StS Posted January 27, 2012 Share #41 Posted January 27, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) Sorry for disagreeing Alan, but the daylight image appears to me to be spot-on - at least on my monitor. The rest of the images are taken under artificial light. Having all these fluorescent and LED light sources with their non-uniform spectral distributions these days, I find it a mess or even impossible to find a neutral setting for the whole image - regardless, if I use digital or film*. I typically try to find a colour balance, which looks pleasant to me instead. Stefan *For some strange reasons, I find it easier to colour-balance film scans than digital images Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 27, 2012 Posted January 27, 2012 Hi StS, Take a look here Color film developing suggestions please!!!!. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
erl Posted January 27, 2012 Share #42 Posted January 27, 2012 Hi Stefan, I totally agree about finding a balance that looks pleasing to your eye. 'Correct' is often not so pleasing IMO. As for finding scanning balancing easier, be pleased! Many cannot achieve that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
erl Posted January 27, 2012 Share #43 Posted January 27, 2012 Regarding Vo's images, clearly the first one has a fluoro cast at the very least. Looking at the others, I suspect under development. Processing at 30Deg instead of 38Deg may have a dtrimental effect. Certainly it will necessitate extended dev time, but calculating how much in 'real time' could be tricky. Alan's suggestion of shooting a colour chart to start is pretty close to essential. The other factor in these shots is that it is Ektar film. Most (internet) pics of Ektar I have seen have IMO been problematic. This may just be a pe4rsonal preference, but I don't Ektar colours seen on the web. I do prefer Portra or Fuji 400H. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted January 27, 2012 Share #44 Posted January 27, 2012 Sorry for disagreeing Alan, but the daylight image appears to me to be spot-on - at least on my monitor. The rest of the images are taken under artificial light. Having all these fluorescent and LED light sources with their non-uniform spectral distributions these days, I find it a mess or even impossible to find a neutral setting for the whole image - regardless, if I use digital or film*. I typically try to find a colour balance, which looks pleasant to me instead. Stefan *For some strange reasons, I find it easier to colour-balance film scans than digital images I am trying to be giving some feedback that will help this photographer do better. As he is just starting out in processing his own color film and also looks new to scanning, I think he would really benefit from some of the lessons I had when I first started learning color printing many years ago. I am sure he can do better than this if he is interested in improving and a good way to start would be by including a color chart in some of his images and using that to guide his adjustments. (It can be removed after shooting one frame in a given situation) If he is happy with these results and doesn't see any reason to try to improve, that is fine with me. I am not holding him up to top professional standards. I am just suggesting he push himself a bit more. Yes that one outdoor shot can pass but is kind of dull and flat on my calibrated monitor and better on my laptop. If you use that for a reference on the greenish interior that incorporates the same woman, it should be clear to anyone how different they are. Now I don't know if the discontinuous spectral qualities of that lighting preclude a better color reproduction on that film, but my guess is it could be better. In any case, these don't hold up as shining examples of excellent color photography (just speaking technically here.) Perhaps this film is also a limiting factor but the photographer will not easily be able to determine if he is getting the most from his film, processing, and scanning without at least including a test target to determine some aspects of where the limits are. If he really wanted to see if his processing is up to scratch he'll need to shoot two rolls that include one or more identical or very similar shots. He can process one roll himself and compare it with another roll that is sent to a high quality pro lab. Scanning color neg film is an art in itself and takes a while to get a good feel for it. Again having a test target will help in the learning process even if you want to deviate from "accurate" color whatever that is. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tuanvo1982 Posted January 27, 2012 Author Share #45 Posted January 27, 2012 Hi all, Honestly, the picture was under 1EV or 1.5 EV because my chemicals was 2.5 months(basically it goes off). After 2-3 months with color films, I have found that it is too difficult to make color correct as you saw. We seem to always need to do color balance when doing scan. It is a good ideal to take a picture of color chart then ... do white-balance depending on that. Even if you have developed correctly but when do you scan I don't think you can get the color the same as with what you saw. Any suggestion please? Thank you very much for your help Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tuanvo1982 Posted January 27, 2012 Author Share #46 Posted January 27, 2012 I am trying to be giving some feedback that will help this photographer do better. As he is just starting out in processing his own color film and also looks new to scanning, I think he would really benefit from some of the lessons I had when I first started learning color printing many years ago. I am sure he can do better than this if he is interested in improving and a good way to start would be by including a color chart in some of his images and using that to guide his adjustments. (It can be removed after shooting one frame in a given situation) If he is happy with these results and doesn't see any reason to try to improve, that is fine with me. I am not holding him up to top professional standards. I am just suggesting he push himself a bit more. Yes that one outdoor shot can pass but is kind of dull and flat on my calibrated monitor and better on my laptop. If you use that for a reference on the greenish interior that incorporates the same woman, it should be clear to anyone how different they are. Now I don't know if the discontinuous spectral qualities of that lighting preclude a better color reproduction on that film, but my guess is it could be better. In any case, these don't hold up as shining examples of excellent color photography (just speaking technically here.) Perhaps this film is also a limiting factor but the photographer will not easily be able to determine if he is getting the most from his film, processing, and scanning without at least including a test target to determine some aspects of where the limits are. If he really wanted to see if his processing is up to scratch he'll need to shoot two rolls that include one or more identical or very similar shots. He can process one roll himself and compare it with another roll that is sent to a high quality pro lab. Scanning color neg film is an art in itself and takes a while to get a good feel for it. Again having a test target will help in the learning process even if you want to deviate from "accurate" color whatever that is. I totally agree with you about "Scanning color neg film is an art in itself and takes a while to get a good feel for it." Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted January 27, 2012 Share #47 Posted January 27, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) The other factor in these shots is that it is Ektar film. Most (internet) pics of Ektar I have seen have IMO been problematic. This may just be a pe4rsonal preference, but I don't Ektar colours seen on the web. I do prefer Portra or Fuji 400H. I have made my feelings known on Ektar film more than once and agree with you 100%. I will be taking Portra or 400H to New York with me in March. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tuanvo1982 Posted January 27, 2012 Author Share #48 Posted January 27, 2012 I have made my feelings known on Ektar film more than once and agree with you 100%. I will be taking Portra or 400H to New York with me in March. Where can I get a cheapest one Portra or 400h? Thanks Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted January 27, 2012 Share #49 Posted January 27, 2012 7dayshop.com Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stealth3kpl Posted January 27, 2012 Share #50 Posted January 27, 2012 I get my film from UK buisness tax payers AG Photographic. Maybe 7day shop do (?) but it's good to support a buisness who's sole interest is film. Pete Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
StS Posted January 27, 2012 Share #51 Posted January 27, 2012 As for finding scanning balancing easier, be pleased! Many cannot achieve that. ...to avoid misunderstandings, I find it easier to find a pleasing balance, at least if I use Portra 400 or 800. A neutral balance is certainly easier achieved using a digital source. Needless to say, "pleasing" is of course very subjective... My thanks to everyone - I'm learning a lot here. Stefan Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted January 27, 2012 Share #52 Posted January 27, 2012 I'm sure 7dayshop pay their business taxes, but Vo did ask for the cheapest I buy all my standard B&W film from Mathers, but would go to AG for more specialist stuff. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted January 27, 2012 Share #53 Posted January 27, 2012 I totally agree with you about "Scanning color neg film is an art in itself and takes a while to get a good feel for it." Yes it takes a while to study and practice. I don't know what kind of scanning software you have but if you can't get a good adjustment from it you could always scan the image and save it as a 16 bit "raw" file that has all the info that your scanner can extract from the negative. Then you could use Photoshop or some other program to adjust the files. I don't know what the processing issues contributed to the image as I can only judge the combination of photography, film, lighting, processing and scanning as one item. Despite the fact that your image does not contain all of the color information that is probably in the negative, I was still able to do color adjustments to make it look a bit better. I did not retouch any area but simply changed contrast and color saturation for each channel using DXO Optics software. Of course there are limits to working from a jpeg that only has mostly yellow and green in it. So we still have a greenish yellow jacket, etc. But I keyed on the woman's skin tone and let the rest fall where it may. Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/165478-color-film-developing-suggestions-please/?do=findComment&comment=1910685'>More sharing options...
Stealth3kpl Posted January 27, 2012 Share #54 Posted January 27, 2012 I had a go too. Pete Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/165478-color-film-developing-suggestions-please/?do=findComment&comment=1910748'>More sharing options...
plasticman Posted January 27, 2012 Share #55 Posted January 27, 2012 I actually think I prefer Pete's warmer version, but just as a test, I tried the absolutely easiest way to adjust these sorts of casts: open the image in Photoshop, cmd-M to open the curves dialog box, click on the 'Options...' button, and within that secondary panel, select 'Snap Neutral Midtones'. This adjustment took about 5 seconds, and I think it's an okay place to start. But I do hope the OP doesn't mind us messing with his images (I like this one incidentally). *Incidentally - different browsers (and obviously monitors) will render the image totally differently. Google Chrome makes this image look almost ghostly pale, whereas Safari and Firefox render slightly warmer. PS: I hope this doesn't begin to look like stalking, but I couldn't resist a couple of extra tweaks to remove some more green locally, and updated the image again. Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/165478-color-film-developing-suggestions-please/?do=findComment&comment=1910753'>More sharing options...
AlanG Posted January 27, 2012 Share #56 Posted January 27, 2012 I think the overall point is despite the possibility of cross curves or other issues from the poor processing, if the jpeg can be improved by these adjustments, a skilled scanning operator should be able to make it quite a bit better by re-scanning it. And if the exterior shot of the girl was from the same roll, as I assume, the processing may not be that far off. My choice would be to go for good skin tones and punchy colors as it is about touring a shop that sells very colorful fun items. Going for a dull muted effect doesn't seem to fit the subject for me and just makes the picture look grayish. But he can make those decisions once he has mastery over the process. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
erl Posted January 27, 2012 Share #57 Posted January 27, 2012 I have made my feelings known on Ektar film more than once and agree with you 100%. I will be taking Portra or 400H to New York with me in March. Andy, seriously consider buying your stock from B&H in N.Y., unless you are trying to support your local suppliers. For me B&H are less than half price relative to what I am asked to pay here in Oz. UK may be different but check it out online before you go. Shopping locally in NY would be a buzz too, I imagine. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tuanvo1982 Posted January 27, 2012 Author Share #58 Posted January 27, 2012 Thank everyone for helping me out. I should use ISO 400 because low ISO in low light will give me strong color-cast than the high ISO Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
erl Posted January 27, 2012 Share #59 Posted January 27, 2012 Vo, 400ISO film is usually wise in low light, but it's colour cast will be the same as low ISO, assuming the same family of films. What a low ISO will do is give 'cleaner' colours, including the colour cast, if there is one. This will make any colour, including the cast, look brighter, so you notice it more. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted January 28, 2012 Share #60 Posted January 28, 2012 Thank everyone for helping me out. I should use ISO 400 because low ISO in low light will give me strong color-cast than the high ISO Your main issue is with adjusting the color in scanning not with the selected film. Although as Erl pointed out lower speed film usually is capable of more saturated colors. Fuji used to make a 4 color layer Professional Reala negative film that was designed for a variety of light sources. I think Fujicolor Superia Reala is similar because it too has a 4th layer and claims no greenish casts under fluorescent lighting. Any color neg film should be capable of giving fairly good results under a variety of lighting if you adjust the image properly when scanning. But this might be the way to go if you can work at 100 ISO. http://www.fujifilm.com/products/consumer_film/color_negativefilms_35mm/superia_reala/ http://www.fujifilm.com/products/consumer_film/pdf/superia_reala_datasheet.pdf The best approach for good color is to use specific color correction filters over your lens when you shoot under tungsten or fluorescent lighting. But you will find this to be complicated and a hassle to employ for your casual photography. This was pretty much standard operating procedure when shooting color slides but color neg film is designed to be adjusted when printing. Scanning makes it possible to correct casts in color slide film too. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.