Better Canonet QL 17 photos and better scans

[zimster]

I went to Walgreens with my third roll of film and asked them to scan too.

Boy what a difference.

There is a fine line across each photo most noticable in the photo of my 90 year old mother. I have a Kenco 1A filter and used the lens hood for all photos.

3 questions:
What is the cause of the line?
What kind of film should I use next time for indoor photos? I couldn't find tungsten.
How do I blur the background in a portrait? I was told to use f2 or 2.4 and it didn't work.

These photos were all Walgreens 400.

Thanks, Zimster

 

[kaiyen]

I doubt that it's the film - the scanner probably has something wrong with it.

And your blurring did work - the third photo only has a depth of field of like 5' or so. That's about what you're talking about. It's a 40mm lens, which means for a bit more inherent DOF than a longer lens.

allan

 

[zimster]

Negatives don't have the line

Negatives don't have the line

Thanks. I checked the negatives and can't see the line. I have several different Walgreen's to go to next time. I'll try another store.

By the way, the camera has a 45 mm lens.

Zimster

 

[colyn]

Thanks. I checked the negatives and can't see the line. I have several different Walgreen's to go to next time. I'll try another store.

By the way, the camera has a 45 mm lens.

Zimster

I know it will cost a bit more but you should consider having your film processed at better quality labs. Everytime I let CVS, Walgreens, or other stores process my film, they do damage to the negs.

 

[kaiyen]

That's weird. I"m pretty sure my QL17 has a 40mm. Is this a different generation? QLIII vs QL?

It's all about the machine operator about the quality of the negatives and, even, the scans. You can have a careless guy at a pro lab screw up your negs, and a careful guy at the walgreens who consistently gives you great stuff.

allan

 

[nickmeertens]

That's weird. I"m pretty sure my QL17 has a 40mm. Is this a different generation? QLIII vs QL?

It's all about the machine operator about the quality of the negatives and, even, the scans. You can have a careless guy at a pro lab screw up your negs, and a careful guy at the walgreens who consistently gives you great stuff.

allan

Yes, mine has a 40mm lens and 48mm filter thread. No 45mm to be found.

 

[Wayne R. Scott]

I think that the Canonette QL 17, QL 19, and QL 25 had 45mm lens. The New Canonette QL-17, Canonette QL-17-L and the Canonette QL-17 GIII have the 40mm lens.

The depth of field on a 45mm lens is still going to be greater than a portrait type lens in the 85mm to 135mm class.

Wayne

 

[Kim Coxon]

The New Canonet QL-17 and the Canonet QL-17 GIII did have the 40mm lens but the New QL19 and QL19 GIII retained the 45mm lens and some prefer them for this reason. 😉

Kim

I think that the Canonette QL 17, QL 19, and QL 25 had 45mm lens. The New Canonette QL-17, Canonette QL-17-L and the Canonette QL-17 GIII have the 40mm lens.

The depth of field on a 45mm lens is still going to be greater than a portrait type lens in the 85mm to 135mm class.

Wayne

 

[dmr]

I know it will cost a bit more but you should consider having your film processed at better quality labs. Everytime I let CVS, Walgreens, or other stores process my film, they do damage to the negs.

Lately I've been having very good luck with Walgreens {knocking on wood} for processing. I've found a few of the stores that do a very consistently good job on a DO/CD. Yes, many of the people who operate the machines there are really not photo-savvy, but if they are properly trained (as in handle the negatives by the edges) they can deliver good results if they do their job properly.

Some of the Walgreens (around here, anyway) use the older (Kodak? Noritsu?) mini-lab machines which can't do a CD ROM. I've just made a mental note of which ones have the newer Fuji Frontier machines and which ones don't. Those (Fuji Frontier) seem to give very good results. The one Walgreens I regularly use has a very new (as in a few weeks) Frontier 550 minilab.

Back in 2003 or 2004 I did notice that some of my film was coming back with horizontal scratches on the emulsion side. I first blamed the camera, but I soon realized that the rolls I took to Wally World were not scratched and those I had sent to Target' were. I mentioned this to the "manager" of the Target photo and he (looked like late teens) seemed only casually concerned. 🙁 I haven't sent any film there since.

Last September one roll I took to Wally World came back with what appeared to be a horizontal scratch. I was upset, but when I looked closely at the negatives, this scratch appeared to be a very fine black mark, almost like a very fine felt pen, on the non-emulsion side. It came off with some H2O on a cotton ball. I think what might have happened is that a piece of something got stuck in the felt light trap of the cartridge and smeared across the film when they pulled it out to load into the mini-lab.

Because of this, I always be sure to store the exposed rolls in those little plastic canisters until I take them in.

 

[Andrew Sowerby]

It's more expensive but try using higher quality film and a better lab. These pictures seem very grainy, even for 400asa.

I was eventually able to find a drug store that made decent scans and prints for not much $$$ but it took some searching. I got a lot of sub-par results from other labs before I stumbled upon a good one. It would have cost more but I should have just went to one of the "pro" labs to begin with.

 

[dmr]

It's more expensive but try using higher quality film and a better lab. These pictures seem very grainy, even for 400asa.

This is similar to what I got with the older Walgreens/Agfa 400. The colors are fine in daylight (not very good in available light) but the grain was coarser and more evident that with the Fuji 400.

 

[colyn]

Lately I've been having very good luck with Walgreens {knocking on wood} for processing. I've found a few of the stores that do a very consistently good job on a DO/CD. Yes, many of the people who operate the machines there are really not photo-savvy, but if they are properly trained (as in handle the negatives by the edges) they can deliver good results if they do their job properly.

There's a Walgreens a few blocks from where I live. They have such a high turnover rate I'd be afraid to trust them with my film. However the store manager is very experienced in processing but seldom works in the lab. I'd let him do my film.

Some of the Walgreens (around here, anyway) use the older (Kodak? Noritsu?) mini-lab machines which can't do a CD ROM. I've just made a mental note of which ones have the newer Fuji Frontier machines and which ones don't. Those (Fuji Frontier) seem to give very good results. The one Walgreens I regularly use has a very new (as in a few weeks) Frontier 550 minilab.

This one does use the Fuji Frontier machines. Too bad they can't keep good help. I would consider using them since they are within walking distance.. Instead I use a lab close to downtown..

 

[vicmortelmans]

And your blurring did work - the third photo only has a depth of field of like 5' or so. That's about what you're talking about. It's a 40mm lens, which means for a bit more inherent DOF than a longer lens.

allan

If your camera has a depth-of-field range indication, you could do as such:
let's say the guy on your picture is at 2m away. Choose your aperture setting, e.g. f/2. On a d-o-f-indication you would now find two indications marked f/2. Set the focusing ring such that the distance of 2m matches the outer f/2-mark on the d-o-f-scale. This way, the guy will be in focus, and everything behind him will be out of focus.

Of course, the effect is not the same as on a long lens, because everything closer to you will be in focus; it's only the background that you put our of focus. And still the out-of-focus will be not as strong as on a long lens.

A pity that the Canonet doesn't have the d-o-f-scale, but if you do a search on this forum, you'll find a printable scale that you can stick on the camera yourself...

Groeten,

Vic