Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,010   Posts: 1,524,630   Online: 1004
      
Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 31
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    aberystwyth west wales uk
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    120

    ok new question why is the image quality

    from my film camera both x-700 and pentax p30t
    not as good as my now busted 3 mp other format
    this is a scan from a print i just run off of a photo taken with x-700
    i would of thought that a 35mm would be very nice
    but i could be letting my camera down lol
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails minolta x-700 2010.JPG  
    Leave nothing but footprints.Kill nothing but time.

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    5,686
    That indeed looks terrible.
    Hard to say why, but it's probably indeed something you do.
    Seriously, this is not what you should be getting. So unless something is wrong with the camera, lens or film (or all three), it is you, or whoever else processes the stuff such that this is the final result.

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    aberystwyth west wales uk
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    120
    sadly i think its me as the film from the pentax is no better
    here
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails pentax.jpg  
    Leave nothing but footprints.Kill nothing but time.

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    florida
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,156
    Images
    2
    Have you used or tried fresh film? Was the film old or exposed to high heat? Have you tried a different processor?

  5. #5
    MartinCrabtree's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Back in the hills
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    639
    Images
    2
    More details.Filter?Film Type?Clean Glass?The colors appear flat and washed out.And it looks like you may have gotten your finger in the way on the Pentax pic.What altitude were these taken?

  6. #6
    mjs
    mjs is offline

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Elkhart, Indiana (USA)
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,105
    Images
    2
    There are too many variables to just pop up a photo and ask, 'what's wrong with this picture.' You need to work systematically to eliminate variables. Most likely, there isn't one cause but an accumulation of causes. Try this:

    - Is there a camera store in your area? If not, guess at which store sells the most film. In either case, ask the clerk what print film they sell the most of and buy a couple of rolls. This way you're sure it's fresh film, not something that's been sitting on a hot, humid shelf for five years.
    - Take the camera outdoors on a calm day and put it on a tripod. Focus carefully on something about six feet away and carefully release the shutter. Do the same thing with a subject far away. Write down the frame number and details of the shot for every shot on this roll of film.
    - Shoot the roll, part on a cloudy, calm day, part on a sunny, calm day. Use a shutter release cable if you have one, use a tripod for at least most of the photos. You can take the last 1/4 roll hand-held if you want, just to see the difference. Try to take the same pictures as you did with a tripod, so you can see the difference. Can't see a difference between a hand-held photo and one made on a tripod? Enlarge it! You ought to be able to see the difference at 8x10.
    - Do you have different lenses? If so, try a couple of photos with each lens, in each case close-up and distant. There will be differences between lenses, most likely, but they'll probably be subtle differences.
    - Take the film back for processing to the same place you got it, if possible. If they sell a lot of it and process it themselves, you have at least some chance of the technician having some idea how to do it.
    - Take a look at your prints. Do you see any differences? Can you ascribe differences to the film, the tripod, the cable release, the processing? You have a lot of pictures taken under different conditions. Try to puzzle out which technique produced which result, until you think you 'get' it.

    You have another roll of film. Take it out and, using the technique you think works for you based on that first roll, shoot the roll and have it processed. Are the results consistent and as you expected, based on the results from your first roll? If yes then congratulations, you now know one thing that works. Finding others is up to you! There will be many; finding the first is basically a confidence builder, plus proof that your equipment works.

    At first, you'll likely want your pictures to look like the pictures you see every day. That's fine, that's normal. If you keep at it and let yourself experiment you'll find that there are lots of ways to make a picture 'look'. The more you experiment and allow your pictures to look different, the more often you'll stumble over things that you like but didn't consciously think of before. Remember that most experiments are failures and try to learn from them. Don't be too swayed by comments from friends and family: some of them will like what you like and some won't. It's that way for everyone.

    There are lots of ways of accomplishing this same thing; some take more film and time, some take less. This one works for me and the folks I try to teach because it's flexible and you get to take 'real' pictures (i.e., things you want to take pictures of,) as part of it. It beats the heck out of photographing newspapers taped to a brick wall between the hours of 12:00 noon to 12:30 noon inclusive, etc. I hope it works for you!

    Mike
    Life should not be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside in a cloud of smoke, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming– “Wow! What a Ride!”

    — Hunter S. Thompson

  7. #7
    Jon Shiu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Elk, California
    Shooter
    Plastic Cameras
    Posts
    2,489
    Images
    33
    Well one thing is that the photos were not printed dark enough.

    Jon
    Mendocino Coast Black and White Photography: www.jonshiu.com

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    aberystwyth west wales uk
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    120
    yes im thinking as was said in one of my other topics that i need to try another place as jessops only really want to talk to you if your digital

    ask about film and you would think i just run over his puppy or asked him a question on quantum physics as this look of terror comes over his face

    and then this is followed by puffs of smoke from his ears

    he said "cameras dont take film they take flash cards" and im not joking

    i saved a link someone gave me to another place ill send the next roll off
    to them and see whats what
    Leave nothing but footprints.Kill nothing but time.

  9. #9
    Mats_A's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Finland
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    571
    Images
    10
    The first picture looks like there is noise in it. Is it the scanner or does the print also have these?

    r
    Digital is for communication, film is for documentation.


    http://www.flickr.com/photos/studiopirilo

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    aberystwyth west wales uk
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    120
    print has grain but scanner has not helped it im looking for a new scanner now
    but im trying to start my own biz so cash is at a altime low

    not that its at a high in the uk im hoping at some point to emigrate to usa to be with my girlfriend
    Leave nothing but footprints.Kill nothing but time.

Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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