Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,904   Posts: 1,521,237   Online: 1083
      
Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 54
  1. #11
    Mark Feldstein's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Monterey, CA / BiCoastal NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    163
    As an anecdote, I had a roll of VPS ISO 160 Vericolor (from the same emulsion batch) that had been stored in an A-12 magazine and in a metal camera case run through 6 scanners on a cross-country trip. It was dip and dunked by my lab. The film showed base side emulsion fog as did two blank rolls that hadnt been loaded in a magazine. The Kodak Tech. Rep was concerned enough to send them to Rochester NY for a look. This was about the time the FAA was saying their scanners only affected film with an ISO of 1600 or higher. (Right).

    Since the effects of radiation are cumulative, Kodak came back and told us the film had been fogged by x-rays, probably from airport scanning since Kodak used transportation and storage methods that did not involve x-rays. Kodak and I contacted the FAA and requested that they retest their earlier results although then (and now) they provided for hand inspection of film without scanning it. The FAA denied our request and continued to deny that medium and low speed films were affected in any way by even multiple radiation exposures.

    They subsequently revised their tune and without agreeing or admitting any error and finally acknowledged that base side emulsion fog could occur in all films and continued to provide for hand-inspection of any film type/speed.

    See if this problem occurred on another roll of the same batch number and from another processor although if it doesn't bleed over the frames into the border, it's probably not fogged but I'd agree it's processing.
    _________________________________
    Without guys like John Coltrane, Count Basie and Duke Ellington, life....would be meaningless.

  2. #12
    clayne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    San Francisco, CA | Kuching, MY | Jakarta, ID
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,838
    Images
    57
    Make sure you're not topping off the tank as well. There should be some airspace for the liquid to displace.
    Stop worrying about grain, resolution, sharpness, and everything else that doesn't have a damn thing to do with substance.

    http://www.flickr.com/kediwah

  3. #13
    polyglot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    South Australia
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    3,089
    Images
    12
    It's a scanning failure; you've not set your black-point correctly. Red shadows in Portra are a classic symptom of using the mask colour as the black point. Have a read of the C41-scan howto in the FAQ in my signature. The gradient is usually a function of flare inside the scanner.

    The subject's face is also under-exposed. With normal contrast, the face is going to be pretty dim with the background set to black. Bringing the skin tones up causes the contrast to be unnaturally high (the second scan) or the background to fail to be black (first scan). There is no cure for that other than better light.

    As to agitation, C41 expects constant agitation through the whole process. Inversion should be fine, but don't do it once per minute, keep going for the whole 3:15.

  4. #14
    Andrew O'Neill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Coquitlam, BC, Canada
    Posts
    602
    If you are in a darkroom, lift the film in/out of the tank a few times every minute. If you are not in a darkroom, invert the tank a couple of times every minute. I rarely could get decent results when using that silly little stick. I believe that the film edges are receiving more agitation than the centre, building up more density.

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    386
    Quote Originally Posted by karrlander View Post
    Thank's! Might absolutely be something to take into consideration. But if it's because of dev getting exhausted and that happends faster in the center the problem should not show up along the edges?
    perhaps it's one of those rare occasions when negative thinking would yield more useful results...

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Mariefred
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    24
    Thanks a lot everyone. Lots of information and things to start working with. Looks like I have to get myself a good scanner after all and learn how to run it. And work a little more on my dev process to get all the bits and pieces together. I will keep the thread updated with the results!

  7. #17
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    6,989
    Images
    222
    Epson v750


    ~Stone | Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk
    ~Stone | "...of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong." ~Dennis Miller

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Mariefred
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    24
    Quote Originally Posted by StoneNYC View Post
    Epson v750


    ~Stone | Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk
    That would be a nice one but my wife says she want food every night. I can get a Epson V500 for a really nice price, would it be a good start or will I be dissapointed and want to upgrade shortly?

  9. #19
    clayne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    San Francisco, CA | Kuching, MY | Jakarta, ID
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,838
    Images
    57
    You will be disappointed with any of those flatbed scanners. I hate to break it to you, but unfortunately you will only be truly satisfied using a dedicated film scanner.

    Now you're going to hear from a bunch of people who will tell you they get great results with the Epson, etc. through various games they play with the scanner, but it's a far cry from a 4000 dpi medium format capable scanner (which will also do 135 format). Plan on 2k$ budget.

    Amusingly though, if you scan 5x7 and 8x10 prints on a v500 or v700 it'll do pretty good - but that's because they've already had the hard work done for them ahead of time. Don't fall into the flatbed scanner trap - they're severely lacking.
    Stop worrying about grain, resolution, sharpness, and everything else that doesn't have a damn thing to do with substance.

    http://www.flickr.com/kediwah

  10. #20

    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Mariefred
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    24
    Quote Originally Posted by clayne View Post
    You will be disappointed with any of those flatbed scanners. I hate to break it to you, but unfortunately you will only be truly satisfied using a dedicated film scanner.

    Now you're going to hear from a bunch of people who will tell you they get great results with the Epson, etc. through various games they play with the scanner, but it's a far cry from a 4000 dpi medium format capable scanner (which will also do 135 format). Plan on 2k$ budget.

    Amusingly though, if you scan 5x7 and 8x10 prints on a v500 or v700 it'll do pretty good - but that's because they've already had the hard work done for them ahead of time. Don't fall into the flatbed scanner trap - they're severely lacking.
    I know, but I can't put that much money in a scanner. I dont get paid for my film shooting, the DSLR stands for the income. Someday maybe I can get one but for now I have to do with the second best.

Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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