On the portrait, the vent cap is always off when pouring which I do rapidly, then immediately close the vent, squeeze and turn the fill cap.That's very odd.
I was going to ask if, by chance, you might have bent the previous lake-image films sharply, while loading or unloading. Sometimes, mechanical stress can have an effect on film, although I don't know the mechanism.
The portrait looks as if some developer was poured in, then stopped, then a little more and finally the tank was filled. It seems unlikely. You'd know about this if your hands were doing it, but are you loosening the opposite cap when you pour the dev in?
And yes, you are right about putting the sheath in at an angle. I can, if the light seal springs are weak or worn, open a little gap. This is when you use a sharp angle. A small deviation from parallel should cause no problem. You'll have observed that the ends of most sheaths are gently curved so that the leading edge is always at a slight angle and "strokes" the light seal open.
On the other hand, if the light seal springs are strong, you can inadvertently move the whole holder away from the camera back. Yer pays yer money...
Hi, in terms of sharpness I pulled back on the front standard and focussed on the eyes. Fully opened I wanted to see the reduced DOF. the Exp was f5.6, 1/60. In terms of DE, yes it could be the shutter although with previous shots with this lens I haven't noticed this issue. There was no error on darkslide as I only took two shots and the other one came out as attached with a different lens(300, f9, 1/30). I've taken another photo this morning and will process this afternoon. Thanks!Looking again at the portrait, there are several interesting features. I was wrong about the staggered pouring as any marks from that would run right across the sheet, from side to side.There's no evidence in the wall on the left.
As mpirie says, it looks more like a double exposure.
Examining the wall shows an unusual distribution of sharpness. The top and bottom are distinctly blurred and the corner seems to be sharpest next to the fingers. Is this intentional? I'm curious.
It's possible to get double exposures in several ways. The shutter could be misbehaving and occasionally leaving a tiny pinhole when it should be shut.
There was once a case of "spirit photography" where the photographer was working in a cold church with very long exposures. To keep warm, he wrapped himself in his darkcloth and stood to one side. An unnoticed pinhole in the bellows projected his image onto the film, producing a convincing ghost of a monk. I wish I'd kept chapter and verse of this.
A pinhole in the bellows is a possibility. Its effect would vary with the bellows extension. It might even be producing the effect of developing marks on the original lake pictures.
Some part of the camera may be reflecting into the lens.
...and it's very unlikely, but you may have inserted the dark slide for a different image, opened it, then changed your mind.
There are marks on the image that might be air bells or dust on the scanner. That would be a subject fo a different post.
Hi BillLooking at the latest one there is still a problem. Look at the bottom of the wall on the LHS and the skirt, there are similar straight marks on that area as there are in the first shot. May be a processing problem or a scanner issue? The previous comments about bellows are also worth considering. The other thought is film QC issues.
Another thought is where do you load your holders? If in a dark room is it possible that it is not as dark as you think and that the marks are caused by the film sheets lying out overlapping so some are getting some pre-exposure as you are loading others? If you use a changing bag, as I do, are the zips light tight or is the bag worn in any way?