Usairways@clt From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 209 posts, RR: 3 Posted (13 years 1 month 1 week 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 829 times:
I just got my pictures back and was quite surprised to learn that two of my rolls of film contained blank pictures. And with my luck, these rolls contained my best pictures....can anyone tell me what I might of been doing wrong to have gotten such a sad result? I WAS shooting around dusk time, but that shouldn't of given me blanks pics, should it?? And don't worry, my lens cap was on...
Usairways@clt From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 209 posts, RR: 3 Reply 4, posted (13 years 1 month 1 week 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 793 times:
Well, they are clear, so I guess they were overexposed. But how could they have been overexposed to the extent of there being NOTHING on them? I have never had exposure problems like that. What kind of exposure compensation should I shoot for?
Ckw From UK - England, joined Aug 2010, 660 posts, RR: 17 Reply 8, posted (13 years 1 month 1 week 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 764 times:
I agree with USAir_757 - if they are totally devoid of any image at all, then they were processed, but any processing fault will leave a trace of something on the film.
With some cameras it is remarkably easy to load a film incorrectly (ie. the leader doesn't get properly "caught" by the winder spool) and happily shoot away with no indication that there is a problem - I recall the Pentax ME & MX being prone to this, and I've been caught before on a Canon AT1. Remember, the film counter advancing does not necessarily mean the film is advancing, as the counter is linked to the winding
mechanism, not the film in (many? all?) cameras.
Oh yeah - the best shots I ever took were on that roll which didn't wind on!