FILM + DIGITAL = PISSED

[gsga]

hmm. wow. i have to call them and get the low down. go in and show them my prints...

 

[Battou]

that's what i would think! if anything, they would have the BEST scanners and printing system... this co has been around forever and does a great business... so i was suprised. maybe it was a trainee that scanned them. (maybe it was my newly hired friend hahaha).

and yeah, even scanning prints at home 1200dpi... takes a million years.

I would have to say you ended up with a noobie my self, I use a lack luster lab and yet never see this ( I see every other error possible but that is beside the point).

I scan my negs at home for digital display, scanning at 2710dpi takes but a few seconds for me....what preytell are you using???

*EDIT*
Scratch that, I misread your scanning comment, I saw prints and read negs lol

 

[nealjpage]

And ask them if they know of any labs that still do optical enlargements. I don't think you can beat the old fashioned way of doing things.

 

[Jeff Canes]

I think laser light jet printers are the most commonly used machines today at less in my part of the US. And they usually have a scanner as past of the setup. But not sure if it is drum scanner.

 

[Flash Harry]

Prints 5 x 3 and pixellated, I reckon they've been improperly scanned by some div they just took on, take them back n kick up. H

 

[OverlordXenu]

And ask them if they know of any labs that still do optical enlargements. I don't think you can beat the old fashioned way of doing things.

I would love to find a lab like that. Anyone know of one where you can mail in slides and they'll do prints? What about huge wall-sized blow-ups?

 

[Irminsul]

I recently had a batch developed and printec by the Kodak services offered via a BJ's in West Kendall (Miami), Florida. Not only were the images sh***y, at least one of the images came out inverted! I don't know how they managed that! A park sign that should read "nature trail" actually read "liart erutan" instead. I took the negatives to a more professional place (Wolf's) and had them correctly developed, then took both batches back to BJ's and demanded a refund for the lousy job done by the Kodak services. This is the first time something remotely like this has happened to me. Must be a sign of the times. :x

 

[gsga]

thanks everyone for your input... haven't gotten there yet. more pressing things to do... but i'll post the results

battou- a crap scanner! hahaha. its a cheap flatbed. i don't have the ability to scan negs. really. (but i still throw em on there if i want to design something in pshop and i don't care about the orig pic haha)

nealp- true. gotta find someone that goes to art school and has access to the color darkroom. my old school ID doesn't cut it anymore there

flash- school me on the words DIV and KICK UP i'm american, we're not so good at the English language, lol

irminsul- that... is nuts! were the colors inverted, like a neg?! or just the image (mirrored)? maybe somebody hit Apple I instead of Apple S hahaha. that type of stuff blows your mind.

 

[selmerdave]

They should have drum scanners, you cannot get better by scanning at home.

I suspect it is the printing ... just complain and tell them what you got is not acceptable.

Drum scans are (in this city anyway) typically $35-$70 per frame, so I doubt they are doing that for general printing.

I would second the OP complaint, even though the quality is often "acceptable" I find it very frustrating to get digital artifacts in a print from film. I've had the same results from Adorama, Duggal and other pro labs. The only option is to get a custom optical print done, which BTW most pro places cannot/will not do with positive film.

Dave

 

[Helen B]

...

I would second the OP complaint, even though the quality is often "acceptable" I find it very frustrating to get digital artifacts in a print from film. I've had the same results from Adorama, Duggal and other pro labs. The only option is to get a custom optical print done, which BTW most pro places cannot/will not do with positive film.

Dave

You should be able to get digital prints from scanned film that show no digital artefacts whatsoever.

Best,
Helen

 

[selmerdave]

Hi Helen,

That's what I think too, but thus far my experience does not back that up. As I said I am being picky and I'm not saying that they are bad prints or that most people would notice the digital artifacts, but they are there and I find that annoying. I don't doubt people's accounts of getting better, but if I can't get it with a $45 8x10 I'm not exactly sure what it takes to get it. In this case, I'm speaking of a print from transparency, for B&W or neg I would get an optical print made.

Dave

 

[Alpha]

Last month I took a few rolls of 120 color neg (Fuji 160C if it matters) to my trusted local lab. All I wanted was contact sheets. Turns out the RA4 processor had died so I couldn't get a traditional contact sheet. They offered "digital" contact sheets, i.e. scan and laser RA4 print from their Noritsu. The images were pixelated. I repeat, the contact sheet was pixelated. I was flabbergasted.

 

[Helen B]

Hi Helen,

That's what I think too, but thus far my experience does not back that up. As I said I am being picky and I'm not saying that they are bad prints or that most people would notice the digital artifacts, but they are there and I find that annoying. I don't doubt people's accounts of getting better, but if I can't get it with a $45 8x10 I'm not exactly sure what it takes to get it. In this case, I'm speaking of a print from transparency, for B&W or neg I would get an optical print made.

What sort of digital artifacts are you seeing? When you say a $45 8x10, how was it originated and how was it printed? If you want, I can show you or send you a 20 x 30 that was scanned from a 35 mm Kodachrome slide and digitally printed, all for less than $45 in total, and you can judge whether or not it shows digital artifacts.

Best,
Helen

 

[Alex_B]

Last month I took a few rolls of 120 color neg (Fuji 160C if it matters) to my trusted local lab. All I wanted was contact sheets. Turns out the RA4 processor had died so I couldn't get a traditional contact sheet. They offered "digital" contact sheets, i.e. scan and laser RA4 print from their Noritsu. The images were pixelated. I repeat, the contact sheet was pixelated. I was flabbergasted.

they should not be pixelated.

with 120 the resolution of even lower-end scanners is high enough to produce non-pixelated images even with some magnification.

Also today's printers are good enough.

so it must have been a problem of the people operating all this. maybe even the software.

 

[Alpha]

Of course they shouldn't be pixelated. That's one reason why I like working with local labs/printers. If they screw up, it's much easier to deny payment.

Once I dropped a few rolls off at a different lab. I asked for contact sheets of each. One of them I had accidentally mis-set my shutter speed and so there was shutter drag on the whole roll. They printed the contact sheet anyway and then charged me for it. So I laughed at them.