Why does my most recently developed roll look so bad?

Discussion in 'Film Discussion and Q & A' started by meg_marie, Nov 7, 2018.

  1. dxqcanada

    dxqcanada Been spending a lot of time on here!

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2008
    Messages:
    6,822
    Likes Received:
    1,174
    Location:
    Woodbridge, Ontario, Canada
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    If you have an iPad you can use an App called Lightbox to place your negs on.
    Looking at your negatives, it does not look like a chemistry issue ... more towards camera metering exposure incorrectly ??


     
  2. Derrel

    Derrel Mr. Rain Cloud

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2009
    Messages:
    42,864
    Likes Received:
    16,331
    Location:
    USA
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    I tend to agree with this: looks to me like some of the exposures are significantly "off".
     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. webestang64

    webestang64 Been spending a lot of time on here!

    Joined:
    May 15, 2013
    Messages:
    1,430
    Likes Received:
    696
    Location:
    St. Louis, MO. USA
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    This clearly shows that you do have shots that are under-exposed. Other than that the film looks fine. But the lab did not do a good job of scanning IMO.
     
  4. alpreston

    alpreston TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2012
    Messages:
    2
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Calgary, Alberta, Canada
    To me, the fogging looks uneven, being more pronounced toward the ends of the images, and less in the centre. That tells me that it is NOT a processing error. Nor does it look like background radiation fog - which would also give an overall grainy appearance.
    Several of the negatives are underexposed, which does make them difficult to scan - and there is noticeable dust on them which indicates poor scanning technique and/or equipment.
    An observation: many of the images are back-lit. (Note that the window behind the cat, the street light, and several of the other backgrounds are overexposed, but the foregrounds are underexposed). It looks like the meter is favouring the background. Check to see if the camera has a spot-metering or centre-weighted option - in most of these images, metering off the primary subject will give a better exposure. (One of the reasons I keep a handheld incident-light meter in my camera bag!).
    BTW, the blue tint in the last photo of the young woman is a lighting issue - she's standing in a shaded area lit by blue sky rather than direct sunlight.
    To put my remarks in context, I should mention that I started processing my own B&W film and prints in 1961, hand processing colour prints in 1966, and slide film (Kodak E3 and Agfa P45, also by hand) in 1971/72 (as part of my Photographic Technology studies), and worked in the photolab industry most of my working life.
     
  5. alpreston

    alpreston TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2012
    Messages:
    2
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Calgary, Alberta, Canada


    Chemical (and radiation) issues also show up in the rebate area - the area outside the image frame. That's one of the reasons the various markings, other than the numbers and arrows, are on the edge of the film.
     

Share This Page