Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,498   Posts: 1,543,097   Online: 1081
      
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 31
  1. #11

    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Mission Viejo, California
    Shooter
    127 Format
    Posts
    1,462
    First pic looks like camera has light leaks. May require attention. Probably needs new door seals (usually foam rubber in those days)

  2. #12

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Aurora, IL
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,954
    How big is your print? If it is 4x6 then there are no more than 2MP in the picture. The print also loses a lot of information that is in the negative. It seems also that the first shot was out of focus and was underexposed (although it looks light). Scan from a 4x6 print is never be as good as picture from a 3MP camera.

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    aberystwyth west wales uk
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    120
    they are 6x4 but still i would expect better images
    the film was new and fresh im trying kodak color plus asa 200 right now

    ok here are some pics i shot just now with webcam









    Last edited by cyberspider; 03-23-2010 at 02:21 AM. Click to view previous post history. Reason: added photos
    Leave nothing but footprints.Kill nothing but time.

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Mission Viejo, California
    Shooter
    127 Format
    Posts
    1,462
    It appears that there are foam bits stuck to the edges of your film door. That looks like deteriorated light seals. It's very common for any camera over 20 years old.

    Try to tape up the edges with some black masking tape for the remainder of this roll and see if it helps.

    You can get resealing foam kits on ebay for about 10 or 15 dollars.

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    aberystwyth west wales uk
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    120
    great i shot two rolls in that camera still to be developed
    Leave nothing but footprints.Kill nothing but time.

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    UK
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    409
    Looks like you are using crappy Jessops diamond film......that doesn't help to get the best pictures.

  7. #17
    tiberiustibz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Tufts University
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,750
    Images
    5
    Get the negatives optically printed and you'll be surprised the difference it makes. You can also try a film like Ektar 100.

    Edit: the camera itself does not influence the quality of the final picture (with the exception of light leaks and scratches.) Only the lens has an effect.
    Last edited by tiberiustibz; 03-23-2010 at 02:14 PM. Click to view previous post history.
    --Nicholas Andre

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Cape Canaveral, FL
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    98
    Images
    8
    A number possibilities:

    1. A lot of mini-labs make lousy prints. Between old chemistry and operators who don't care, the results can be awful. Bring your negatives to another lab and bring one of your bad prints. Ask if they can do better. You may have to shop around to find a lab (and even an individual who works at the lab) who gives a darn. You may have to pay more for quality & experience.

    2. A lot of mini-labs make lousy negatives. While it less common to mess up the developing machinery, it's not unheard of. But if you shop around, again you might find a lab who cares. (Scratches and dust are more common problems.)

    3. Light leaks as mentioned. This may not affect all exposures equally. The ones that spent the least time in the leak area (e.g. end of the roll where you rewound shortly afterwards) might still be OK.

    4. Take more control by developing, printing (or - gasp - scanning) your negatives yourself. If you can't find a lab you can trust, then learn to do it yourself. Details of scanning are off-topic (see hybridphoto.com) but every step you do yourself means you know exactly how well (or poorly) it will be done.

  9. #19
    jbbooks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    173
    Concentrate on the Pentax, for now. Get a tripod and a cable release. Find out where you can get some fresh Ektachrome 100 or Fuji Provia 100F and get it processed (just developed, not cut and mounted). Quit trying to take landscapes. Take something reasonably close without any sky in it, preferably with lots of detail like a street scene.

    I think you have light leaks in the Minolta and, probably, exposure issues. These are aggravated by trying to take pictures that appear to involve a lot of atmospheric haze and exceeding the film's exposure latitude by trying to combine sky and terrain using an averaged meter reading and no compensation.

    Your Minolta has a fresnel focusing screen in the center for fine focusing and it should be clear when you are focusing on your subject. It also has a split image which should be aligned to indicate proper focusing. I am not familiar with the Pentax, but, hopefully, it is similar. Use a tripod and a cable release to allow you to focus precisely and not disturb the camera when you release the shutter. Bracket the shots to give the same aperture and three different shutter speeds for each, one at the metered speed, one one stop slower and another one stop faster.

    If you cannot use slide film, use black and white. Use C-41 process B&W film if that is all you can get processed, but leave the color negative film alone for now. What you want to do is eliminate as many processing problems as possible and make any such problems as obvious as possible. Slide film is better for this because the exposure latitude is narrower, the color and contrast are not subject to problems in printing and metering errors show up faster. However, trying to take the kinds of photographs you are now with slide film and no compensation will just aggravate your problems.

    If you can, get a light meter that reads incident light. If there is a large difference between it and what your camera is reading, use the incident reading to set the aperture and shutter speed manually for the exposure. Last, keep the light behind you--no shooting into the sun.

  10. #20
    jamesgignac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Beijing, China
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    281
    Images
    8
    cyberspider - I'm interested in seeing the results from your new rolls - make sure to keep us posted. I just started out with this myself not that long ago and yes there is a lot to learn and there can be a few essential purchases to make at the beginning (I purchased my Epson v500 negative scanner for MF film before I purchased my first MF camera.) Just remember: Photography is a BIG world and it's your mission to find what you enjoy most about it and what it can do for you as a business. Don't be unrealistic but please keep your hopes up - your results will come around in time as long as you have the interest and determination to stick with it.

    Thanks again for the update!
    -dereck|james|gignac
    dereckjamesgignac.com

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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