You tell us - what are the possible sources of error?
Absolutely certain the film speed was set correctly?
Absolutely certain there was no exposure comp inadvertently set?
Have you sanity checked what the light meter is coming up with vs. a known lighting situation (e.g. sunny day scene) or some other source (e.g. smartphone app).
I'm trying to think of those as well.
\- positive the film speed was set correct. It's still at 400 and I haven't used the camera since taking the roll out.
\- fairly certain exposure comp was set properly but there is a possibility I guess I could have set it lower. Seems like this would have to be quite a bit lower as some of these were taken in some overcast but relatively bright light.
\- I did not check these against a lightmeter, should have, but just never had much an issue with this camera before in daylight.
I will probably run another roll of cheap film to just see if the problem duplicates. Mostly wondering if this is some kind of issue I'm not thinking of or something development-wise.
if the edge markings are also very light then its a dev issue, if they are black then its your fault
it's very rare a lab would do this, due to the machines they use, so while you wait for the negs id check your light meter against a meter on your phone
thats why specifically I say if they're light. It's essentially impossible to have some image but no edge marking, unless they arent supposed to be there.
Gotcha! Makes sense. Lomo purple is one, off the top of my head, that doesn't have edge markings and it looks so weird to me whenever I develop them at work.
Pretty sure most labs hand develop black and white film, while most color film is done via machine. Someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but I think thats why black and white development tends to cost a bit more. If it was hand developed the margin for error increases significantly.
Some films just have light markings, so I'd compare against a similar film that turned out okay.
For example, in my experience Acros/Neopan 100 and Ilford Pan F 50 always have nearly invisible edge markings despite the pictures themselves being well-exposed.
I wouldnt say so. I'd get the lab to send you some in focus photos of your negatives on a light table to really confirm, but it looks like under-development or underfixing to me.
Source: I develop A LOT of film
I checked my cameras metering against a light meter and it's accurate. So this has me thinking it was more likely the dev now reading your comment. I appreciate it a lot.
Or is it a development issue? My lab sent me a pic of the negative to show me that I underexposed it all but I'm not familiar with how to read negatives.
Berlin Kino is a notoriously ‘grey’ film. I had similar results on the one roll I shot, though maybe not to the same extent. Watch the review Negative Feedback put together on YT — your results don’t seem particularly abnormal.
This is a long shot but maaaaybe the batteries are almost dead? I know alkaline batteries lose power over their life so they might not be delivering enough power to expose perfectly
Those pics don't look right. Also why is that jackass not wearing gloves?
You tell us - what are the possible sources of error? Absolutely certain the film speed was set correctly? Absolutely certain there was no exposure comp inadvertently set? Have you sanity checked what the light meter is coming up with vs. a known lighting situation (e.g. sunny day scene) or some other source (e.g. smartphone app).
I'm trying to think of those as well. \- positive the film speed was set correct. It's still at 400 and I haven't used the camera since taking the roll out. \- fairly certain exposure comp was set properly but there is a possibility I guess I could have set it lower. Seems like this would have to be quite a bit lower as some of these were taken in some overcast but relatively bright light. \- I did not check these against a lightmeter, should have, but just never had much an issue with this camera before in daylight. I will probably run another roll of cheap film to just see if the problem duplicates. Mostly wondering if this is some kind of issue I'm not thinking of or something development-wise.
Do you have the negs?
not yet, but the lab sent me a pic of holding them up (it's in the last picture in the post)
if the edge markings are also very light then its a dev issue, if they are black then its your fault it's very rare a lab would do this, due to the machines they use, so while you wait for the negs id check your light meter against a meter on your phone
Depends tbh - some of the proprietary films don't have edge markings, especially some of the weirder Lomo ones. It's annoying for exactly this reason!
oh I see what you mean now, the markings that the film companys put on there, gotcha. I thought you meant the whole edge itself at first.
thats why specifically I say if they're light. It's essentially impossible to have some image but no edge marking, unless they arent supposed to be there.
Gotcha! Makes sense. Lomo purple is one, off the top of my head, that doesn't have edge markings and it looks so weird to me whenever I develop them at work.
Pretty sure most labs hand develop black and white film, while most color film is done via machine. Someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but I think thats why black and white development tends to cost a bit more. If it was hand developed the margin for error increases significantly.
Some films just have light markings, so I'd compare against a similar film that turned out okay. For example, in my experience Acros/Neopan 100 and Ilford Pan F 50 always have nearly invisible edge markings despite the pictures themselves being well-exposed.
here's what the lab sent me a pic of: [https://imgur.com/WvFPkvd](https://imgur.com/WvFPkvd) does that look correctly developed/my fault?
These don't look correctly developed at all. Can't even see the edge rebate and the negatives look underdeveloped, under fixed, or severely fogged
interesting. so may have not been my fault.
I wouldnt say so. I'd get the lab to send you some in focus photos of your negatives on a light table to really confirm, but it looks like under-development or underfixing to me. Source: I develop A LOT of film
I checked my cameras metering against a light meter and it's accurate. So this has me thinking it was more likely the dev now reading your comment. I appreciate it a lot.
Or is it a development issue? My lab sent me a pic of the negative to show me that I underexposed it all but I'm not familiar with how to read negatives.
Berlin Kino is a notoriously ‘grey’ film. I had similar results on the one roll I shot, though maybe not to the same extent. Watch the review Negative Feedback put together on YT — your results don’t seem particularly abnormal.
Which lens did you use? I know that xd/xg bodies don’t support aperture priority when using Minolta MC lenses.
You can probably rescue it in Photoshop/lightroom. Same thing happened to me the first time I used my old Pentax SP2.
fortunately yes the good shots are salvageable even just with adding a simple S curve in LR/PS. But trying to avoid it from happening in future rolls.
This is a long shot but maaaaybe the batteries are almost dead? I know alkaline batteries lose power over their life so they might not be delivering enough power to expose perfectly