Red and green lines/double image in Walgreens prints (Fujicolor C200)

[dehk]

This is an extremely alarming prospect. This was the first roll I took after disassembling the lens and repairing a loose spring on the aperture mechanism. Any way to check this w/o wasting another roll of film? Would the aberration appear in the viewfinder? I plan to check the negatives as soon as I can.

Alright for a real reply this time. You said you repaired a loose spring on the aperture mechanism. Let me guess that would be the spring at the mount (back of the lens), so you didn't really have to disassemble the whole thing (i am still guessing), if that's the case it shouldn't be knock out of alignment. And another thing, those type of zoom nikkor, from my experience, if you tear everything out of it, everything can pretty much go back in ONE way, or that thing wouldn't move at all, so chances of it being out of alignment is slim. I can't tell you what it is because I do not do color negs much. But what I can tell you is to borrow a DSLR and see if the problem exist, if it does, its the lens for sure. One last question, your images are not blurry and they are in focus where you want them to be correct?

[photoncatcher]

Were these optical prints from you film negatives, or did the simply process the film to do digital prints from scans? If it was the latter, run do not walk away from that place. I find it annoying, at least, that they wouldn't just make regular prints from your negs. Also pretty disheartening if that is the state of the photo finishing industry. I rarely shoot color film, but recently I have been asked to do some for my day job. I took the film to a local CVS, and got back pretty nice 4x6 prints from my negs. If they are digital prints, there is definately an allignment problem some where.

[dehk]

If it was the latter, run do not walk away from that place.

I like your style.

[jphwx7]

I think I'll have the B&W developed then. Here's one more crop from an outside shot. The cement between the bricks pictured here is not particularly bright in person, but there is consistent fringing on each brick. This would also tend to conflict with what I've heard about CA.



Once again, the original for scale and sharpness comparison:

[jphwx7]

Alright for a real reply this time. You said you repaired a loose spring on the aperture mechanism. Let me guess that would be the spring at the mount (back of the lens), so you didn't really have to disassemble the whole thing (i am still guessing), if that's the case it shouldn't be knock out of alignment. And another thing, those type of zoom nikkor, from my experience, if you tear everything out of it, everything can pretty much go back in ONE way, or that thing wouldn't move at all, so chances of it being out of alignment is slim. I can't tell you what it is because I do not do color negs much. But what I can tell you is to borrow a DSLR and see if the problem exist, if it does, its the lens for sure. One last question, your images are not blurry and they are in focus where you want them to be correct?

The spring in question wasn't on the mount but rather on the aperture mechanism itself (where the blades are). I did in fact have to remove the mount down to the center ring around the rear lens element that has the CPU contacts on it. From there i was able to reposition the spring at the center of the lens that pulls the aperture lever on the mount. Borrowing a DSLR and testing the lens would be a great idea; I'll try to get my hands on one. As for the focusing, I haven't worked much with this camera, lens, or film before, but I consider the results satisfactory. Check out the two original images that I posted for reference to see for yourself.

Were these optical prints from you film negatives, or did the simply process the film to do digital prints from scans? If it was the latter, run do not walk away from that place. I find it annoying, at least, that they wouldn't just make regular prints from your negs. Also pretty disheartening if that is the state of the photo finishing industry. I rarely shoot color film, but recently I have been asked to do some for my day job. I took the film to a local CVS, and got back pretty nice 4x6 prints from my negs. If they are digital prints, there is definately an allignment problem some where.

I wouldn't venture to qualify Walgreens as an important part of the photo finishing industry, but I'm relatively sure they printed these from scans. Either way I know not to order prints from Walgreens next time...

[Paul Sorensen]

Getting optical prints with film development is not something I have heard of in years. Even the pro labs I have used are using Frontier machines or the like and all of the prints are from scans. The scans that they use to print are not at all high resolution, just enough to print 4x6 from, really, and if you want better scans from which to make larger prints, there will usually be an additional cost.

I am curious to see what you find on your negs, because my suspicion is still that the scanning process at the lab was to blame and that you can get good prints from the negs once you have them. Sure optical prints would be preferable, but the cost will likely be more than you wish to pay when you are getting what amount to proofs with your film developing.

[dehk]

My final thoughts on this subject, as many mentioned before, bad scan.

P.S. i hate how those machines like to digitally sharpen and all the other shxt for my prints.

[erikg]

In that additional photo it looks much more like digital artifact thing than a lens issue to me. These machines are crap. People will get stuff like that and blame the film or the camera and get talked into buying a digital rebel.

[jphwx7]

In that additional photo it looks much more like digital artifact thing than a lens issue to me. These machines are crap. People will get stuff like that and blame the film or the camera and get talked into buying a digital rebel.

Heh, it would take a lot more than that to get me to buy Canon...

Seriously though, I see where you and dehk are coming from. From what I can tell, the lines are far too consistent and sharp to be a lens issue. Take into account the older prints I have that showed no signs of this kind of artifact and I agree that it's probably a scanning or printing issue.

Thanks to everyone for the help so far, I'll be sure to get back to you as soon as I see the negatives.

[photoncatcher]

The Frontier machines are not to bad if they are maintained, but 9.5 out of 10 places that use them will not pay to have a tech look at them till they completely shut down. The CVS I went to did optical prints, and the girl who seems to be in charge of the lab actually knows what's she's doing. But I'll still stay with my B&W, and my nasty, but lovable basement DR.