Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,851   Posts: 1,582,866   Online: 865
      
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 18 of 18
  1. #11

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,551
    Um, are you shooting out-of-date film? I ask because in the second shot the fence has, at least on my monitor, a magenta cast. Could be due to your lab or your scanner, though.

  2. #12
    Akki14's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    London, UK
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    1,873
    Images
    210
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Fromm View Post
    Um, are you shooting out-of-date film? I ask because in the second shot the fence has, at least on my monitor, a magenta cast. Could be due to your lab or your scanner, though.
    It doesn't have a magenta cast on my monitor or print - part of the fence is not very weathered so it looks a bit more colourful on the lefthand side than the right (right hand side gets more sunlight). I think it might be the oversaturated print scan that is making it look that way as the negative scan I did doesn't have that effect to it.
    I'm actually pretty confident that that's in-date film since it's the kodak 160NC stuff which I only remember buying an actual pack from calumet once.
    ~Heather
    oooh shiny!
    http://www.stargazy.org/

  3. #13
    Snapshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    914
    Man, I must poor detail discerning ability because I don't think there's a big problem with these pictures.
    "The secret to life is to keep your mind full and your bowels empty. Unfortunately, the converse is true for most people."

  4. #14
    Ole
    Ole is offline
    Ole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Bergen, Norway
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    9,282
    Blog Entries
    1
    Images
    31
    Comparing the print scan and the neg scan just now, I think you should have a serious word with your printer.

    The print scan shows massive "black bleed", as you get when printing a negative through a diffusing filter. Diffusion during exposure makes light areas "bleed" into darker areas; during printing it does the opposite. This can be done intentionally when the effect is wanted, but is more often a result of really grubby optics.

    For examples of intentional use see Mapplethorpe's portraits.
    -- Ole Tjugen, Luddite Elitist
    Norway

  5. #15
    Akki14's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    London, UK
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    1,873
    Images
    210
    Quote Originally Posted by Ole View Post
    Comparing the print scan and the neg scan just now, I think you should have a serious word with your printer.

    The print scan shows massive "black bleed", as you get when printing a negative through a diffusing filter. Diffusion during exposure makes light areas "bleed" into darker areas; during printing it does the opposite. This can be done intentionally when the effect is wanted, but is more often a result of really grubby optics.

    For examples of intentional use see Mapplethorpe's portraits.
    Or it's just crap digi frontier minilabs. It's not a pro-printing service. I've seen it on digiprints before (very badly done wedding photos from someone else's digicam)... I think they just whack up the contrast/saturation or something. Maybe I should look for another lab but this is the best one I've found as far as price and service and they don't destroy my negs
    ~Heather
    oooh shiny!
    http://www.stargazy.org/

  6. #16
    Ole
    Ole is offline
    Ole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Bergen, Norway
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    9,282
    Blog Entries
    1
    Images
    31
    and they don't destroy my negs
    for labs, that's recommendation enough in my book!
    -- Ole Tjugen, Luddite Elitist
    Norway

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Winnipeg, MB, Canada
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    830
    I think it's likely the minilab didn't know (or wasn't set up for) the 160NC, and so it's contrast/colour settings were set for something else for printing (incidentally, they look pretty good to me as well).

    A lot of 1-hour places aren't set up for and/or don't see much "pro" film, so they don't know the print settings specific to those films.

    Last year I brought in a roll of 400VC to a local Costco (I was in a hurry, it wasn't terribly important), and got back neutral/muted colour (which actually worked OK in the end, but it wasn't what I originally had in mind).

    I've got a couple of single-coated lenses, like the one on my Argus C3, and I'd say sometimes prints look a little "different" than more modern multi-coated lenses, but in my case that's partially because I'm trying to use Sunny 16 much of the time, so my exposures might be somewhat off.
    i can't wait to take a picture of my thumb with this beautiful camera.

    - phirehouse, after buying a camera in the classifieds

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    302
    Heather, I've seen this contrasty look from my Minox 35ML with the Color-Minotar 35mm f2.8 Lens. I've also seen this look with the 55mm f2.8 Industar 61 L/Z lens. My Argus Matchmatic C-3 is very contrasty as well. They seem to give this effect with either 100 200 or 400 ISO print films. Almost too contrasty in some situations. All are brilliant to use on overcast days, wonderful saturation.
    All the best,
    Sam

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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