Huge light leak nightmare on the whole film!

[senseBOP]

Hey everyone, am I glad for finding this place!!!!

I don't know how, but my film was exposed in a very strange way to light, that caused a light wave across the whole film (probably a bad cap on one of the ends, or something). This was probably before even going into the camera, since I did notice the film being somewhat "exposed" when I pulled it out of the case and into the film grip in the camera.

Anyways, this is a true nightmare!!!! I had such beatiful pictures on this roll, and while I can Photoshop them one at a time, I was hoping someone here has a neat little script in PS to ease the pain for me.

There's a little snappy of the contact sheet at the end of this message. It makes the "light wave" very visible, and illustrates my problem quite nicely.

I'm a very well trained Photoshoper and Photographer, but having to go through 20 images, and fixing levels, dodging, burning, is not something I count as a good use of my (minimal) "quality time" infront of the PC.

Help and advice would be GREATLY appreachiated on this manner, especially if one can provide with a script for it in Photoshop.

Thank you all in advance for taking the time to help others with their problems.

Link to contact sheet is RIGHT HERE.

A note about the contact sheet: Some photos were rotated (obviously), so the wave might not be as visible, but you get the idea...

[cspringer]

kind of small. Can you post a picture?

[Gary Richardson]

No experience with scripts here, but I'd say its going to be difficult, as the pattern is different on each contact print.

Have you thought of creating an Action to part automate the process. That way the only manual input would be selection of the affected area.

Should make the process a little less time consuming.

[senseBOP]

Originally Posted by Gary Richardson

No experience with scripts here, but I'd say its going to be difficult, as the pattern is different on each contact print.

Have you thought of creating an Action to part automate the process. That way the only manual input would be selection of the affected area.

Should make the process a little less time consuming.

Well, I never really went through the process of making an action in PS, and I'm not quite sure how to go about it. I'm starting to think that I should just get somebody to fix these for me. It's going to consume too much of my time. I REALLY need to get myself a dSLR, now!

cspringer, here's a photo for you to take a shot at if you're interested: Blue Metal

[senseBOP]

Hey everyone, I hope this can be accepted by you as a "challenge", since it's quite a big one, but not really a "challenge" per se.

To get an idea of the "challenge", go to this link.

It's a contact sheet of the whole roll.
Notice that annoying "wave" running across all of the images? It was caused by some light-leak. I don't know if it was a faulty roll, or a faulty developement process, as I didn't do the developement myself.

In any case, here's a sample photo from the roll. See if you can remove the "light wave" from it, and if you can, let me know if you want more photos posted. I have 22 photos in total that need fixing.

If this is not an "acceptable" challenge, please forgive me, and get one of the mods to remove this thread.

I might be able to offer some "compensations" for a kind soul that will be willing to take this project on him/herself, and provide some good results.

[PatrickB]

Worked pretty good on this picture:

Duplicated the background layer.
Did a curves adjustment once based on the "good" part and once on the "bad" part.
Created a gradient along the bad part, copied to a channel, loaded as a selection and added to the background copy as a layer mask.

Don't know if it will work well on the other pictures though....

Patrick

PS: You see the edges of the bad parts, that needs a little tweaking on the mask

[Flora]

Hi senseBOP,

Welcome to RP!

What Gary said about scripts .... as for actions... I have my doubts about finding an automated way to fix color and contrast in such different pictures even if you do your selection manually ...

I had a go at your picture using Levels and Hue&Saturation ALs on a quick Mask selection ....

[senseBOP]

Hi, Flora, thanks for the warm welcome.

Wow, that is just an excellent job you did on that photo, can you send me the fixed version, or just upload it to imageShack?

Also, can you give me a it more details as to how you fixed it so nicely? None of my efforts have produced such a wonderful result.

I guess I'm not as good as I thought I was in Photoshop. :P

[cspringer]

I used my Paint with Light action (Shadow layer)but instead of black I picked one of the blues in the picture (www.atncentral.com) Take a brush and paint out the offending color. To darken the holes I used Selective Color Black.

[senseBOP]

Good job cspringer, it came out a little too blueish, compared to the original, but I like the idea you simply "painted" the white out.

And I'm loving the Action Central, so thank you for the link!

[Gary Richardson]

Hi Flora, wasn't suggesting an action as a total solution to the problem, just as a way of minimising the manual input needed. I only looked at the contact strip, and it was difficult to ascertain from that how much difference there was in degredation of individual images. I agree with you entirely that to get a finished result would require manual adjustment. By the way, like your work on the perforated drum, but I think senseBOP is looking for some sort of auto fix. I get the impression he doesn't want to spend any real time at all in fixing these images.

[senseBOP]

You're right, Gary, I am looking for a set and forget sollution, but since I'm a realistic person, and thus must accept the fact such a solution can not be found, I am looking for the shortest route to get there.
Going through 20 pics is going to be quite a hectic thing, and I'm trying to save me the effort, and cut time-costs to a bare minimum.

[Cameraken]

This is a VERY unusual fault. The light leak is in the middle of the film. This rules out light from a faulty cassette. As the leak is wavy it also rules out a problem with the camera back. I have been repairing cameras for 30 years and I’ve only seen this type of problem with a fault in the shutter. If one of the shutter blades is damaged ie off its tracks or a rivet missing or a hole in the shutter blind then light can be hitting the film while the camera is being wound on and this can cause a wavy pattern similar to your contact sheet.
(It’s usually a diagonal but it depends on the camera model)

IF I am correct then:-

The waves should all follow a pattern. They will just vary in intensity caused by light at the time the camera was wound on and the mirror return.

Your answer lies in images 5400 and 5401 which have formed natural masks.

These 2 unexposed images have created perfect templates of the leak.
All you should need to do is invert these and use them as layer masks then vary their intensity to repair the problem.

You need to check your camera shutter carefully as the problem will reoccur until the camera is repaired.

Ken

[senseBOP]

Wow, Ken, that's an excellent idea!
I should have thought of using those two images as masks. How silly of me.

As for your observation regarding the cause of this fault... It makes perfect sense. My shutter has been known to get stuck evry once in a while, but so far, all images came out ok. This is the first time I have seen such a defect.
I will have to wait for thedevelopement of the current film in the camera to know if the shutter is indeed faulty (other than its lagging, of course) before I go try fixing it.

This is an "old" Canon Elan IIe, and I'm in the process of getting Rebel 350, or something of that magnitude, so I don't want to spend that much in fixing this one.

Back to our diagnostics: The two "blank" shots are at the beginning of the film, which means it was exposed prior to the shutter being opened, doesn't it? Since it would have been wraped around the rod by the time the first shot was taken. This means it had to be exposed after the whole roll was shot, and the film was being rewind back into the canister. But, if that's the case, shouldn't the line be a straight one, and not wavy, since the source of light is straight on the film, and the film is flat?
A wavy line suggests it was exposed AFTER the film was already back in the canister, having a source of light expose it from one, narrow, specific angle.

Can this be a fault of the people at the developement center? I doubt they do it manually there, so maybe it was a faulty machine? I'm not too familiar with the process of commercial film developement, but I'm pretty sure the people there don't handle the films personally. Am I wrong?

I'd love to hear your input on these.

Thanks again for your excellent feedback, Ken!

[cspringer]

"Good job cspringer, it came out a little too blueish, compared to the original, but I like the idea you simply "painted" the white out."

It isn't on the original I did. I was having a hard time getting the resolution correct for this site. However, even if this is the problem with your attempt (if you try it), all you have to do is add a Hue/Sat. adjustment layer to tweak the color to your liking. It isn't "painting" ...that is just the term people used for Paint with Light...it is a dodge and burn technique.

[Flora]

Originally Posted by senseBOP

Hi, Flora, thanks for the warm welcome.

Wow, that is just an excellent job you did on that photo, can you send me the fixed version, or just upload it to imageShack?

Also, can you give me a it more details as to how you fixed it so nicely? None of my efforts have produced such a wonderful result...

Thank you so much for your great comment!!!

I'm attaching a snapshot of my workflow and here are the values of Levels and Hue&Saturation AL ...

Levels Adjustment Layer
Channels:
composite (RGB) channel
Input: 0 , 0.66 , 255
red channel
Input: 50 , 0.64 , 255
green channel
Input: 65 , 0.77, 241
blue channel
Input: 60 , 0.47 , 221

Hue/Saturation Adjustment Layer
Master:
Hue: -3
Saturation: -11
Lightness: -8

Blank Overlay layer (soft black brush - opacity 10% - to further darken middle right side) ...

That's all I did ...

I could send you the fixed image by email ... haven't got a clue about what imageShack is .... .... If you didn't provide an email address when you registered, go to my profile and send me an email from there so I'll have your address ....

Gary,

thanks for your kindness... I know you didn't suggest that .. .... I expressed myself badly ... I was having doubts even about partially autofixing such different pictures and having to tweak contrast and colours... this because, maybe, in the next picture Brightness&Contrast + Selective Colors might do the trick ....

senseBOP,

I know you would like "some sort of auto fix" and it still could be possible .. I would like to try it on different pictures of yours to see if it works so I could write an action... BTW ... which version of PS do you use?

[Cameraken]

The Elan is known as the EOS in UK. When you close the camera back the camera makes a couple of blank exposures to get past the exposed film and transports the film to number one.
If there is a hole in the shutter then these will not be ‘Blank exposures’ and I think this is what you are seeing here.
It is very easy on some of the Canons to dislodge one of the shutter leaves and they come off their tracks. The repair is cheap and easy if this is all that’s happened. But if the damage is more serious then a new shutter is required.
The ONLY way you can get a curved or diagonal line on the negatives is if the light leak and the film are moving together. This can not happen in the rewinding. It can only happen while the shutter is resetting and the film is transporting forwards.

I have seen wavy lines from the development But this is usually when the films are hand processed. But these are never even like yours seem to be.

One other thing, I still don’t think you will be able to automate this repair as there are too many variables. The light will vary each time and if you replaced the lens cap quickly then the mark will stop altogether.

It makes me laugh what can be achieved now. 10 years ago I would have had to take these negs into the darkroom. Make a wavy cardboard cutout to use as a mask and try to balance this under my enlarger while trying to guess the exposures.

Now I can repair Pictures in America without even standing up

Ken

[senseBOP]

Originally Posted by Cameraken

The ONLY way you can get a curved or diagonal line on the negatives is if the light leak and the film are moving together. This can not happen in the rewinding. It can only happen while the shutter is resetting and the film is transporting forwards.

Assuming the wave was caused by a faulty shutter, wouldn't that mean there should be a wide area, and a thin area of the wave? Shouldn't the wave area at the center of the image be wider than the rest, since the film remains there untill the next shot is taken? All photos, except for 5402 and 5403, were taken at the same day, but with varying pauses between each shot (as can be seen by the sunset shots vs daylight outdoor flower shots), so according to your theory, the first two shots (5402 and 5403) should have had a WAY thicker wave than the others.
Also, wouldn't the waves be identical (or almost identical) in all images, instead of continuing each other as a pattern?

The more I think about it, the more I'm getting the feeling that someone screwed up in the developement center. But I may be just being paranoic about it.

Originally Posted by Cameraken

It makes me laugh what can be achieved now. 10 years ago I would have had to take these negs into the darkroom. Make a wavy cardboard cutout to use as a mask and try to balance this under my enlarger while trying to guess the exposures.

Now I can repair Pictures in America without even standing up
Ken

Heh. Reminds me of Photography class in high-school.

[senseBOP]

Flora,
thank you for the detailed info, and for even posting a screenshot of it. Using Ken's idea, you might have better luck at this using one of the "blanks", so I have included those, as well as several other photos for you, at the bottom.

I'm using the latest and greatest of PS - PS CS2. It's quite a nice tool, and is far better than the first CS.

I have provided an email address when I signed up, but I'd prefer if you use my Gmail one, which is my nickname at gmail.com.

You can't even imagine how happy I am for all your great help with my photo(s). You're saving me SOOO much grief and sorrow, not to mention time!

Anyways, here are more shots of the horrid film:
(Feel free to not touch any of them, if you don't feel like it. )

• Refrence 1
• Refrence 2

• 54_05
• 54_07
• 54_09
• 54_13
• 54_23
• 54_26

You might even be able to use the image below as a refrence for the wave in some of the above photos.
---

Ken,
this photo is a reorganized view of the contact sheet, which makes the wave more visible and clear. Notice that in some photos the curvature is up, while in others it is down?

[cspringer]

more "Paint With Light" action

[nicks]

Hi SenseBOP,

I don't know whether your snaps would be selected for the challenge or not.. Here I have done the sample pic... removed the light.. Look at it.

I would like to use this snap for my portfolio, to put in site as a sample.. Can I use it?

- Nick.

[cspringer]

Here are my examples from original posts ...took a about a minute for each with brush and my action.

Picture 1

Picture 2

Picture 3

[Cameraken]

senseBOP
You are confusing three different faults

1) Shutter Lag – This is common on older Canons. There is a piece of foam within the shutter which was added as a shock absorber. After time this perishes and becomes sticky this causes the second blind to hesitate and can overexpose the whole picture
2) Weak springs – This is common on older Minolta and Pentax. If the Shutter springs become weak then one blind can be traveling faster than the other. This can vary the exposure across the neg.
3) Damaged shutter – This is the only problem that will cause a diagonal line. While I understand your logic about the shutter being ‘open’ between shots you will find that virtually no light will pass the mirror while it is down.

You will find that your processors will be using automatic machinery to detect the end of each frame and with a fault like this the process can get confused and its common for some of the pictures to get cut in half while the negs look OK.

wouldn't the waves be identical (or almost identical) in all images, instead of continuing each other as a pattern?

That is a very valid point and the whole reason I put IF in bold in my first post. The simple answer is ‘yes it should’.
The only way to check this is to go back and look at you negs. Have the scans been flipped/rotated/cropped. You or your processors may have taken the portrait shots then rotated them to view.

Can you post a scan of a strip of negs i.e. the full strip including all the edges as this is the only way to check.

Ken

[nicks]

Hello All,

I don't know what happen to the actual post.. I have post my work for this image here.. I play with the hue/sat and channels as well..

http://www.retouchpro.com/forums/showthread.php?t=10766

Look at the pic at http://www.retouchpro.com/forums/showthread.php?t=10766 .

- Nick

[senseBOP]

Ken, I was not confusing between faults, I was merely theorizing on the cause of the wave, excluding the possibility for it being generated on a per-shot basis, as oposed to a per-film basis. Having various widths/strengths of wave on each shot would have suggested that it was created during the shooting, while having a costant, continuous wave suggests it was created in one "Smooth" action. (as in when the film was wound back into the canister)

I will try and get the actual film strips scanned, but since I don't have a working scanner, it'll take a couple of days. However, the image at this link is the original layout/rotation of the images.
I only changed the order of the images to match the film strips, since Windows has a bad habbit of putting _12 before __2 when it auto-arranges a folder view.

Looking at the strips, none of the images were cut, offset, or anything like that, and the wave is constant and fluid across the whole film.

[nicks]

Hi Flora,

I have seen your work its always excellent..

I saw the snap, you have post in this thread. I have also done the same snap and post it at http://www.retouchpro.com/forums/showthread.php?t=10766 . When you see the large version of the thumbnail. you can see its not that sharp & clear.. ( while original pic is absolutly clear & fine) I used save for web option in photoshop to make the snap under 100KB.. original was around 350 kB.. Can you please tell me why your snap is looking sharp... ? what is the good way to save it under 100KB?

Thanks,

- Nick

[senseBOP]

Chip,
thanks for your additional help and work. Those came out a little too dark, though.

Nick,
thanks for your help, and for your kind offer. I will have to think about it a little longer.
You've done a great job on the picture, but you've added a bit too much of cyan to it.
Feel free to use it on your site. Just make sure to credit it with my email address (my nickname at gmail.com).

[cspringer]

"thanks for your additional help and work. Those came out alittle too dark, though."

NP. I'm not sure how much you know about post processing but adjusting the brightness and contrast "to taste" is about the easiest edit there is. You might want to buy Total Training for Photoshop...it is a semester of PS on CDs.

[senseBOP]

Originally Posted by cspringer

"thanks for your additional help and work. Those came out alittle too dark, though."

NP. I'm not sure how much you know about post processing but adjusting the brightness and contrast "to taste" is about the easiest edit there is. You might want to buy Total Training for Photoshop...it is a semester of PS on CDs.

He he, yeah, I know how to do that, I was just stating the obvious.
Total Training is an awesome product. I've got their new series for the PS CS2 features, and it's just amazing the amount of detail they show, and how well their work process is layed out.

[Flora]

Originally Posted by nicks

Hi Flora,

I have seen your work its always excellent..

I saw the snap, you have post in this thread. I have also done the same snap and post it at http://www.retouchpro.com/forums/showthread.php?t=10766 . When you see the large version of the thumbnail. you can see its not that sharp & clear.. ( while original pic is absolutly clear & fine) I used save for web option in photoshop to make the snap under 100KB.. original was around 350 kB.. Can you please tell me why your snap is looking sharp... ? what is the good way to save it under 100KB?

Thanks,

- Nick

Hi Nick,

... Not so sure it's the 'good way' of doing it but when 'saving for web' (which I also use) I tend to resize for quality .... meaning if for remaining under the 100KB limit the 'save for web' suggests a quality of under 65%, I cancel, go back to my workspace, resize the picture and try again .... I'd rather post a smaller picture than a big, blurred one ... particularly after having worked for hours on it, just to see great part of my work disappear to compression ....