Topic: Ok, HERE's one. Tell me if you've ever done THIS.

[Indofunk]

So I shot through a roll of 35mm Savon-rebranded Ferrania color film up in the Poughkeepsie area where I played a gig last night. Beautiful fall colors. Since color dev is a PITA to me, I try to process 2x 35mm rolls at a time. So today I quickly shot through the rest of some Elitechrome 100 that I was rating at 50. Cool, 2 rolls ready to dev. I got home, pulled out 2 rolls from my "camera" bag, loaded them up, and dev'd. One roll came out blank! Even though I'd done a leader test! Dammit!! Oh well, at least the roll of Ferrania came out, so I'm excited to see the fall colors. The Gold 200 didn't really have anything importan..... Wait, GOLD 200?? Where did that come from?

 

 

 

It was the blank roll that I'd thrown into the bag to load up once I'd finished shooting the Elitechrome. 

Show of hands, how many people have developed a completely fresh roll of film? 

[Francois]

The only time it happens to me is when I find a roll of "mystery film" in a used camera that I buy...

[Kayos]

Yes, took a blank roll of Retro 400s from the fridge and developed it, It was in the exposed box so must have been out and not used

I solved the mystery several months later when i accidently double shot a roll of Ektar

Ive also developed found rolls that have been blank

[Adam Doe]

Yes, I've developed a blank roll. And, if it makes you feel any better, yesterday i decided, despite being really tired, to develop three rolls of 35mm that I had ready. I had pre-soaked them and the thought, "I wonder if my fixer is still good?", drifted through my sleepy brain. I decided to see if the negatives had cleared and opened the tank to check... before developing, stopping, fixing. The top roll was toast, the middle roll suffered lots of light leaks and we shall see about the bottom roll, though I'm not too hopeful. Don't dev when tired kids!

[Sandeha Lynch]

That was how I confirmed that I am slightly dyspraxic and have to be very careful in understanding what my left hand is doing while my right hand is doing something else.  But apart from the blank roll it also created one of the best rolls of double exposure that I've ever done.

[limr]

Well, I haven't done that, but only because I don't leave the leader hanging out of the canister when I rewind so I can tell which rolls have been exposed or not. But I did once "develop" (or not) a single roll of 35mm using the top reel in my 2-reel tank and enough chemicals to cover the bottom reel only 

[Francois]

So far my worse darkroom mishap was while mixing some d76 back in the 90's... In their infinite wisdom, Kodak had decided that the French Canadian translation should only be metric... But just a direct conversion, not something smart. Have you ever tried measuring 296ml, adding the powder and then adding 714ml to make the full volume? Or something stupid like that... I ended up with a roll of very thin negatives... And had to throw the whole batch out.

[charles binns]

No, never.  Though I did once process the backing paper of 110 film rather than the film.

[Indofunk]

Well, I haven't done that, but only because I don't leave the leader hanging out of the canister when I rewind so I can tell which rolls have been exposed or not.

Hm, this is a convincing argument for me to change my workflow in this regard 

But I did once "develop" (or not) a single roll of 35mm using the top reel in my 2-reel tank and enough chemicals to cover the bottom reel only 

No, never.  Though I did once process the backing paper of 110 film rather than the film.

Well now I feel better 

[Late Developer]

Done it twice (in 40+ years) and never worked out how I managed to do it.  Once was a roll I developed and once was a roll I gave to a lab to develop.  The lab took pity on me and only charged me a a couple of quid.

[Ezzie]

No, but I have swapped rolls with much more devastating effect. I managed to load an exposed B+W roll in a tank meant for C-41. Now that also came out blank, very blank.

[Francois]

Well... I just realized that last night I did something stu-pid...
I developed the roll from my WTCD camera and proceeded to scan it using my little instant film scanner. I used the roll film adapter like I do most of the time. It's a small holder that is designed to keep the dust traps open so that I can slip the film through the device without cutting the film and using a film holder. I decided it would be simpler to just slip the whole film through, so I brought the scanner into the lab (it's one of those stand-alone devices that stores photos directly to an SD card) but somehow managed to slip the film between the adapter and the dust trap... exactly where it's not supposed to go. As I was scanning and sleeving at the same time, I kept thinking that the film was unusually hard to pull through... and not I look at my scans and I have a very nice scratch all along the film... bummer.

[jharr]

Well, I haven't done that, but only because I don't leave the leader hanging out of the canister when I rewind so I can tell which rolls have been exposed or not.

Hm, this is a convincing argument for me to change my workflow in this regard 

I leave the leader out, but I tape it down to the canister and write the unload date on it. If I don't have tape handy, I write directly on the leader. I wouldn't say it's fool "proof", but it is fool "resistant".

[Francois]

do you mean fool resistant like my shirts that are wrinkle resistant?