Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
06-13-2018, 10:42 AM   #1
New Member




Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 15
What is wrong with this films

Hello.
Excuse for my english, it is not my native language.

I still shooting film so my question is about the problem of a few negative photos. Although it is the same type of film, from the same Kodak ColorPlus 200 lot, three different rolls and the pictures were made with the same Ricoh XR-20SP camera and Rikenon P Zoom 1:3.4-4.5 35-70mm Macro lens, but in different time periods. The first photo is taken somewhere in February, the second photo at the beginning of June, and the third one last week. Photos were scanned from film with the same scanner at the photo lab.
Film development was done at the same lab, on the same machine by the same staff. What could have been wrong? The camera was used in Program mode (auto) for all the photos on the three films. It was something wrong to develop, the process was wrong, used chemicals were used..., what do you think? Any advice or opinion is welcome, so as not to make mistakes again. The lab told me I'm wrong with camera settings.

Attached Images
View Picture EXIF
  Photo 
View Picture EXIF
  Photo 
View Picture EXIF
  Photo 
06-13-2018, 11:30 AM   #2
Senior Member
aremmes's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Philadelphia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 215
The first picture looks underexposed but otherwise OK, and the last one looks fine. The middle picture looks like bad parameter input during scanning, but should be fixable by adjusting the green channel gamma down a bit to balance things out.

Others will have better insight on this.
06-13-2018, 11:39 AM   #3
Pentaxian




Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 455
Wasn't any of the three roll of film expired? It would explain the colors and contrast of the second one.
06-13-2018, 12:03 PM   #4
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
gofour3's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 5,816
The first shot looks like what I get when I try and adjust the lighting in a scanned image, so my guess it's a scanning issue.

The second looks like either bad film or processing.

The third looks fine to me.

How do the negatives look?

Phil.

06-13-2018, 12:29 PM   #5
New Member




Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 15
Original Poster
Thank you for your answers.
QuoteOriginally posted by aremmes Quote
The first picture looks underexposed but otherwise OK, and the last one looks fine. The middle picture looks like bad parameter input during scanning, but should be fixable by adjusting the green channel gamma down a bit to balance things out.

Others will have better insight on this.
All pictures (from three rolls) was shoot in Program mode, not manual or other ISO settings.


QuoteOriginally posted by 08amczb Quote
Wasn't any of the three roll of film expired? It would explain the colors and contrast of the second one.
Nope. The rolls were the same lot and date of made, same expiry date


QuoteOriginally posted by gofour3 Quote
The first shot looks like what I get when I try and adjust the lighting in a scanned image, so my guess it's a scanning issue.

The second looks like either bad film or processing.

The third looks fine to me.

How do the negatives look?

Phil.
The second negative looks colorless, first one look good and third one looks better. I think that lab use the chemicals more than normal. When are new process is good, when are used the process is bad...

Geo.
06-13-2018, 12:49 PM   #6
Pentaxian
Alex645's Avatar

Join Date: May 2015
Location: Kaneohe, HI
Photos: Albums
Posts: 2,233
QuoteOriginally posted by lonerider41life Quote
the same Kodak ColorPlus 200 lot, three different rolls and the pictures were made in different time periods.
Photos were scanned from film with the same scanner at the photo lab.
Film development was done at the same lab, on the same machine by the same staff. What could have been wrong?
The lab told me I'm wrong with camera settings.
Can you post photos of a strip of negs from the first, second, and third roll? That will reveal if the film was expired, heat damaged, or badly processed (chemical potency or temperature or time) by the lab.

IF none of the above, then it's a bad scanner or bad scanner software setting by the lab.

C-41 processing is not hard to do, but is complicated to do it well. When I managed a photo lab, we would run tests daily that would reveal
a) Developer: replenishment rate and/or contamination, temperature, processor speed/time
b) Blix (bleach/fix): replenishment rate and/or contamination, temperature, process speed/time

And we used a high speed scanner, but its output would vary due to age of light source, age of RGB or CMY filters, profile set.
For EVERY film emulsion, we had a different color profile for optimized scanning. So depending on the lab's scanning software, it's possible #3 was correct, but #1 and #2 were set for a different film.

When we ran our daily tests, the tests were not just for normal exposures, but also for under and over exposed negs. Under and over exposed negatives require a different scanning profile to compensate for how that emulsion skews not just contrast, but also the color channels.

Color film has a red, green, and blue light sensitive layer. Each layer ages/fades differently and react differently to processing anomalies. No matter how advanced the tech being used by the lab, if the user (employee) doesn't care or doesn't know how to recognize and fix a problem, you're just going to get inconsistent results.

Post photos of your three negs from the three rolls in the same order you posted the photos. Without it, my best guess is that there were minor issues in your camera settings combined with inconsistent film processing or scanning by the lab.
06-14-2018, 08:44 AM   #7
Pentaxian
Not a Number's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 5,194
Color negatives have a orange contrast mask in acetate substrate. This varies from manufacturer and film stock. If the incorrect correction factor was set in the scanner then you could see results as in the 2nd image.
06-14-2018, 10:15 AM   #8
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
murrelet's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Portland, OR, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 320
My thoughts:

First image: the camera metered for the background so the statues in the foreground appear underexposed. In this case, the lab is (mostly) correct that the camera settings were bad
Second image: the lab is wrong; bad camera settings wouldn't get you an image like this. It's a scanner issue.
Third image: looks good. But is that dust by the little cloud at the top-right?

06-14-2018, 07:14 PM   #9
Pentaxian
disconnekt's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Riverside, CA
Posts: 763
QuoteOriginally posted by murrelet Quote
My thoughts:

First image: the camera metered for the background so the statues in the foreground appear underexposed. In this case, the lab is (mostly) correct that the camera settings were bad
Second image: the lab is wrong; bad camera settings wouldn't get you an image like this. It's a scanner issue.
Third image: looks good. But is that dust by the little cloud at the top-right?
Yeah, the second photo looks like they slapped a "painterly" type of filter over the photo
06-15-2018, 03:17 PM - 3 Likes   #10
Pentaxian
Wheatfield's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The wheatfields of Canada
Photos: Albums
Posts: 10,701
Picture 1 is exhausted bleach, picture 2 is weak developer, picture 3 looks pretty normal.
Find a new lab, this one has awful quality control.
Disclaimer: I worked in photolabs from 1978 to 2006, and was the quality control manager at various labs for 22 of those years, but have been out of the industry since then.
08-05-2018, 11:12 AM   #11
New Member




Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 15
Original Poster
What is wrong with this films

QuoteOriginally posted by murrelet Quote
My thoughts:

............................................
But is that dust by the little cloud at the top-right?
Yes, a little lint...

---------- Post added 08-05-18 at 11:22 AM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by Wheatfield Quote
............

Find a new lab, this one has awful quality control.
............
It's a little harder and too expensive to find another lab. I agreed with the lab, that when I go to process another films, those will not be processed unless they have new or good chemicals. I prefer to wait...
08-11-2018, 08:49 PM   #12
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Idaho
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 605
Can you have another lab scan and print your negatives?? That would settle the question of bad film or technique pretty fast. Since the last came out pretty well, it doesn't seem the film would be at fault (since they are all the same emulsion batch). Scanning errors could certainly cause the issues with the first two (not saying that is the cause).
08-12-2018, 08:13 PM   #13
Pentaxian
Alex645's Avatar

Join Date: May 2015
Location: Kaneohe, HI
Photos: Albums
Posts: 2,233
QuoteOriginally posted by Bob 256 Quote
Can you have another lab scan and print your negatives?? That would settle the question of bad film or technique pretty fast. Since the last came out pretty well, it doesn't seem the film would be at fault (since they are all the same emulsion batch). Scanning errors could certainly cause the issues with the first two (not saying that is the cause).
This is not a bad idea, but the problem could have been caused by how the initial lab developed the film (fresh chems, correct temp and time, etc)...or a combination of things.
08-13-2018, 08:12 AM - 1 Like   #14
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Idaho
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 605
QuoteOriginally posted by Alex645 Quote
This is not a bad idea, but the problem could have been caused by how the initial lab developed the film (fresh chems, correct temp and time, etc)...or a combination of things.
You're right - underdeveloped negatives or residual silver (weak developer or exhausted bleach) could well produce the effects shown in the first two shots. That means that those were processed in a different run than the third which appears as being pretty good. The OP said the negatives looked ok except the second negative being "colorless" which might be expected since it is primarily only one color and opposite that of the mask. It's hard to judge color negatives sometimes. His only option though is to try another scan (from a different service) or have the negatives directly printed (maybe difficult to find that kind of service nowadays) to rule out bad negatives.

Last edited by Bob 256; 08-13-2018 at 02:20 PM.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
camera, film, films, lab, photo, photography, photos
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Expired films - AGFA APX 100, Fujifilm Neopan 400 and 1600 BarneyL Film Processing, Scanning, and Darkroom 20 05-30-2018 08:05 PM
CineStill Films? butangmucat Film Processing, Scanning, and Darkroom 11 03-06-2017 01:00 PM
Kodak/Ilford/FOMAPAN films John Elger Pentax Film SLR Discussion 45 12-04-2016 09:01 AM
Nature Wrong Lens, Wrong time, Wrong…………. lukulele Post Your Photos! 4 05-08-2014 03:11 AM
Abstract Wrong camera - Wrong Lens old4570 Post Your Photos! 16 12-13-2013 07:50 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:04 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top