Mike O'Pray
10th October 2010, 11:19 PM
Well I managed to load my bulk LP400 into my Watson loader with 12 frames and exposed and processed the negs tonight with what may be various problems.
I'd appreciate help in isolating these:
The whole film looks fogged with the exception of maybe one neg. Let me explain. The sprocket holes along the full length are nearly as dark as the neg so it is difficult to determine where the sprocket holes end and the frame begins. There isn't that clear rectangular frame that characterises 35mm film.Most negs look very uniform grey and under a loup the negs look grainy. There appears to be no contrast with the exception of what appears to be the one good neg with another next to it being maybe OK. Even the good neg has some dark grey around the sprocket holes but it isn't a uniform darkness like the rest
Most negs look underexposed but this may be the fogging effect as I don't think they are underexposed. A camera's metering system doesn't usually go wrong then right itself for one neg and then go wrong again.
It suggests to me that the cassette I used isn't light tight and the one good neg being in the middle of the film strip was rotected by the rest of the film. It may be the one neg that even with the cassette's exposure to light, both on loading into the camera and unloading would have been protected.
Is my reasoning holding up here?
I feel I can rule out any dev problems as the numbers along the edges look about right and anyway the dev was used with Neopan 400 only about 2 weeks ago with no problems.
Can I take it from users of LP 400 that as it is the same film as Neopan400 then dev times will be the same?
Certainly the exposed part of the film has gone black which again suggests that the dev did its job.
It may be my loader that is leaking light but I can see no cracks and as the film was cranked from the loader into the cassette you'd expect light streaks as each frame went past the crack. Certainly everything on the loader appears to be working as it should. It clicks in the closed position as Watsons' should.
My plan would be to test for any cracks in the loader by reeling out a length in the dark and loading it straight into a tank reel and processing. If the film is totally blank then I think that rules out leaks in the loader.
Hoefully we can rule out a film age problem. It is short dated but only requires processing by end Jan 2011.
I am sure any users here of LP400 would have said if they had noticed any kind of film problem.
So my initial plan of action is to: Do as I said 3 papargraphs above. If no problems then load another short length and expose and process again but this time NOT use the same re-useable cassettes.
To sum up: my gut feel is that either the cassettes are leaking or in messing about with the bulk roll and a new loader( The Watson as opposed to the Telesar where the spool won't fit) I somehow managed to fog the film very slightly.
It is early days to set any hares running and it may only have been me who bought a pack of metal cassettes from the same company as the OP mentioned in a thread about re-useable casettes here but just in case the cassettes may be prone to leakage possibly because the ends require pressing on where it is easy to make a mistake in so doing, then that person who posted about such cassettes might care to be very careful with them if he bought any.
He should have enough knowledge to know what I am referring to.
So two things: Can those who use LP400 confirm that the exact same development times apply as they used for Neopan 400?
Would anyone who has thoughts on my plan of diagnostic action to solve the problem comment. It will be much appreciated.
Thanks
Mike
I'd appreciate help in isolating these:
The whole film looks fogged with the exception of maybe one neg. Let me explain. The sprocket holes along the full length are nearly as dark as the neg so it is difficult to determine where the sprocket holes end and the frame begins. There isn't that clear rectangular frame that characterises 35mm film.Most negs look very uniform grey and under a loup the negs look grainy. There appears to be no contrast with the exception of what appears to be the one good neg with another next to it being maybe OK. Even the good neg has some dark grey around the sprocket holes but it isn't a uniform darkness like the rest
Most negs look underexposed but this may be the fogging effect as I don't think they are underexposed. A camera's metering system doesn't usually go wrong then right itself for one neg and then go wrong again.
It suggests to me that the cassette I used isn't light tight and the one good neg being in the middle of the film strip was rotected by the rest of the film. It may be the one neg that even with the cassette's exposure to light, both on loading into the camera and unloading would have been protected.
Is my reasoning holding up here?
I feel I can rule out any dev problems as the numbers along the edges look about right and anyway the dev was used with Neopan 400 only about 2 weeks ago with no problems.
Can I take it from users of LP 400 that as it is the same film as Neopan400 then dev times will be the same?
Certainly the exposed part of the film has gone black which again suggests that the dev did its job.
It may be my loader that is leaking light but I can see no cracks and as the film was cranked from the loader into the cassette you'd expect light streaks as each frame went past the crack. Certainly everything on the loader appears to be working as it should. It clicks in the closed position as Watsons' should.
My plan would be to test for any cracks in the loader by reeling out a length in the dark and loading it straight into a tank reel and processing. If the film is totally blank then I think that rules out leaks in the loader.
Hoefully we can rule out a film age problem. It is short dated but only requires processing by end Jan 2011.
I am sure any users here of LP400 would have said if they had noticed any kind of film problem.
So my initial plan of action is to: Do as I said 3 papargraphs above. If no problems then load another short length and expose and process again but this time NOT use the same re-useable cassettes.
To sum up: my gut feel is that either the cassettes are leaking or in messing about with the bulk roll and a new loader( The Watson as opposed to the Telesar where the spool won't fit) I somehow managed to fog the film very slightly.
It is early days to set any hares running and it may only have been me who bought a pack of metal cassettes from the same company as the OP mentioned in a thread about re-useable casettes here but just in case the cassettes may be prone to leakage possibly because the ends require pressing on where it is easy to make a mistake in so doing, then that person who posted about such cassettes might care to be very careful with them if he bought any.
He should have enough knowledge to know what I am referring to.
So two things: Can those who use LP400 confirm that the exact same development times apply as they used for Neopan 400?
Would anyone who has thoughts on my plan of diagnostic action to solve the problem comment. It will be much appreciated.
Thanks
Mike