Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,011   Posts: 1,524,677   Online: 738
      
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 12
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    2

    Portra 160 | Crawfish Eating Contestant | Questions

    I took this photo, nailed focus, nailed exposure, just plaing enjoy this photo. My issue is this....why is it so blue?? It seems the colors are muted in general, but more so covered in a blue hue. Any tips? Fixes? Reasons? I'm guessing it could be my lab?


    CrawfishChamp by Grant Young Photography, on Flickr

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    210
    That looks overexposed on my monitor. Did you have a skylight filter on the lens? Summer day like that is going to have tons of UV light, and film tends to be oversensitive to blue light.
    The camera is the most incidental element of photography.

  3. #3

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Aurora, IL
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,942
    It looks like it printed or scanned very light if you scanned from the film. As for the color it needs to be correct during printing and or the scanning from film. The contrast is low so I don't think it's overexposed.

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    58
    do agree with prev poster: nothing really wrong, just a lil overexposed shot, and many cameras would work like this in that conditions. On my monitor I can't see any real "cast" of blu on the image...

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by okto View Post
    That looks overexposed on my monitor. Did you have a skylight filter on the lens? Summer day like that is going to have tons of UV light, and film tends to be oversensitive to blue light.
    No filters, just bare lens on my Yashica D.

    Quote Originally Posted by desertratt View Post
    Take a look at the gentleman's left arm. It is exposed just right. His shirt is white and it's going to blow out a bit becasue of that. Was the sky light blue or dark? I don't think there is anything wrong with your negative. It's what was done to it afterwards. Was it scanned too light? Did you tweak it with software?
    I was using the Sunny/16 so the exposure is withing a 1/3...or should be. I may could have dropped it 1/3 to gain some saturation...but I think I need to learn to scan better. I really don't know how to scan "darker" as I am the only film guy I know right now in my area. Trying to meet more to learn this kind of stuff. Should I have a few prints made with color correction done to see what things should be like?

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    58
    thats why i am NOT looking for any scanner (if not an eventual low cost one for websharing):
    managing colours in digital is an ugly beast imho... so many different steps and parameters in play...

  7. #7

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Aurora, IL
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,942
    I can be sure that the negative was not overexposed, if anything it's a little underexposed. If a negative was overexposed then the shadow area would have excellent details but it's not so in this case there isn't much details in the shadow.

  8. #8

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Aurora, IL
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,942
    Quote Originally Posted by summerbee View Post
    thats why i am NOT looking for any scanner (if not an eventual low cost one for websharing):
    managing colours in digital is an ugly beast imho... so many different steps and parameters in play...
    So you make your own RA-4 prints? Because getting the correct color balance in the analog world is not an easy task and every single adjustment made is a wasted sheet of paper and chemical.

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Iowa
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,034
    Scanning color negatives is a challenge, no doubt. I scan hundreds of rolls of film every year and sometimes it just won't come out right at scan time. In Photoshop it's relatively easy to correct, often by clicking "Auto-color" or by setting the white point using curves. When printing it's also easy, just dial in more of the color you want to take out. I think you should take or mail this negative to a proper lab and have them print it. If it's still too blue they can correct it.

    On a side note, that's an excellent photograph. I share in your joy - sometimes nailing the focus is a prize in and of itself!
    In life you only get one great dog, one great car, and one great woman. Pet the dog. Drive the car. Make love to the woman. Don't mix them up.

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    58
    Quote Originally Posted by Chan Tran View Post
    So you make your own RA-4 prints? Because getting the correct color balance in the analog world is not an easy task and every single adjustment made is a wasted sheet of paper and chemical.
    nah, I was in digital for a brief while and soon moved back to analog B/W. I am actually starting to make my hand on printing in black. I'll keep on shooting some trasparencies and some digital if I really need colours.
    Next step planned is developing colour film and slides my own... probably next year.
    If I'd really need to print something in colours I know a pair of profs who will give me their help (for money of course...)

    Moneywise a capable PC + a good storage device + a good scanner + a decent monitor + the tool for balancing colours + a decent printer + papers and inks...
    well, perhaps you can waist that pair of prints and still be on a bargain

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