Jump to content

Disappointed with developed film results


DaveyA

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I recently bought an Olympus XA2, I just rather liked the idea of film for a change. My intention was to load it up with some cheap film that I bought from Poundland and get it developed just to test the camera out before I spent money on better film that I was going to use for some snaps on my holidays. As it worked out I did not have enough time to get the "test" film developed before I went on holiday, so I bought some Fuji C200 and thought I would just go for it, I was taking my good camera along anyway, the XA2 was just for a bit of fun really. So I shot 2 rolls of film and dropped them into a professional photo lab for development and printing on my return. I was not sure at all what to expect to be honest but having read so many good reports about the little Olympus I was truly disappointed with the prints. I don't have the means to post any examples for you, but there is not one single photo that is anywhere near what I would call even half decent. The colours are way off and very "blocky" in some areas, most people resemble zombies with sickly white skin tones, nothing is anywhere near sharp. So I took my cheapo £1 roll of Agfa Vista, that I shot before I went away, to Boots the chemist for 1 hour processing just for comparison and the difference is remarkable. The difference is like night and day, the colours are accurate and the overall results are much more pleasing. I would like to go back to the professional developers and ask what could possibly account for it, but to be honest I would feel a little silly going in there and saying that they had messed up my holiday snaps taken on my £30 camera that I bought on Ebay:) If someone could give me a little advice before I approach them I might feel a little better about it. I did wonder whether the film had been affected by the scanners at the airport but I have read that film should be unaffected if taken through with hand luggage. The film is still in date and has not been mistreated in any way.

Many thanks for any help at all.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is most likely the cheap film you bought from Poundland, the processors can only deal with what they are dealt. The Olympus XA2 is an excellent camera, and unless you have the wrong battery in it (so the meter works accurately) it is difficult to say what else could go wrong, especially as the Boots processing was good (but with a name brand of film). Do the negatives from both sets of film look similar, or are the exposure differences?

 

Steve

Link to post
Share on other sites

As I read it, the Agfa Vista from Poundland was the good stuff. It was the Fuji film at the Pro developers that was tripe. I'm a big fan of Agfa Vista. Great film at a great Poundland price :)

I think I'd take the Fuji and Agfa results to the pro lab with the camera, point out that all films went through the XA and simply ask them politely what they think is the problem. It sounds like the lab's messed up to me, assuming you'd put a new battery in the XA.

Pete

Link to post
Share on other sites

As I read it, the Agfa Vista from Poundland was the good stuff. It was the Fuji film at the Pro developers that was tripe.

Pete

 

Yes that's right, sorry if my post was confusing. Pukka batteries in the XA too, not Poundland sourced. I'll go along and ask for their thoughts at the lab. At least I know the camera can produce decent results even with cheap film. I have another roll of the Fuji and one more of Poundlands best:)

I'll let you know how I get on.

Thanks for your replies.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I read through again and realise I misunderstood the film issue. Yes, in that case it is the lab at fault, either get Boots to print your pictures and show the lab the difference and ask for your money back, or see if they can do a better job second time around. Just so long as Boots aren't sending your film to the same lab!

 

Around here all the camera shops and chemists pretty well all send the film they take in to Peak Imaging, the nearest pro lab. But the difference between sending it direct to Peak or through the local shop is simply the price, quality is the same.

 

Steve

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

From what you've described it is almost certainly a problem with the 'pro' lab.

 

I would guess it's a scanning issue - their machines will process and scan the film and the prints are digital. That's the typical lab workflow.

 

As for the idea of 'cheap' film, there's only a few manufacturers in the world so any non branded film will be the same product as one of the brands anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is Agfa Vista 200 developed at AG Photographic Lab. I like the colours and at £1 a box at Poundland you can't go wrong for holiday snaps.

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

I read through again and realise I misunderstood the film issue. Yes, in that case it is the lab at fault, either get Boots to print your pictures and show the lab the difference and ask for your money back, or see if they can do a better job second time around. Just so long as Boots aren't sending your film to the same lab!

 

Around here all the camera shops and chemists pretty well all send the film they take in to Peak Imaging, the nearest pro lab. But the difference between sending it direct to Peak or through the local shop is simply the price, quality is the same.

 

Steve

 

Peak pharmacy send theirs to Peak pharmacy on Whittington Moor only £2 a roll for negatives i'm very pleased for £2

here's a quick scan

Scan-130620-0003-XL.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the airport scanners are unlikely to have had much if any effect on the film . I have had Kodachrome go through 5 or 6 scans on some trips and it has been fine.

If you were shooting at 1600 ASA ( ISO) or more then the fast films are more sensitive to xrays.

 

What do the negatives look like ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...