Underexposure - what went wrong here?

[wlaidlaw]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Thank you, Wilson. However, I had the film processed at a professional lab. I have never done this myself.

 

Bernhard

 

Bernhard,

 

I regret that I have almost certainly had more films badly developed by so called professional labs than by high street processors. When I reached the point about 10 years ago, when my intolerance of photochemicals, even wearing rubber gloves, became a serious issue, I started to send all my B&W films to either a Fleet Street lab in London or the Vault in Brighton. Skylabs developed 6 B&W rolls of a trip to Sri Lanka very poorly with streaks all over them (luckily I still have all the digital shots from my Leica Digilux 4.3). Then the Vault did an equally poor job of processing the B&W rolls I had taken at my daughter's wedding. For B&W I now tend to use C41 film like XP2 or BW400CN. You can push 400CN to at least 1600 ISO and still get remarkable results. I now mainly use Picto for developing/scanning and so far so good.

 

Wilson

[taskoni]

Looks like at least two stops underexposed - I guess your shutter speed was not long enough. Do you remember f stop /speed?

In general the slow speed film is best for the night shots with long exposures. Also, 3200 is a great film but you can try to shoot it at 1600.

Regards,

b.

[BlackDE]

Looks like at least two stops underexposed - I guess your shutter speed was not long enough. Do you remember f stop /speed?

In general the slow speed film is best for the night shots with long exposures. Also, 3200 is a great film but you can try to shoot it at 1600.

Regards,

b.

 

Hi, I believe it was 1/2 sec at f/5.6.

 

Cheers,

Bernhard