The TREACHERY of film photography

[Everythingisnt]

Well, I just returned in disgust after a 3 hour long photo shoot.

After three hours of hiking through forest, swapping lenses, kneeling and stretching to get my camera in all sorts of positions, and even getting my jacket completely muddy for one shot (I was kneeling on it and the ground was really wet) - my camera kept on shooting after the 36 exposure limit! Puzzled, I carefully pried off the back, to discover that the film hadn't advanced past the first exposure!!!

Somehow, I made a small mistake when I inserted the film, and thus it slipped off of the little winding peg. This basically means that for three hours I was carefully metering my light, changing aperture and shutter speeds, swapping lenses, for NOTHING.

Gah.

[bartelby]

I spent 7 hours in sub zero temps once, my hands were to numb to work properly and I did exactly the same as you. I was the only time I made that mistake though. It was highly annoying as there was no way I could go back and shoot stuff again.

[Everythingisnt]

:eek:

When I hear your story I certainly feel less sorry for myself. I guess that I have learned one thing... Always double check your film :p.

[Digital Skunk]

I think every shooter has been through that.

I once knew a very nice videographer for the local news. He was fired when he left for assignment and forgot his tapes.

A good friend of mine went to a wedding without his camera :eek:

Then I myself have mis-loaded film, brought the wrong film, and had the camera back opened mid roll.

Now there is the problem of memory cards. Every time I get a new body I forget to set that one setting that prevents the shutter from releasing when there is no card inserted... :confused:

And there was the not too long ago Micro drive fiasco.... made it to the wedding with a 2GB card only to find out that it was NO GOOD.

[-hh]

:eek:

When I hear your story I certainly feel less sorry for myself. I guess that I have learned one thing... Always double check your film :p.


That's a life lesson that almost always takes a blown photo op to really, really learn.

If its only happened once to you (so far), consider yourself lucky.


...and just wait until you go out on a shoot, and at what you know is only halfway, you fill the roll and go to rewind ...only to discover that it is stuck, and you have no darkroom handy.

Had this happen to me this past November.

Fortunately, the diveboat's head was belowdecks and a pretty dark small room and I had a beach towel with me, so I got into the head, turned off the light, threw the towel over myself & camera. I then opened up the camera back, pulled the film out by hand, and rolled it back into its canister, all by touch...it took probably around 2 minutes. After I got back home, I sent the film out for developing and was lucky in that I only had a couple of light leaks mess up a couple of frames.


-hh

[Hello.there]

Something similar happened me years ago. After shooting approx 152 'photos' I thought, "wow, this film goes on FOREVER".

:o

[Optimus Rhyme]

While that's a shame, it's nice that it happens less to people with digital memory now that far less people use film. I've had problems in the past with film like that, but I was younger so the pictures I took didn't mean as much as they do now.

Sorry to hear about your experience, but it could have been worse!

[jlcharles]

I had the same thing happen with my first roll of film in my Hasselblad. I didn't know how to load it properly and took a whole roll of shots for nothing. And it was especially bad knowing that I lost the shots in the fog that had already broken.

[ChrisA]

Get yourself a "real camera". One with a thumb lever film advance. You can feel the film moving through the works with your thumb on that kind of camera. I've never made that mistake on a manual camera. It's easy to make that mistake on a motor driven camera.

A "real camera" works even without the batteries installed.I suspect I'll still own my old F2 even after by DSLR has been upgraded twice.

Seriouly now, sorry to hear that.

[Everythingisnt]

Get yourself a "real camera". One with a thumb lever film advance. You can feel the film moving through the works with your thumb on that kind of camera. I've never made that mistake on a manual camera. It's easy to make that mistake on a motor driven camera.

A "real camera" works even without the batteries installed.I suspect I'll still own my old F2 even after by DSLR has been upgraded twice.

Seriouly now, sorry to hear that.

I have a Canon AE-1. It has a thumb lever advance... (I KNEW that the film felt light today! :mad:)

[MacUser2525]

Get yourself a "real camera". One with a thumb lever film advance. You can feel the film moving through the works with your thumb on that kind of camera. I've never made that mistake on a manual camera. It's easy to make that mistake on a motor driven camera.

A "real camera" works even without the batteries installed.I suspect I'll still own my old F2 even after by DSLR has been upgraded twice.

Seriouly now, sorry to hear that.

Good chance you will see the rewind lever moving with the film advance as well...

[Everythingisnt]

Good chance you will see the rewind lever moving with the film advance as well...

Arrghh!!

I'm such an idiot for having missed that!

[iBallz]

A 'real' film camera will hold one sheet of film at a time!:D

[snberk103]

A 'real' film camera will hold one sheet of film at a time!:D

Holds 2 sheets, but you only use one at a time ... :D

When I was teaching at a photo school in Vancouver we would take the students to the interior of BC every fall for a long weekend of shooting the fall colours. One year I went with my 4x5. Each evening as we sat around the fireplace, beers at hand - the students would compare notes - how many exposures each had made, etc. Their numbers were typically hundreds per day (obviously they were shooting 35mm.) Finally they would ask me - as I sat on the floor to bring the coffee table to convenient height. Up to my elbows in a changing bag. Film holders, film boxes, carefully organized so I got the exposed sheets into the correct boxes, and the unexposed film into the correct holders. "Oh", I would say "I think I got 6 or 8 good exposures today." They would laugh, of course. But I liked my stuff better than theirs!

The good old days!

[iBallz]

Holds 2 sheets, but you only use one at a time ... :D


True!

But, you not using it any more?

I went to a nice gallery in Park City the other day, amazing photos, but a noticeable bit of noise in his bigger prints, (said to use the cibacrome) they said all the pics were from 35mm slides. Yet the prints I've seen from 4x5" are sharp at any size. And as far as most digital...:rolleyes:

[CrackedButter]

If you think 3 hours on a short journey is bad. I went to Japan last September and over a period of 2 days I shot 1 roll of film to carefully consider my shots only to find I hadn't put any film into the camera!

[Everythingisnt]

:eek: two days!

Well I'd better be thankful that that hasn't happened to me.. (yet)

As it is, if the weather improves I'm going to leave to retake all of my shots today!

[CrackedButter]

Well I have a 5D now and my medium format camera won't work without film so I'm not likely to make mistakes like that again.

[snberk103]

True!

But, you not using it any more?

I haven't lately - but hope to get back to it. Mostly, its due to lack of access to a darkroom.



I went to a nice gallery in Park City the other day, amazing photos, but a noticeable bit of noise in his bigger prints, (said to use the cibacrome) they said all the pics were from 35mm slides. Yet the prints I've seen from 4x5" are sharp at any size. And as far as most digital...:rolleyes:

Then you haven't see digital prints from truly professional and passionate photographers and printers. I live in small community that is crawling with photographers. Some who show their work internationally. The 30x40 prints from some of the digital cameras would knock your socks off. They're different than the prints from the 4x5 and 5x7 shooters - but certainly nothing to 'roll your eyes' at. :)

I personally think that 35mm colour print film is, for most purposes, supplanted by the current crop of high end digital cameras.

Black and White film is increasing its market share, as is large format. And this is "a good thing", IMHO.

If you happen to be in the Vancouver/Victoria area this summer I can send you the details of the annual show.

And, as for the original thread... any serious film shooter has a similar story. The good ones do it only once. The not-so-good ones ......

Cheers

Seth

[sushi]

I have a Canon AE-1. It has a thumb lever advance...
Cool. :)

I have the A-1. Haven't used it much in the past few years. Now I am mostly point and shoot in digital. Good enough for me now. But may get a nice DSLR down the road.

[iBallz]

:eek: two days!

Well I'd better be thankful that that hasn't happened to me.. (yet)

As it is, if the weather improves I'm going to leave to retake all of my shots today!

Look forward to seeing some pics! Sounds like you are in a neat place.

I blew a whole day shooting not realizing the ISO was set to 3200. I was in bright day light, the shutter could not go much faster:D

Hey Seth,

I'd love to visit that area some time. And thats what I've heard about prints from digital, 30x40" will be just fine. I have a customer who wants 5' + prints and is willing to pay whatever for them. He said he can get online and buy stock photos all day, and even talk the owner down to $50 for his pics. But not the case with LF. So I may have a challenge!:eek:

My only other gripe with prints from digital, is they are some times too good, and then I realized they must of photochopped them. But I guess its easy to do with film too.:rolleyes:

[iRachel]

I once shot a ton of pictures of my brother's birthday - and then realized there wasn't any film in the camera at all! When I went to get the camera, my mom said that she thought there was still a half-used roll in there from whatever our last event had been. I believed her, and didn't check - until I realized I had taken about 40 pictures, and there's no way the roll should have allowed that many - especially if it was already partially used! Oops!

By far my worst film gaff, though, was getting back from a vacation, getting my photos printed, and having them come back very grainy and orange. At first I thought the lab must have screwed up, and I was about to take them back and demand a reprint when I realized that I hadn't taken the unexposed film out of my bag at the airport on the way there...it had been x-rayed, and then I had put it in the camera and used it.

[teleromeo]

<snip>...it had been x-rayed...

It's hard to believe that this happened. I'm in photo printing business for over more than 20 years and I can remember only two cases of film being fogged by X-ray. The worst case was severe damage from scanning by unskilled custom guards with obsolete machines in some low developped country. The other case was very light fogging the customer did not see.

[-hh]

It's hard to believe that this happened. I'm in photo printing business for over more than 20 years and I can remember only two cases of film being fogged by X-ray. The worst case was severe damage from scanning by unskilled custom guards with obsolete machines in some low developped country. The other case was very light fogging the customer did not see.


X-Ray isn't too rough on film if it is in carry-on baggage. However, checked baggage is another story.


-hh

[harcosparky]

Whew ... I thought this was gonna be a film bashing thread!

Though I never did what the OP did because a friend decades ago told me to always check the rewind knob when first loading until you get a 'feel' for it.

I did go in the field for a 21 day exercise with known weak battery, it died on the 6th day. The was a Canon A-1, metering and shutter totally battery dependent.

When I got back from the field I immediately secured a Canon F1 because it can function without a battery.

[zephyrnoid]

I lost 75% of a 7 hr Wedding thanks to a lab screw-up. Never messed up film loading on my end. Just luck of the draw I guess.

[iRachel]

It's hard to believe that this happened. I'm in photo printing business for over more than 20 years and I can remember only two cases of film being fogged by X-ray. The worst case was severe damage from scanning by unskilled custom guards with obsolete machines in some low developped country. The other case was very light fogging the customer did not see.

Well, I suppose it might have just been a bad roll of film, but I can't come up with any other explanation for what happened. You can see the graininess all over the negatives, too, so it wasn't just a bad print job - something clearly happened to the film itself. I know it was exposed to the x-ray, so that's what I've always believed was the culprit. Though, you could be right. It's possible, I suppose, that it was just a bad roll of film.

[glennyboiwpg]

This is why I could never get into FILM photography...


digital all the way baby!

[snberk103]

Well, I suppose it might have just been a bad roll of film, but I can't come up with any other explanation for what happened. You can see the graininess all over the negatives, too, so it wasn't just a bad print job - something clearly happened to the film itself. I know it was exposed to the x-ray, so that's what I've always believed was the culprit. Though, you could be right. It's possible, I suppose, that it was just a bad roll of film.

Its likely that the film was actually x-rayed twice.... once each way on a round-trip. Also, the film speed will make a difference. Higher speed films are more sensitive to x-rays. And finally..... perhaps it was an old roll of film that was already feeling its age, and/or had gone travelling (and been x-rayed) previously. Two trips = 4 times through the x-ray machine! I believe that the x-ray effects are cumulative.

I got into the habit of marking each roll of film that had been x-rayed (with an 'X' of course :) ) each time I travelled. I was suprised one day to find I was about to use a roll with 4 'X's on it. The marked rolls I saved for less important shooting, and only used clean rolls for important stuff.

[CrackedButter]

Its likely that the film was actually x-rayed twice.... once each way on a round-trip. Also, the film speed will make a difference. Higher speed films are more sensitive to x-rays. And finally..... perhaps it was an old roll of film that was already feeling its age, and/or had gone travelling (and been x-rayed) previously. Two trips = 4 times through the x-ray machine! I believe that the x-ray effects are cumulative.

I got into the habit of marking each roll of film that had been x-rayed (with an 'X' of course :) ) each time I travelled. I was suprised one day to find I was about to use a roll with 4 'X's on it. The marked rolls I saved for less important shooting, and only used clean rolls for important stuff.

I've had 1600 Fuji Colour Superia scanned four times under X-ray with no problems. All the airport staff I have spoken (in 4 different countries) too mentioned that X-ray scanners are a lot more delicate these days. You start to get problems with 3200 film and upwards. All anecdotal of course!

[iRachel]

Well, I don't remember the details of the film. But it was probably 400 or 800, but it wasn't anything fancy - just a roll of Kodak or Fuji that you get at the drugstore. It's possible that it was old. I was going on a short family vacation and didn't feel like hauling any expensive film or gear around in a canoe, so I just took the point and shoot. I do know that neither the camera nor the film got wet, so that wasn't the problem, and the camera still works fine, so that doesn't seem to be the issue, either. It was either crap film to begin with or the x-ray machine got it.

[compuwar]

A 'real' film camera will hold one sheet of film at a time!:D

Until you put a rollfilm back on it :-P

[ChrisA]

By far my worst film gaff, though, was getting back from a vacation, getting my photos printed, and having them come back very grainy and orange. At first I thought the lab must have screwed up, and I was about to take them back and demand a reprint when I realized that I hadn't taken the unexposed film out of my bag at the airport on the way there...it had been x-rayed, and then I had put it in the camera and used it.

Xray could be the explanation if you were in some third world place with a very old and poorly maintained xray machine. Modern machines don't bother film. Another explanation is that the film was stored in some very warm place. Sometimes people leave a camera with film in it in a closed up car in the sun. Film does not like heat. If it were xray then the problem would be fogging. Heat tends to cause a color shift.

Your best bet is to buy film after you arrive and not to bring it from home. Almost any place that has an airport also has film available. Get it procees there too. There are one hour mini-labs all over the world.

[teleromeo]

Film degradation caused by heat results in magenta cast with not much more grain than normal. My first though when I hear orange and grainy would be underexposure or underdeveloppement.

[stagi]

Happens to everyone at least once, just have to learn from your mistakes. Same can happen in the digital world, I have known people who forgot to put a card in, there are always things that can go wrong, just need to check out your equip before shooting :)

[Mechcozmo]

Get yourself a "real camera". One with a thumb lever film advance. You can feel the film moving through the works with your thumb on that kind of camera. I've never made that mistake on a manual camera. It's easy to make that mistake on a motor driven camera.

A "real camera" works even without the batteries installed.I suspect I'll still own my old F2 even after by DSLR has been upgraded twice.

Funny to see this thread, I just shot 6 rolls of XP2 Super yesterday through my Nikon FE. You can feel and see the film advance on that camera. Although it needs batteries for anything other than 1/90 and bulb. Ah, well, they last for years at a time anyway.