Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,566   Posts: 1,545,415   Online: 1027
      
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 14
  1. #1
    Graham_Martin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    St. Augustine, Florida
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    213
    Images
    6

    Is this a development or user problem?

    I had a roll of Kodak Gold 400 developed at CVS today. Every image is covered in white spots. I checked my UV filter to see if it was dirty and it appears to be OK. I also scanned in the negatives myself with the same results. Could this have been some sort of developing error at CVS? I'm wondering if using old chemicals could have caused this.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails 05_7.jpg  
    Graham from St. Augustine, FL

  2. #2
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    23,034
    Images
    65
    White spots on the print mean black spots on the film. Or dust! If it isn't dust, then it is a lab problem.

    PE

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    42
    Could be calcium deposits from the labs' water being too hard, that's my guess.

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    117
    Its a processing problem that is common now in places with low volume (pretty much everywhere now, save a busy costco or two). Related to old/under use of the chemicals and the filters that clog up/fail as a result, allowing these precipitates to coat the film. I used to take my negs to Target, until i began home scanning andd saw, when ICE was turned off, how horribly speckled they were with this gunk. Hundreds of white spots on the resulting scans from each frame. With Digital ICE (the IR dust removal technology invented by Kodak0 turned on, you dont see these spots - they are digitally removed by the IR scan. But I had some hope of analog printing them some day, so I switched to costco. They are still busy with 1 time use camera film, so the chems are fresh and clean. Well worth the extra 50 cents per roll they charge (still the best deal in town - pro lab quality negs developed for $1.50/roll - and only $3.88 if you wants prints too).
    Anyways, the Fuji hunt Europe website has an interesting paper on this problem, and they have developed low throughput/use chemicals to correct it.

  5. #5
    Graham_Martin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    St. Augustine, Florida
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    213
    Images
    6
    Thanks for the suggestion about ICE. My original scan was using VueScan. When I tried the ICE software the difference was noticeable as can be seen here.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails farm-2040.jpg  
    Graham from St. Augustine, FL

  6. #6
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    23,034
    Images
    65
    But those spots should not be there or be that bad in the first place!

    PE

  7. #7
    Graham_Martin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    St. Augustine, Florida
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    213
    Images
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by Photo Engineer View Post
    But those spots should not be there or be that bad in the first place!

    PE
    I agree with you. CVS tried "wiping" down the negs with a white glove and got some of the gunk off. They refunded my money, but I'm still disappointed with the results.
    Graham from St. Augustine, FL

  8. #8

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Daventry, Northamptonshire, England
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    6,969
    Sounds like a case for developing your own.

    pentaxuser

  9. #9
    Graham_Martin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    St. Augustine, Florida
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    213
    Images
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by pentaxuser View Post
    Sounds like a case for developing your own.

    pentaxuser
    I have toyed with the idea but, so far, haven't summed up the courage to do it.
    Graham from St. Augustine, FL

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    117
    Try it, it is super easy. doesnt cost much to get started, brings your processing costs way down, you get pristine clean negs, and most of all it is actually fun. I put it off for far too lomg out of fear, and stories on the net that it was too hard to do at home (blame Photo.net on that).
    Anyways, I got started this past Spring doing home E6, the ,most "difficult" of the 3, and it is super easy. Color neg should be even easier, as you have far fewer steps. Go to Freestyle or Maco Direct and order a Fuji or Tetenal kit (wish I could promote Kpodak here, but they are out of the home user market now).

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin