Waiting to hear back from the lab inspecting the neg, but...
We had intermittent blue fogging on 2 consecutive B-Camera rolls B97 & B98. The picture is pristine, then a gradual blue fog evenly fades-up
and overtakes the picture - after 3 seconds it peaks then fades out again
to a pristine picture.
I do not suspect the SR3 cameras/mags since :
- Looks nothing like a camera/mag
light-leak (its too even and fades up too perfectly and slowly). - Camera did not light-leak onto
other mags used. - Same 2 mags did not leak with
other rolls (M#7773 & 2364) - Seems unlikely that 2 adjacent
mag rolls would leak so similarly
It's not the Loader since :
- Does not look like a flashed
roll where you'd have edge fogging on one side or throughout the reel. - She's really solid and experienced.
I do not suspect the film manufacturer or storage since its unlikely that
two entirely different emulsion batches would have the same problem on
2 consecutive camera rolls.
Due to all of the above I am suspecting an isolated problem at our Lab
- It's the same problem
on 2 adjacent camera rolls assembled at the tail of the lab
reel. - It looks like it
could be a problem in the yellow dye developer layer (or fixer?)...perhaps
the machine slowed down and the rollers dipped in that tank
got overdeveloped ? - Otherwise it would
have to be some overall light exposure that could only occur
when the film was unspooled (the anti-halation layer wasn't
helping here - it was a very even fogging). - The frequency of
the intermittent fog waves is too long to be a camera issue
- it seems to come and go on a larger scale than what's possible
in a camera, and seems to fit the scale of the lab developer
If anyone has any experience with this sort of problem, let
me know on or off list.
LA based DP
Although this end of the business is no longer my specialty, it sure sounds
like lab to me.
I'll bet there was a break during processing. The film after the break
point stopped moving and they had to turn on the overhead lights to fix
the break. The film that was looped over the roller at the top of the
tank got most exposed by the overhead lights - the most blue fog - and
the exposure gradually fades away on the film on either side of the roller
as the film descends deeper into the tank...or something pretty similar.
Have you talked to the lab?
Hope this helps!
Straight Shoot'r Cranes, Inc.
If your film stock is Kodak, contact your marketing rep who can have a
length of the negative sent back to Rochester for examination.
They should be able to ascertain if the blue fog is pre exposure, during
exposure or post-exposure.
Out of interest, just exactly how do they do that? It strikes me as Very
And on an unrelated topic, well, a slightly related topic, where does
the word "Kodak" actually come from?
>where does the word "Kodak"
actually come from?
If I can recall correctly from my high school days (or was it primary
school?), it comes from nowhere actually. George Eastman thought a commercial
name should be short and with a strong sound (that was where the use of
repeated K's came from) and also should have no meaning; and, as a result
he produced KODAK (instead of Eastman, or Photox, or Supercalifragilisticoexpialidoso).
Madrid (Imperial Spain)
>We had intermittent blue fogging
The exact frequency of the fogging is the smoking gun clue here.
You need to measure the exact distance from one peak to the next. That
may well correspond to the exact length of the roller racks in the developing
tanks. Also, how many times does it happen altogether? It sounds as though
it starts in one reel and continues through to the next. All the clues
point to the processing machine. The blue colour would be due to daylight
fogging affecting the top layer before or during development. Not fixer,
the film is no longer light sensitive at that point. A slow-down or stop
wouldn't give you the blue - more likely that someone opened a tank lid
when they shouldn't have done, or possibly the darkroom door was opened
Of course your lab should be able to work this out if they examine the
negative. Try to get you production office to let them do this - so often
we are unable to properly investigate problems because the negative is
(a) "useless" but (b) mustn't be handled or examined or cut
up or sent to odak or anything "in case we need that take".