blank negative!!

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

puffball - 14 Jun 2004 17:42 GMT

I just shot 4 rolls of kodak gold 100 for a friend's wedding. After
developing at a local lab, the first two rolls turned out, and the
last one also came out well, but the third roll, only the first 4
shots came through. The rest of the negative was blank. The edge
markings (Kodak and frame number) was there, but the frames were all
blank. Does this mean that the Kodak film was inproperly
manufactured? I don't think it's my camera (Pentax PZ-1 SLR) because
the counter still counted, the motor and the mirror did not sound like
it was stuck, the last good frame in the negative was NOT black
(multiple exposures of the same frame) and it rewound properly at the
end of the roll. It's not the developer because the negative edge
markings developed properly. The pictures were shot outdoors on a
sunny day and I did not adjust anything on my camera for any special
settings.

Anyone experienced this before?

Reply to this Message

Mark A - 14 Jun 2004 17:50 GMT

> I just shot 4 rolls of kodak gold 100 for a friend's wedding. After
> developing at a local lab, the first two rolls turned out, and the
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
>
> Anyone experienced this before?

There could have been a problem with the flash or automatic exposure. If the
edge markings came out, it is not the film.

Reply to this Message

Nicholas O. Lindan - 14 Jun 2004 19:38 GMT

> kodak gold 100 ... only the first 4
> shots came through. The rest of the negative [er, strip of film?]
> was blank. The edge markings (Kodak and frame number) was there, but
> the frames were all blank.

> Does this mean that the Kodak film was improperly
> manufactured?

I can't see how the edge of the film was coated with emulsion and the
center wasn't. If there was a wavy nature to the fault I would agree
with you.

> I don't think it's my camera (Pentax PZ-1 SLR) because
> the counter still counted, the motor and the mirror did not sound like
> it was stuck,

Most cameras (well, all of _my_ cameras, a small sample of all
that are available) keep on clicking even if the film isn't moving -
much to my disappointment and embarrassment.

> the last good frame in the negative was NOT black

Now that's unusual if ripped perfs or stuck film was the fault.

> it rewound properly at the end of the roll.

So it most likely was not low batteries.

> I did not adjust anything on my camera for any special settings.

That happens to me: I didn't _knowingly_ adjust anything ... but that
doesn't sound like the case. Your camera doesn't have a 'blank film'
setting, I assume. I suppose setting the ASA to 6400 would do it,
it may be in the DX contacts - are the negatives _completely_ blank,
exposing 100 film at 6400 (six stops off) would have recorded
_something_ very faintly.

> Anyone experienced this before?

Similar to this, many times. Exactly this, no.

It sounds to me like a transient fault in the camera. Could be it's
got some Windows code in it - did the finder turn blue? - just a joke,
but cameras these days are run by software and software invariably has
bugs.

And one can also blame the problem on Gamma-Rays -- they are one
remaining cause of errors in computers and can't be gotten rid of. The
reliability of some circuits is high enough that such rare events can
be seen. 30 years ago it was alpha-particles causing errors in RAMs,
but that was because the epoxy was slightly radioactive.

There is a chance that it will never happen again, but there is the
chance it will. Typical help center response, eh? Try again, maybe
it will go away.

[Ob joke: A salesman, a field service rep and a programmer were driving
in a car when a tire went flat. They got out of the car and looked and
pondered. The salesman said "We need a new car." The field service rep said
"lets swap all the tires around so we can isolate the bad one."
The programmer said "Let's come back tomorrow, the tire may have fixed itself
by then."]

FWIW: A gamma-ray with 45 ft-lbs (3.8E20 ev) of energy has been recorded,
or so I think I remember I read. Seems pretty remarkable to me, it would
seem that the detector would have been destroyed.

Signature

Nicholas O. Lindan, Cleveland, Ohio
Consulting Engineer: Electronics; Informatics; Photonics.
Remove spaces etc. to reply: n o lindan at net com dot com
psst.. want to buy an f-stop timer? nolindan.com/da/fstop/

Reply to this Message

Donald Qualls - 15 Jun 2004 03:53 GMT

> FWIW: A gamma-ray with 45 ft-lbs (3.8E20 ev) of energy has been
> recorded, or so I think I remember I read. Seems pretty remarkable to
> me, it would seem that the detector would have been destroyed.

Hell's bells, that's not a subatomic particle, it's a fastball!

Signature

I may be a scwewy wabbit, but I'm not going to Alcatwaz!
-- E. J. Fudd, 1954

Donald Qualls, aka The Silent Observer
Lathe Building Pages http://silent1.home.netcom.com/HomebuiltLathe.htm
Speedway 7x12 Lathe Pages http://silent1.home.netcom.com/my7x12.htm

Opinions expressed are my own -- take them for what they're worth
and don't expect them to be perfect.

Reply to this Message

Donald Qualls - 15 Jun 2004 04:21 GMT

> FWIW: A gamma-ray with 45 ft-lbs (3.8E20 ev) of energy has been recorded,
> or so I think I remember I read. Seems pretty remarkable to me, it would
> seem that the detector would have been destroyed.

Hell's bells, that's not a subatomic particle, it's a fastball!

Signature

Reply to this Message

Donald Qualls - 15 Jun 2004 04:21 GMT

Hell's bells, that's not a subatomic particle, it's a fastball!

Signature

Reply to this Message

John - 29 Jun 2004 13:37 GMT

>I just shot 4 rolls of kodak gold 100 for a friend's wedding. After
>developing at a local lab, the first two rolls turned out, and the
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
>
>Anyone experienced this before?

Stuck shutter.

Regards,

John S. Douglas, Photographer - http://www.darkroompro.com
Please remove the "_" when replying via email

Reply to this Message