fototaco
Member
I tried to use the picture manager, but it didn't work. Links to reddit posts down below
I'm new to negative film. 3 rolls in to be exact. First roll i shot - super satisfied, some great shots and some to learn a real deal from. But no rashes that I can see. I switched the lab that developed my next two rolls.
The next two rolls rolls, not so good. It seems rather contagious since both rolls have the same problem - so I'm seeking help from you experienced photography doctors. Could anyone help me make a diagnosis. I asked the lab (not the microbiology lab, the darkroom guys), they told me OK there are some dust, we can scan your pictures again for free. And they also told me the other rash-marks were my cameras fault. "Sand and dirt in the back". Like lumbago. My problem? Developing problem? Camera faulty?
And there is one picture that is rather amputated. Can someone tell me how to avoid this?
https://www.reddit.com/r/analog/com...nge_in_the/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x
https://www.reddit.com/r/analog/com..._scan_have/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x
https://www.reddit.com/r/analog/com...portra_400/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x
https://www.reddit.com/r/analog/com...portra_400/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x
I'm new to negative film. 3 rolls in to be exact. First roll i shot - super satisfied, some great shots and some to learn a real deal from. But no rashes that I can see. I switched the lab that developed my next two rolls.
The next two rolls rolls, not so good. It seems rather contagious since both rolls have the same problem - so I'm seeking help from you experienced photography doctors. Could anyone help me make a diagnosis. I asked the lab (not the microbiology lab, the darkroom guys), they told me OK there are some dust, we can scan your pictures again for free. And they also told me the other rash-marks were my cameras fault. "Sand and dirt in the back". Like lumbago. My problem? Developing problem? Camera faulty?
And there is one picture that is rather amputated. Can someone tell me how to avoid this?
https://www.reddit.com/r/analog/com...nge_in_the/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x
https://www.reddit.com/r/analog/com..._scan_have/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x
https://www.reddit.com/r/analog/com...portra_400/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x
https://www.reddit.com/r/analog/com...portra_400/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
Looks like dirt on the film when it was scanned. Cleaning the negs should fix it if that's what it is. Look at the film. is it dusty or are the marks you see actually in the image?
TenEleven
Well-known
It looks like you have 2 issues.
1. The machine the lab used has dirty rollers. This causes the horizontal scratches/stains on the negative. They appear white because they are opaque in real life and the negative obviously gets inverted.
2. The last image has a lot of dust. It appears white for the same reason. That's however not uncommon. It's however a lot of it. Near impossible to say who's the culprit here. Could be the handling of the negatives, always put them back into the sleeve when not needed. Don't use the paper sleeves some labs still hand out. Use gloves to handle, use a dust blower before scanning.
(3. Since you appear to be "scanning" with a digital camera that means it doesn't have ICE automatic dust removal. A dedicated film-scanner or flatbed-scanner can usually mask out the smaller specs of dust for you.)
1. The machine the lab used has dirty rollers. This causes the horizontal scratches/stains on the negative. They appear white because they are opaque in real life and the negative obviously gets inverted.
2. The last image has a lot of dust. It appears white for the same reason. That's however not uncommon. It's however a lot of it. Near impossible to say who's the culprit here. Could be the handling of the negatives, always put them back into the sleeve when not needed. Don't use the paper sleeves some labs still hand out. Use gloves to handle, use a dust blower before scanning.
(3. Since you appear to be "scanning" with a digital camera that means it doesn't have ICE automatic dust removal. A dedicated film-scanner or flatbed-scanner can usually mask out the smaller specs of dust for you.)
Dan Daniel
Well-known
First, if there is sand and dirt in your camera, the dots will show up as black. The dirt will prevent light from hitting the film, and when reversed to a positive it will register as black.
This is not an encouraging comment as to the knowledge or honesty of the new lab.
The black areas around many of the white dots are artifacts from digital sharpening. Most likely introduced b their scan system. Sharpening is a basic requirement for digital files, but if applied excessively or incompetently you will get strong edge effects like your negatives show.
That sure looks like dust to me. Either dirty water used in the film developing, dusty drying location, or dusty scanner (I don't know enough about color film processing to say your film looks like dirty chemicals or not; maybe someone else can speak to that).
I would take a magnifying glass to the emulsion side of your film. See if any mark in the file is matched by a visible dust dot on the film. If so, take something soft like a cotton swab and see if you can lightly move the dust.
If you are lucky, it is a dried but dusty negative or a dirty scanner. Unlucky, and the dirt is embedded in the emulsion (either from dirt in the chemicals or dirt in the air getting on the wet film).
This is not an encouraging comment as to the knowledge or honesty of the new lab.
The black areas around many of the white dots are artifacts from digital sharpening. Most likely introduced b their scan system. Sharpening is a basic requirement for digital files, but if applied excessively or incompetently you will get strong edge effects like your negatives show.
That sure looks like dust to me. Either dirty water used in the film developing, dusty drying location, or dusty scanner (I don't know enough about color film processing to say your film looks like dirty chemicals or not; maybe someone else can speak to that).
I would take a magnifying glass to the emulsion side of your film. See if any mark in the file is matched by a visible dust dot on the film. If so, take something soft like a cotton swab and see if you can lightly move the dust.
If you are lucky, it is a dried but dusty negative or a dirty scanner. Unlucky, and the dirt is embedded in the emulsion (either from dirt in the chemicals or dirt in the air getting on the wet film).
davidnewtonguitars
Family Snaps
Looks like dirty processing equipment. No one ever wants to name the lab that they used. That is an important fact because others who use the same lab can have the same result and corroborate your story, or minimize it.
I had ugly results using a newly set up operation in the northeast US, who bought out a midwest lab and moved the equipment and apparently ran with worn out chemical to save start up cost. They must have seen the light and finally got going again after some much needed maintenance.
I had ugly results using a newly set up operation in the northeast US, who bought out a midwest lab and moved the equipment and apparently ran with worn out chemical to save start up cost. They must have seen the light and finally got going again after some much needed maintenance.
fototaco
Member
thanks a lot for the feedback! It is very helpful, and motivating knowing it may be fixed and I’m not in need of a new camera.
I tried to take a look at the negatives. To me there is obviously dust. I don’t know what lab “film rollers” are, but I can imagine that it is correct what is written above (@teneleven) that they might have caused the scratches/stains that is pretty obvious when shining a light on the negative. There are some easy recognisable ones that show up in pictures of the negative below, but also faint scratches that is running along the whole film roll. Also there is in the negative corresponding to link 1 and 2 a some water-like stain on the negative.
thanks a lot for your time!
i tried to that pictures of this:
https://www.reddit.com/user/fototaco/comments/f1r5x2/negative_1/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x
https://www.reddit.com/user/fototaco/comments/f1r64q/negative_2/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x
"negative 2" is negative from the scanned pictures in link 1 and 2 in the original post
"negative 1" is negative from scanned picture with censoring (the camera emoji)
I tried to take a look at the negatives. To me there is obviously dust. I don’t know what lab “film rollers” are, but I can imagine that it is correct what is written above (@teneleven) that they might have caused the scratches/stains that is pretty obvious when shining a light on the negative. There are some easy recognisable ones that show up in pictures of the negative below, but also faint scratches that is running along the whole film roll. Also there is in the negative corresponding to link 1 and 2 a some water-like stain on the negative.
thanks a lot for your time!
i tried to that pictures of this:
https://www.reddit.com/user/fototaco/comments/f1r5x2/negative_1/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x
https://www.reddit.com/user/fototaco/comments/f1r64q/negative_2/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x
"negative 2" is negative from the scanned pictures in link 1 and 2 in the original post
"negative 1" is negative from scanned picture with censoring (the camera emoji)
Dan Daniel
Well-known
Whoa...... Negative 2 tells me to stop using that lab. Something is very wrong with their film processing or handling. If there are reasons to want to use that lab again, they need to see this film and offer solid explanations for what THEY did wrong and how they will be remedying the problems.
fototaco
Member
I'm going to talk with them tomorrow. I'm sure they will scan them again, but I'm unsure whether I should demand a refund.
Huss
Veteran
who is the lab? I've had horrible results/service from thedarkroom so I never use them again.
Jamie123
Veteran
Oof....that looks rough! Definitely demand a refund and never use that lab again. The reason why I wouldn't use the lab again is that they obviously don't know what they're doing. Accidents happen even to the best labs but anyone working at a lab with even a little experience will notice right away when they sleeve the negatives.
As for the one picture you refer to as being "amputated", that's most likely just because you didn't wind the camera enough before taking the first picture. When you load the film and close the camera you need to wind on a bit (usually until the film counter is at 0) otherwise the part of the film that was exposed to the light will bleed into the first frame.
As for the one picture you refer to as being "amputated", that's most likely just because you didn't wind the camera enough before taking the first picture. When you load the film and close the camera you need to wind on a bit (usually until the film counter is at 0) otherwise the part of the film that was exposed to the light will bleed into the first frame.
fototaco
Member
It’s a well known photography chain/brand in Norway, but the labs was local!
fototaco
Member
Thanks for a educational and nice comment. Disappointing being told that they’re not to blame when they messed up. At least they should have told me.
Dan Daniel
Well-known
Norway, eh?
They have tacos in Norway??
Please, don't tell me you have Taco Bell restaurants.
They have tacos in Norway??
Please, don't tell me you have Taco Bell restaurants.
fototaco
Member
Haha! We have a very popular psuedo-tacos in Norway with pretty standarized ingredients. We usually have it on fridays - hence the name fredagstaco (fridays taco), u’ll find it on google. Taco bells we don’t have.
Dan Daniel
Well-known
[Just for fun, here's a parody TV show discussing Taca Bell's menu-
https://www.theonion.com/taco-bells-new-green-menu-takes-no-ingredients-from-nat-1819594832
Some people say that Taco Bell is to real tacos as McDonalds is to real hamburgers. I say it's more like Taco Bell is to real tacos as Jiffy Lube is to real hamburgers... Looks like fredadstaco is better food than most gringo tacos in the US.]