Green hue & grainy

[eyebidder]

Just got these back from the lab. Taken with Hasselblad 500CM/80mm 2.8 on Fujicolor PRO 400H daylight. First time this has happened for this film. Any thoughts on why this result? Thank you.

 

[Ysarex]

Couple things: Thin negs (underexposed). Lens flare in the bridge photo. Poor quality scans.

Joe

 

[webestang64]

Poor quality scans.

Agreed, I scan film all day long and these scans look terrible. But then again I need to see the negs. Are they thin? Shame scans never show films true potential.

 

[MartinCrabtree]

What are you metering with?

 

[dxqcanada]

Hmm, is that a scan from the print or direct from the neg ?
I agree ... looks under exposed.

 

[eyebidder]

What are you metering with?

a meter on the Hasselblad winder knob with EV numbers....

 

[eyebidder]

Hmm, is that a scan from the print or direct from the neg ?
I agree ... looks under exposed.

scan from the negative...the lab did a lousy job

 

[Ysarex]

What are you metering with?

a meter on the Hasselblad winder knob with EV numbers....

That's an old selenium cell meter. When it was new I wouldn't have relied on it. It must be 40 years old by now. Regardless of how well or not the lab did with the scans you've got underexposed film. In the third image you posted you have approx. normal brightness in the image and yet the film base registers a value of 50 on a luminosity histogram -- film base should be much much darker -- clear indication of underexposure.

Joe

 

[webestang64]

Underexposed or not as a lab tech myself I would have compensated for the underexposure. It's my job and the right scanner/software can make a 2-3 stop underexposed C-41 neg come back to life.

 

[cgw]

With respect, get a real meter. Preferably a newer, solid incident model or an incident/spot model if you're flush. Sekonic and Gossen are brands worth researching. Current film and processing costs IMHO make using old meters a false economy. Too many seem to equate a "working" meter with an "accurate" meter. Ain't necessarily so.

 

[Dave Colangelo]

As everyone has mentioned a known good, new, working, calibrated meter is key here. The selenium ones are all over the place, you may be lucky and it works fine or it may be right sometimes and off others. The other thing on that front is to have your lens overhauled or at least check your shutter speeds to know if any further compensation needs to be applied. Some 'blads out there were used by pros, overhauled often and are in good shape. Others may have sat on a shelf for years in a hot attic allowing the oil to slowly gum up, this generally slows the shutter down. There are a dwindling number of people that will touch this kind of stuff but David Odess is the go to guru and worth every penny IMO.

 

[MartinCrabtree]

I have a Weston Master III that is 1/3 stop away from my Nikon in-camera meter. And giving that you take 1/3 stop away from box speed for Weston meters it's dead nuts.