sample strips from each roll/camera to the tech. service division of Kodak in Rochester. Call their 800 # and they'll give you the address. They don't charge for the analysis. X-rays can cause base side emulsion fog, not spacing errors in framing. Since this happened with film from different cameras and one roll turned out fine, my vibe is that something slipped in the processor between the first roll and subsequent rolls. When you hear hoof beats, think horses not zebras. I don't think this is a problem with your film, the cameras or how it was exposed. I say processing problems before the film was sliced up for putting in the sleeves since the original film is usually printed from an entire roll, not cut strips. If you look at the negatives and in fact see full frames of images rather than halves, I'd guess it was a problem with the machine film transport If you really got all half images on the negatives, again I'd say it was a processor problem but unfortunately they won't pay to have you travel back to those places to reshoot. Sorry, but they do owe you for the film. Labs aren't generally responsible for consequential damages arising from processing screw ups.
|
|
|
|
||
|
- Gregory LaGrange Contact Gregory LaGrange Gregory LaGrange's Gallery |
Nothing in processing is going to make half of two images show up in one frame. Cow holves if a cow is what you see.
|
|
|
|
||
|
This old forum is now archived. Use improved Forum here
Report this Thread |
||