I haven't been taking pictures...

I haven't been taking pictures because the film I bought is faulty. I have a stash of 25 rolls of film from Croatia and my guess is that each roll is faulty. I bought 4 rolls of efke 127 film in March to use in my Baby Brownie. That is when the learning curve began. I had been warned that I should cover the rear red window on the Baby Brownine as it let light in which fogged the brand of film that I had bought. The red window is there so that you can see the frame numbers of the film you are shooting. I'm talking old fashioned film here. The film itself sits on a piece of blackened backing paper to prevent light getting at the film when it is wound onto a spool which is something like a cotton reel with an axle through the middle. I got so excited about the whole photography thing that I acquired a second hand Baby Rollei camera which takes the same sized film but it has knobs and levers and it focuses and has shutter adjustments and all kinds of exciting lenses and viewing devices attached to it. By way of comparison, The Baby Brownie sits there with a single shutter lever to move, and a lone knob to wind the film on.

So, I forgot about the Baby Brownie and I got the Baby Rollei going in order to do some real fotograffie.

But, it all came to an end when I discovered that the frame numbers on the backing paper were appearing on my portraits. You can see them in the photo of Roy. See that number 10 on its side, with two bars around it, just above his left shoulder. And there is a row of 7s on their side, above his head. Not to mention the black squares running in the vicinity of his left shoulder.

So, because of that psychological set back I haven't been taking photographs. I've toyed with the idea of moving to 35mm black and white; but at the moment that doesn't have the attraction of using a 50 year old camera and a film format which was invented around 1912.

I've been on the InterWeb, of course, looking for solutions to the problem of the backing paper data coming out on my negatives. There are a couple of blokes in the US who are having the same problem. They took to developing some of the errant film straight out of the box to see if the backing paper data came out on the negatives. It did. They didn't put the film in a camera. It had never seen the light of day; but still the numbers appeared on the negatives. I began to suspect things like x-rays were affecting the film as it might have been scanned before being trans-shipped by air.  I thought that might make the numbers come out on the film even if it had not seen the light of day.

I really didn't have an answer, and I was not happy.  So, I decided to have a look for myself.

I took a roll of film out of its tin foil wrapping and had a look at it. Nothing. I waved it around in daylight for a few minutes and then I saw the markings appear. The backing paper ink had leached over into the film emulsion and left marks on the film. The backing paper and film are wound very tightly onto a spool. The film is pressed very tightly on the roll between two sheets of backing paper. It is a meat in the sandwich situation. If the bottom piece of bread has mustard on it, some of that is going to rub off onto the bottom of the meat in the sandwich. However, backing paper pieces of bread are not meant to deliver their markings onto the meat. The marks printed on the backing paper are not meant to come off. Although, it has to be said that backing paper markings have been known to come off if the spool of film is very old, or if it has become moist.

However, backing paper markings are not meant to affect NEW film, and that is what I wrote to the US supplier of the rolls of efke R100 I bought.  I'm not sure if I'll get satisfaction. But I'll certainly know the right questions to ask in future.

Maybe I will shoot some 35mm film, while I wait to hear from the bloke in Texas who shipped me the dud rolls.

Comments

[jgodsey]

this is a great piece of writing.
after I blow out the 6 rolls of ekfe i guess i will stick to color and ten just desaturate it in PS.

[Hal at Ranch Ramblins]

A warning from a former Texas resident - beware of Texans selling Croatian film ;)

I admire your perserverance, and am anxious to see how this project eventually unfolds.

[justin]

Perhaps it's time to have some fun, taking pics with your digital camera? :)

[kim]

so, where is the problem, young son? you go to fotograffy w the media you have, not the media you wish you had. what i see is a great opportunity for unique imaging. everything is in the perspective, ya know? sometimes one must adjust the viewfinder.

[kim]

(not sure if i've bottomed out yet. either way, may begin the long haul back up in a few months. or... tentative everything.)

[Tjilpi]

kim. good to know that you're up and at the keyboard. you're right, some people have used the defect in the film to artistic advantage. one such is rutabegabunny on flickr. i wish i had her eye for composition. i'll work on adjusting my viewfinder. it really is great to see you back.

[kim]

i'm up.
your turn.

[Jude]

Tj, I think Kim might be waiting for you to post so that he can go again. You're holding things up.

[kim]

what she said.

[kim]

besides, yer much missed.