Home
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

Good film vs normal ones with post processing
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Tue Nov 11, 2014 10:06 am    Post subject: Good film vs normal ones with post processing Reply with quote

Dear all,
I am about to try a more expensive color film as I wanted to have my self the experience of a more premium film.

1. Please give your suggestions what do you suggest at iso 400 or 800 range (I need very fast shutter speeds in muddy weather), Ektaria? Fujipro? that perhaps I can start with

2. I have used already kodak gold 400 and Fuji superia 200 and I have felt more happy with the Superia 200. I hoped though to have more vibrant colors. I think I can get very close to what I want with some lightroom vibrance and saturation processing... I wonder though if it really pays off to have a very good colour film but since also the better colour film would need post processing (cropping, aligning e.t.c) it does payoff to stay on the cheaper alternatives and tune as you like.

Regards
Alex


PostPosted: Tue Nov 11, 2014 11:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Alex, a good film is only as good as the lab who processes it. Any lab that has the saturation and sharpness turned up, bad colour filtration and worn out chemicals will produce results no better than a cheap film.


PostPosted: Tue Nov 11, 2014 11:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

so you say that my fuji film 200 vs Ektaria or Fuji Pro in the same lab they will not have a significant difference?

Regards
Alex


PostPosted: Tue Nov 11, 2014 12:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well a guy has taken Agfa Vista to 1200 ISO and got reasonable results. IMO you should stick to a film unless it is not giving the results you want and Fuji superia 200 is a very good all rounder.
I was doing some tests on a lens and it has a fault of only the centre being sharp and used OOD Kodak colorplus exp in 2008 bought at a boot sale for 20p...and was surprised how good the results were with just an annoying magenta cast that was difficult to get rid of without affecting other colours. So even the cheapest film can give good results at the right conditions.
What do I use? Reala (can't it get now for 35mm) and Superia 200.


supermarket dev and scan


PostPosted: Tue Nov 11, 2014 2:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

alaios wrote:
so you say that my fuji film 200 vs Ektaria or Fuji Pro in the same lab they will not have a significant difference?

Regards
Alex


In the lab that processed the film shown in this link, then there will probably be no significant difference. These have an overall magenta cast and dust spots. This is a lab using bad hygiene and overworked or old chemistry. Scanning can also mess up colours too.

http://forum.mflenses.com/my-first-color-film-is-developed-does-it-look-okay-t68784.html

A pro lab should give better results.

I use film in all my old cameras regularly and I'm happy with Vista 200 and any other film that comes my way. I am lucky that I have two shops that will dev and print within 20 minutes walk of my home.

I did use more expensive films back when I did weddings and a pro lab but to be honest the clients preferred the more vivid and contrasty colours of Kodacolor II and minilab processing than all the more expensive film and processes.

Of course colour, as someone pointed out is subjective, what is acceptable to some is not acceptable to others.

A colour film is only as good as the lab that processes it.


PostPosted: Wed Nov 12, 2014 6:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks guys....
I asked for professional scanning and I got a very "good" price.. 40 euros per film roll .......


PostPosted: Wed Nov 12, 2014 7:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi alaios

About your 40 euro good price for scanning...

I recommend you walk throughout your town and look for small/old photography shops/labs.
When I resumed shooting film about a year ago I was trying several new labs in town. Even the one which was described on various forums to be the best in town was giving me really mediocre results in scanning. At some point I was really disappointed and was wondering about 'is shooting film still possible without developing and scanning by myself' when I remembered that there was one photo lab about 3 minutes drive from my home that I remember from when I was a kid. Usually I was going there to get my passport photos done etc., but have decided to give it a try and I gave there one test-roll of photos.
It was 10zł dev + 9zł scanning (which is about 4.5 Euro in total). I ended up with v.good developed negative without scratches, spots and so on and CD full of photos with ~3000px on the wider end. Scans looked crisp, sharp, with splendid colours well in short - very very good and blown away any other scans I got. Not to mention that the price is very reasonable. It's not the cheapest I could go but certainly it is the best. I've never put any roll elsewhere, every single one is being developed and scanned there.
For any members who is living in or maybe will be visiting Szczecin (Poland) I could wholeheartedly recommend the lab, it's placed at "Aleja Wyzwolenia 84, Szczecin"

You're welcome to check out quality of scans I'm talking about on my Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/mateuszmolik/sets
All photos on film from 10.05.2014 were developed in the above mentioned lab (from Film 02 album).

I assume that your 40 euros is for the drum-scanning negatives, but seriously I couldn't even think about one roll of film I would need scanned in such a way.

Long story short - look for lab and guys that really worked with film in the golden days instead of reading about it in history books Wink.
Mateusz


PostPosted: Wed Nov 12, 2014 8:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

alaios wrote:
Thanks guys....
I asked for professional scanning and I got a very "good" price.. 40 euros per film roll .......


HUH 40 euros for scanning is outrageous, well unless you have 36 excellent winning shots, but let's face it how many shots are you going to throw away per roll of film? As a committed film user I would give 35mm up paying these prices in total......I'm sure you can somehow do it my way in finding a very good supermarket or whatever, as I pay 36 shots dev and scan to CD plus an index for 3 and any winning shots scan myself.


PostPosted: Wed Nov 12, 2014 9:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

PhantomLord wrote:
Hi alaios

About your 40 euro good price for scanning...

I recommend you walk throughout your town and look for small/old photography shops/labs.
When I resumed shooting film about a year ago I was trying several new labs in town. Even the one which was described on various forums to be the best in town was giving me really mediocre results in scanning. At some point I was really disappointed and was wondering about 'is shooting film still possible without developing and scanning by myself' when I remembered that there was one photo lab about 3 minutes drive from my home that I remember from when I was a kid. Usually I was going there to get my passport photos done etc., but have decided to give it a try and I gave there one test-roll of photos.
It was 10zł dev + 9zł scanning (which is about 4.5 Euro in total). I ended up with v.good developed negative without scratches, spots and so on and CD full of photos with ~3000px on the wider end. Scans looked crisp, sharp, with splendid colours well in short - very very good and blown away any other scans I got. Not to mention that the price is very reasonable. It's not the cheapest I could go but certainly it is the best. I've never put any roll elsewhere, every single one is being developed and scanned there.
For any members who is living in or maybe will be visiting Szczecin (Poland) I could wholeheartedly recommend the lab, it's placed at "Aleja Wyzwolenia 84, Szczecin"

You're welcome to check out quality of scans I'm talking about on my Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/mateuszmolik/sets
All photos on film from 10.05.2014 were developed in the above mentioned lab (from Film 02 album).

I assume that your 40 euros is for the drum-scanning negatives, but seriously I couldn't even think about one roll of film I would need scanned in such a way.

Long story short - look for lab and guys that really worked with film in the golden days instead of reading about it in history books Wink.
Mateusz


In England we don't have this type of shop. I know in Poland they are very common, in Lodz (my wife's home town) there must be 5 or 6 clustered round the passport office alone. I will give a couple a try when I'm next over there.

Alex lives in Germany, I suspect the situation is the same as the UK.


PostPosted: Thu Nov 13, 2014 9:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

1.I have thought a bout that many times but never did it.
I would buy affordable color film and then try to shoot same but different thinks 4-5 poses per film roll would suffice. The idea is the shot s to be as identical as possible. same focus and lighting. and then distribute those rolls to studios and ask them to give me the developed films and scans....

Then I would be able to compare

2. Second think is that I can see that many film development services on the ebay.. some of them advertise large scan files up to 18Mbs... so as they say I can keep my finest details... I wonder though what would be better my tiff scanned files or their large jpegs? What give more latitute for post processing? I plan to edit my shots in lightroom anyway... I am just thinking that since more labs would give me jpeg I would be good to go with my tiffs and my lightroom combo

Regards
Alex


PostPosted: Thu Nov 13, 2014 10:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

alaios wrote:
1.I have thought a bout that many times but never did it.
I would buy affordable color film and then try to shoot same but different thinks 4-5 poses per film roll would suffice. The idea is the shot s to be as identical as possible. same focus and lighting. and then distribute those rolls to studios and ask them to give me the developed films and scans....

Then I would be able to compare

2. Second think is that I can see that many film development services on the ebay.. some of them advertise large scan files up to 18Mbs... so as they say I can keep my finest details... I wonder though what would be better my tiff scanned files or their large jpegs? What give more latitute for post processing? I plan to edit my shots in lightroom anyway... I am just thinking that since more labs would give me jpeg I would be good to go with my tiffs and my lightroom combo

Regards
Alex


Well you can play\test different films and it can be enjoyable...but to me you seem to be making film photography complicated. The easiest way to test a film is over time and enjoy taking shots and after say so many months, change the film and do the same until you find a film that you like.


PostPosted: Thu Nov 13, 2014 2:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

1. I meant to compare developments and scanning. I am happy with film. I am not happy with my scanner... Buying a very expensive one is not a choice....

Alex


PostPosted: Thu Nov 13, 2014 10:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

alaios wrote:
1. I meant to compare developments and scanning. I am happy with film. I am not happy with my scanner... Buying a very expensive one is not a choice....

Alex


Well if you want A3 prints from 35mm film using a flatbed scanner it wouldn't be the best way. Wink


PostPosted: Tue Nov 18, 2014 7:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi guys,

regarding the scanning... with my flatbed scanner I was trying to understand if scratches and other marks are part that I would have to be used to it, with whatever scanning tool, or it is something that are created from my poor flatbed scanner.

Regards

Alex

P.S How we fix marks and spots of film in lightroom and photoshop?


PostPosted: Tue Nov 18, 2014 11:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Scratches and marks (bits stuck to neg during drying) are usually bad handling of the negs.
Before scanning I usually wipe the neg and glass with a clean cotton handkerchief and just before actual scanning use a rocket blower on glass and neg, but for me there is always some spot on the jpg after scanning and I just touch up with Photoshop.


PostPosted: Wed Nov 19, 2014 9:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

To touch up a spot in Photoshop the healing brush tool is easiest it averages out all the colours around the spot and does a good job.
Healing brush tool is circled in red. you can change the size of the brush using the square brackets [ and ]. Just a dab will do it. to correct a hair move the tool along it. there are a few options about background fill. If there is a textured pattern click on 'create texture' in the tool bar,



PostPosted: Wed Nov 19, 2014 7:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi,
I had very good results with the lightroom.. I have a very careful workflow with my slides.. As you have suggested me in earlier posts I am using disposable gloves and a blower to send dust away from scanner.

I am mostly dissapointed from the permanent markets my scanners glass have.

OTherwise is very nice process
Alex