Author Topic: What's caused this? (Read 4177 times)

Pete_R · « **on:** February 01, 2015, 05:27:27 PM »

This is four consecutive frames from a roll of Rerapan 127 out of the Baby Rolleiflex. Processed in FD10 for 5 minutes. The lower two frames (taken first) have a mottled effect, mostly towards the edge of the frame but actually all over. It also shows up in the exposed parts along the edge of the film so is not just limited to the image area. The effect is on all the earlier frames but not on later ones. The crucial (I think) thing is, there was a long time difference between the lower two frames and the upper two - several months but not sure exactly how long. So what is it and why would it only appear on frames exposed a long time before the film was processed and not on recent frames exposed within the last couple of weeks?

Francois · « **Reply #1 on:** February 01, 2015, 08:46:49 PM »

It could be some sort of fog. Probably chemical in nature. Probably something airborne.

I don't think heat would cause that much damage over a short period of time.

timor · « **Reply #2 on:** February 01, 2015, 09:53:28 PM »

I would drop FD10. From stories on the net it looks like it might be very sensitive to water quality developer. People are getting widely different results with it.

Pete_R · « **Reply #3 on:** February 01, 2015, 10:09:59 PM »

Heat, developer? But wouldn't both effect the whole roll?

Francois · « **Reply #4 on:** February 01, 2015, 10:29:22 PM »

Well... heat on only one side of the camera could... but I really really doubt that could be the case.

And contaminated developer would affect the whole roll unless it was stand developed with absolutely no agitation. I really doubt you did that.

I also doubt that you put the camera near something radioactive or that produces X-rays...

Could it be a leak through the backing paper? That would produce a mottled effect.

Possibly a film defect.

I remember a problem with some Shanghai film years ago. They had a batch of shoddy backing paper that let both light through and left residues of ink on the film base causing a real mess... maybe it's something similar?

Terry · « **Reply #5 on:** February 02, 2015, 01:46:43 AM »

Peter,
I have had some similar results with Rerapan, but not consistently.

This is a frame from my very first roll:

ReraPan 1 par Terry B, on ipernity

And this is from a later one:

looking south par Terry B, on ipernity

I see a lot of grain and something like the mottling effect on the second one.
Both were processed in R09 per Freestyles' recommendations. The second one was shot in more subdued and diffuse light; otherwise the same (no over/under exposure, not pushed, etc.)

For comparison, a frame of HP5 in the same camera

legless par Terry B, on ipernity

LT · « **Reply #6 on:** February 02, 2015, 07:11:40 AM »

My guess would be some sort of contamination/ quality issue with the emulsion. I have had similar things with adox sheet film when I've left it too long in the dds in a damp atmosphere. It looks more pronounced towards the edges so maybe it was stored badly at some point in its life and the attack has crept in from the edges? Perhaps condensation?

I can't see it is a developer problem if it has not damaged all the frames. And, you are an experienced film fellow Peter ... I cant see this being user error at all.

I've never heard of rerapan before! I think I'm a bit out of touch. Are there any other perhaps more reliable types of 127 available any more?

Pete_R · « **Reply #7 on:** February 02, 2015, 09:13:32 AM »

Quote from: Leon on February 02, 2015, 07:11:40 AM

you are an experienced film fellow Peter ... I cant see this being user error at all.

Thanks for the compliment but I wouldn't rule it out completely. I can be a bit gung ho sometimes.

Quote

I've never heard of rerapan before! I think I'm a bit out of touch. Are there any other perhaps more reliable types of 127 available any more?

You can still get Efke off ebay for an extortionate price. Or you can ask Richard down at Nik & Trick to slice something up for you.

Terry · « **Reply #8 on:** February 02, 2015, 12:33:07 PM »

I've got a few more rolls of the stuff in my fridge--I'll shoot it and see what it does. But I'm inclined to agree with Leon and Francois: it may simply be a manufacturing quality issue (like Shanghai). Rerapan appears to come from a company that hasn't made film before, which I suppose should raise some warning signs.

imagesfrugales · « **Reply #9 on:** February 02, 2015, 01:36:38 PM »

I also second Francois' and Leons opinion. Maybe a combination of bad manufacturing quality and bad storage. Obviously the processing is not to blame.

We hear a lot about bad manufacturing today but only with 120 film finished by non-prime manufacturers. E.g. I had problems with Efke and Shanghai GP3. Many reported badly scatched RPX films some years ago. The latter were not finished/packaged by Harman!

OT: there is a huge dissent imo: 120 film is much more challenging to make in good quality, this is confirmed by "Mr. Adox" and former "Mr. Maco" and some others, but they are (were) often much cheaper up to factor 2 (e.g. Fuji Velvia) than the 35 mm films. I sometimes feel punched.

Francois · « **Reply #10 on:** February 02, 2015, 02:15:26 PM »

I guess the only reason we haven't heard as much about quality issues for rerapan is simply related to the number of people who regularly use 127. Let's face it, small format film has become something of a niche market.

Terry · « **Reply #11 on:** February 02, 2015, 03:29:56 PM »

I wonder if it might be respooled Shanghai.

Photo_Utopia · « **Reply #12 on:** February 02, 2015, 03:35:11 PM »

Looks like damp on the backing paper–just a guess
Regards
mark

sapata · « **Reply #13 on:** February 02, 2015, 06:42:44 PM »

I had similar effects on two different cameras using Ilford and Fuji Acros. Never quite undesrtood either what really happened... in the end it just added an extra toycam effect

Francois · « **Reply #14 on:** February 02, 2015, 08:37:39 PM »

Strangely the first one looks an awful lot like paper grain.
Backing paper is manufactured with the paper grain in a specific direction in order to give it a curve width wise. This helps keep the film shaded on the edges.

jharr · « **Reply #15 on:** February 02, 2015, 10:47:06 PM »

It looks to me like light coming through the paper. If it is on the first shots and not the last, that might make sense, if the roll was exposed to bright sunlight before loading. The light could make it through to the first couple of outer layers of film, but not all the way to the inner layers. Just my $0.02.

Francois · « **Reply #16 on:** February 03, 2015, 02:07:48 PM »

Does make sense since the leader on 127 is much shorter than for 120.

Pete_R · « **Reply #17 on:** February 03, 2015, 04:17:31 PM »

Thanks for all the suggestions peeps. I'm going with Leon's idea that it's condenstion or damp. Rerapan isn't foil wrapped so probably more susceptible to such things. My theory is the film was damp and the emulsion was sticking to the back of the backing paper - or maybe damp got transferred from the backing paper to the emulsion where it was touching and this affected the result. But, as the camera was left in the house, in the warm, for sometime before the rest of the film was exposed, it had chance to dry out and so the remaining frames don't have the problem. It's the only way I can explain the effect being even and consistant across all the earlier frames but nothing on the subsequent ones.

Hopefully, all the other films I have, have had chance to dry out and I won't see it again.

Francois · « **Reply #18 on:** February 03, 2015, 09:00:18 PM »

You could always store the film in a zip bag with some silica gel...

Pete_R · « **Reply #19 on:** February 03, 2015, 10:07:33 PM »

Quote from: Francois on February 03, 2015, 09:00:18 PM

You could always store the film in a zip bag with some silica gel...

Good idea.