File :-(, x, )
Blank Film? Anonymous
So I just got done shooting a cheap roll of film with a Zorki 4 and when I got the roll back from Walgreens what I got back was a blank sheet of film. Just like in my pic, not one slide had any trace of anything.

This has never happened before and I'm going to say something is wrong with the camera but it was cleaned and tested before it was sent to me by my grandparents, what do you guys think this is? I was excited about being able to use this camera and this really sucks.
>> Anonymous
Those Walgreens guys were probably laughing at your noobie-ness.
>> Anonymous
the crackhead at walgreens prolly fucked it up and just put film in slot press button walk away...
>> sage !i/euDJmWr2
They came back transparent? Not blank, but transparent? And they were slides, right?

Wrong processing, I guess. As far as I know Walgreens only does C41 so you ended up with basically cross processed slides gone wrong.
>> Anonymous
OP here, thing is, could be any number of things. I was sure that I loaded and rewound it right, nothing seemed wrong there and I gave Walgreens film to process before, I never had a problem.

I'll be careful next time I load it.
>> sage !i/euDJmWr2
>>228784
what was the film? I know you said "cheap", but what brand? And was it intended for C41 development or were you trying to x-pro it?
>> Anonymous
>>228785
expired lomo film
>> Anonymous
>>228785

Cheap as in a Walgreens roll that I found around the house and the sole purpose was to test out the camera. It was meant for C41.
>> sage !i/euDJmWr2
>>228792
uh okay, so it was actually the stuff they sell with their logo on it? and was it negative or slide film? I know they encourage people to cross-process but most of the time x-pro with a mini lab doesn't work out right/at all. If it was slide film, which it sounds like, then that's almost definately the problem.

Put a cheap roll of Kodak Gold or something through it and see how that turns out. I dont know if you're at all like me, but I have tons of cheap film like that lying around that I use just for testing things like this.
>> sage !i/euDJmWr2
>>228794
err...I guess the other person wasn't you? Disregard my last reply then.

If it was negative film and it came out transparent like in the picture, then that's just bizarre. I've had blank rolls come back before but not like that.

I've heard of people buying a roll of film for C41 that was loaded with E6 film and vice versa by mistake, but that's pretty unlikely most of the time.
>> Anonymous
Yeah, I have a few more Walgreens, Kodak, and Fujifilm. I'll keep doing it and see if it happens again. Just don't want to keep going back there every time just to get back the same result, lol.
>> Anonymous
YOU DIDNT LOAD IT PROPERLY AND IT DIDNT WIND.
DO IT PROPERLY NEXT TIME OR GET A DIGITAL.
FILM IS DEAD
FILM IS DEAD
FILM IS DEAD
FILM IS DEAD
FILM IS DEAD
FILM IS DEAD
FILM IS DEAD
FILM IS DEAD
FILM IS DEAD
FILM IS DEAD
FILM IS DEAD
FILM IS DEAD
>> Anonymous
>>228937
Yeah, because digital is so much better than large format.
>> Anonymous
>>228769
If its just like in your pic you used slide film and over exposed every frame horribly. I mean really over exposed them as in there is no color left.

Just like shooting digital in sunlight with long exposure and getting only white images.
>> Anonymous
>>228963
im sorry, what?
http://www.betterlight.com/products4X5.html
http://www.phaseone.com/Content/p1digitalbacks/P65plus/Introduction.aspx
http://www.hasselbladusa.com/products/h-system/h3d.aspx

your point was....
>> Anonymous
>>228968
His point is you can get a $400 good MF film system + scanner.

What the fuck are you on, bringing up digital backs? You can't afford it, faggot.

For the price point, MF + LF all the way > digital backs. Digital backs are about commercial convenience, not quality dipshit.
>> Anonymous
>>228995
im sorry did you say GIGAPIXEL?
that must be a convenience term, nothing to do with the quality.

man i wish i was born as obsinate and stupid as you.

(oh and i dont have the urge to upgrade my H2 system just yet)(you poorfaggot)
>> Anonymous
>>228995
Lol wut?

Large format film, by virtue of size > medium format digital> 135-based digital > medium format film > 135 film.

But that doesn't matter. If you're picking your format based on MAXIMUM RESOLUTION you're doing it wrong.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>228792

I've never shot LSI's slide film before, but I've shot their brand color negative film, and it sucks. Stick to name brand. But you also mentioned Fuji, so I'm guessing Velvia or Provia? I always get my slide film cross processed. I'm guessing it was the developers fault. Either way your negs shouldn't have come back blank...

Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS3 WindowsImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution96 dpiVertical Resolution96 dpiImage Created2008:07:11 20:26:53Color Space InformationUncalibratedImage Width384Image Height256