Here, as a community service, are some of the most commonly asked troubleshooting questions.

Q: My film came out blank (clear). Why?

A: It depends on what you mean by blank.  Look for edge markings (frame numbers, the film type, etc.) along the sides of the film. They are a good diagnostic tool, as they are ‘stamped’ at the time of manufacturer. Are the edge markings visible?

• Yes, the edge markings are visible, but the film is otherwise clear. This means that an unexposed roll of film has been developed. Either you developed an unused roll of film, you loaded your camera incorrectly and the film did not get exposed. Another (unlikely) possibility is that shutter or aperture problems led to massive underexposure.
• No, the edge markings aren’t visible — the film is completely clear. This means that the film was fixed before it was developed. Either you swapped the developer and the fixer, or your developer was inactive (mixed incorrectly, degraded before use, used plain water by mistake, etc.)

Q: My developed film looks milky. Why?

A: Milky film results from insufficient fixing. Your fixer is either past its capacity or is too dilute, or your fixing time was too short. Keep the film in the dark and re-fix with fresh fixer as soon as you can — all will turn out OK.

Q: My developed film has a blue or purple tint to it. Why?
Q: When I poured the developer out of my tank, it was bright pink / purple / blue. Why?

A: Manufacturers routinely add dyes to the emulsion or film base to inhibit fogging and “halation” (cloudiness around image highlights caused by light bouncing around between the surfaces of the film).

• With some types of film (usually medium-format) these dyes wash out during development, resulting in strongly coloured developers. The colour you get will depend on the actual film-developer combination.
• Some films — notably TMAX — develop to give purple-tinted negatives. As long as your film is properly developed and washed, this isn’t harmful, but the tint can usually be minimized with extended fixing and washing.
• A few brands of medium-format film from Eastern European suppliers have permanently tinted (usually blue) film bases. No amount of washing will get rid of this tint.

Was this article helpful to you? If so, let me know in the comments below.

Posted as-is from a drugstore scan (1500×1000 pixels) of cross-processed Ektachrome GX film. The scans were mostly blown out, but I liked the look.

They say that Kodak film works “best” at cross-processing. I have a lot of 120-format Provia lying around, so it might be time to test that hypothesis.

I shot this at a local park with the good ol’ Nikon F90 and 50mm f/1.8 lens. For all you Torontonians — I bought the film (expired 2006) for $1 at a camera fair last year, and had it developed and scanned at the Shoppers Drug Mart at Eglinton and Chaplin for $3. Talk about a cheap thrill!

Another picture from the one-roll project, taken with the Nikon FG and Sigma 18-35mm lens on Efke 25.

I’ve felt a bit uninspired lately, so I decided to kick-start what’s left of my artistic brain by giving myself a project.

For about a week, I carried around a deliberately limited rig (the Nikon FG loaded with a single roll of ultra-slow Efke 25, mounted with a slow and somewhat unsharp Sigma wide-angle zoom). Rather than rattling off pix at every opportunity, I tried to take just a few carefully chosen photographs each day.

I’m still going through the results of the One-Roll Project, but so far I like what I see.

This was 35mm Efke 25 film developed in Rodinal 1+50 for 5 mins at 18C.

• Two-Bath Development: Exposure and Development Strategy for Scanning by Sandy King (PDF). This is an article from a back-issue of View Camera magazine in which Sandy King, champion of alternative processes, ultra-large format, and catechol-based developers, describes the advantages of divided developers for hybrid workflows.
• My friend Jon Day-Reiner, formerly of groundglass.ca, has re-joined the photoblog world with 18% Gray, and he’s shooting large-format.
• A list of 40 photography e-magazines – the ones I’ve looked at are quite good.

I developed a few rolls of B&W film last week — the first home B&W I’ve done in about six months. (Having a baby in the house will do that to you.) I mixed up fresh fixer and a new batch of Thornton’s metol two-bath developer, then proceeded to soup up two rolls of Neopan 400 that I had recently put through the Rolleiflex.

The results, while not exactly “bulletproof”, were very dense (due to overdevelopment, not overexposure). I don’t think I made any weighing errors, so I’m blaming the relatively high temperature of my Part A solution (it was about 27-28C) even though divided developers are usually considered insensitive to temperature and time.

I still managed to salvage a few good images from these rolls (including the one above). Better luck next time, I guess.

I remember feeling elated when I discovered this technique. It gives images just a bit of an edge without any hint of that nasty over-sharpened or posterized look. You can use it in pretty much any image-editing software that provides an Unsharp Mask tool. It’s simple and definitely worth trying.

You can sometimes find photography in unexpected places. On Saturday, while leafing through a profile of Groupe Aeroplan CEO Rupert Duschene in Report on Business magazine, I learned that the man at the helm of the country’s largest reward points program prefers to spend his time doing street and travel photography — he uses a Leica M8 (a very expensive digital rangefinder) but was making his own B&W prints until recently, it seems. Then on Sunday, when out on a walk with the family, I found a “free to a good home” box of darkroom chemicals sitting at the edge of the road — I claimed about $25 worth of fresh film chemistry. My thanks to the former photographer at the corner of Belsize and Forman for spreading the wealth!

This photo was taken with the Rolleiflex 3.5E on recently expired Fuji 160C and was scanned at the lab.

You’re looking at two adjacent 6×4.5cm frames from the Zenobia 6×4.5cm folding camera (which I don’t use too often). The film was Fuji Neopan 400 developed in Rodinal 1+50 (9 mins at 20C). Split-toned in PS.

Among my purchases at the PHSC Camera Fair was a set of no-name +1 close-up lenses for the Rolleiflex for about $20 (a steal at this price, because I have the “rare” 3.5E with Bay II filter mounts). I took it for a test drive on a walk through the neighbourhood and came back with this very appealing image — as usual, I was shooting in colour (expired Portra 400NC) and ended up converting to B&W.