Kodak Ultramax 400 - Green and Murky

Discussion in 'Film Discussion and Q & A' started by Mondrian's Dream, Sep 24, 2018.

  1. Mondrian's Dream

    Mondrian's Dream TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2018
    Messages:
    6
    Likes Received:
    1
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    I've recently invested in a Canon EOS 50e film camera. I shot through my first roll of (fresh) Kodak Ultramax 400 on aperture priority, not using any exposure compensation, and got them developed and scanned by a third party. I'm disappointed with how my images (see below) have come out. They seem to have a definite green hue and feel overwhelmingly murky.

    What has gone wrong here? Have I underexposed the images? Any help or guidance would be greatly appreciated.

    13090016.JPG 13090020.JPG 13090003.JPG


     
  2. webestang64

    webestang64 Been spending a lot of time on here!

    Joined:
    May 15, 2013
    Messages:
    1,848
    Likes Received:
    918
    Location:
    St. Louis, MO. USA
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    Your negs must be thin? Those look like scans from very underexposed film. 2-3 stops under. The lab should have compensated for that during the scan but most labs (not the one I work in) just run the film through their scanner on auto with no input from the lab tech.
    You might need to have the camera meter checked. I shoot all my color (C-41) film with a tad of overexposure. 400 I rate at 320.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  3. jcdeboever

    jcdeboever TPF Supporters Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2015
    Messages:
    18,572
    Likes Received:
    13,548
    Location:
    Michigan
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    crap scans
     
  4. dxqcanada

    dxqcanada Been spending a lot of time on here!

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2008
    Messages:
    7,385
    Likes Received:
    1,447
    Location:
    Woodbridge, Ontario, Canada
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    Can you show us how the developed film looks?
     
  5. compur

    compur Been spending a lot of time on here!

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2008
    Messages:
    3,785
    Likes Received:
    808
    Location:
    L.A.
    They do look underexposed. Was ISO manually set or set via DX?
     
  6. Derrel

    Derrel Mr. Rain Cloud

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2009
    Messages:
    48,229
    Likes Received:
    18,849
    Location:
    USA
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    Looks like bad in-camera exposures to me. I suspect under-exposure in the field, either due to Exposure Compensation being set on the camera to Minus, or incorrect film ISO setting, either due to user error or forgetfulness,or perhaps some type of DX-indexing error if the camera sets the film ISO level automatically off of the DX-coded cassette's bar-code markings.
     
  7. 480sparky

    480sparky Chief Free Electron Relocator Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2011
    Messages:
    24,384
    Likes Received:
    8,710
    Location:
    Iowa
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    Yep. Underexposed. A quick look at the negs should confirm this.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  8. Mondrian's Dream

    Mondrian's Dream TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2018
    Messages:
    6
    Likes Received:
    1
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    So having looked at the negatives, they definitely look thin. My camera seems to be setting the ISO correctly. Additionally, comparing the light meter to my DSLR, my 5oe seems to meter the same in even lighting and underexpose by about a stop in trickier lighting conditions (both were set to evaluative metering). There is no exposure compensation set.

    Should I set the exposure compensation to overexpose by a couple of stops? Is that the easiest way around this?
     
  9. jcdeboever

    jcdeboever TPF Supporters Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2015
    Messages:
    18,572
    Likes Received:
    13,548
    Location:
    Michigan
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    I usually over expose, known good color film by 1 stop. 2 for suspect color film. I've never had an issue with a 2 stop increase even on known, good film. There always seems to be enough latitude on C41 color film. Here's something to consider, that film is widely avaible in CVS, Walgreens, etc, here in Michigan. Lord knows how it is stored prior to hitting the shelf. I'd probably give it a 2 stop bump in exposure
     
    • Like Like x 1
  10. cgw

    cgw No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2013
    Messages:
    1,898
    Likes Received:
    476
    Location:
    Toronto
    $hitty C-41 processing is easy to find now. Try another lab that seems to have some traffic. Probably the easiest variable to eliminate.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  11. bhop

    bhop No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2007
    Messages:
    2,303
    Likes Received:
    327
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    Yes, just crappy scans. Easily fixed in photoshop though. I just pressed shift+command+L (mac) and let it do auto levels..here's the result. Screen Shot 2018-10-03 at 3.26.36 PM copy.jpg Screen Shot 2018-10-03 at 3.26.56 PM copy.jpg
     
  12. dxqcanada

    dxqcanada Been spending a lot of time on here!

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2008
    Messages:
    7,385
    Likes Received:
    1,447
    Location:
    Woodbridge, Ontario, Canada
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit


    Hmm, there appears to be detail in the negs.
     

Share This Page

Search tags for this page
how to meter kodak ultramax 400
,

kodak ultramax 400

,
kodak ultramax 400 overexposed
,
kodak ultramax 400 underexposed
,
kodak ultramax 400 wrong dx
,
light meter for ultramax 400
,
overexposing kodak ultramax 400
,
ultramax400 overexpose