Return to film.

[Mark Antony]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Looks much better Brian.

Neopan is one of the more finer grained 400 films, your first results certainly had processing errors, I'm glad you have found a better lab.

I'd still try XP2 and or consider processing yourself, which is pretty easy.

 

Have fun.

Mark

Photo Utopia

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[Confusion Circle]

1 hour labs typically use chemicals that are 2x warmer than they should be for faster processing. This results in more grain, weird colour casts and such. Go take your film to a pro lab where film is processed properly.

[Mark Antony]

1 hour labs typically use chemicals that are 2x warmer than they should be for faster processing. This results in more grain, weird colour casts and such. Go take your film to a pro lab where film is processed properly.

 

Fred, I'd not heard that. I ran a mini-lab and a Pro-lab for many years and every processor make I can remember used a fixed 3 mins 15 seconds dev time at 38°c ± 10%.

Processing speed was typically 12-20 mins depending on the make of processor and the time is governed by the length of the rack and the speed of the motor (which is fixed) so increasing the temp won't make anything faster just over-develop.

 

Fuji Hunt made a range of chemicals that used bleach accelerators cutting the bleach times from the standard six mins to just 90 seconds, further time was saved by using 'super stabilizers' instead of wash water.

 

Prolabs tend to use either dip and dunk or hand-line processors rather than roller transport systems found in minilabs, the developer is exactly the same temp and time, but has standard 6 mins bleach and washing.

 

I have never seen a minilab that runs a 76°c dev bath

Mark

[harrisfoto]

Unless you scan the film, it is sometimes hard to know if it is the film or sharpening from the scanning software.

 

Many times, the scanners (unless it is a high-cost drum scan) will over sharpen the scan in the scanning software thinking that it gives a better focus impression. This is esp. true if the final print is 4" x 5" (small).

 

You should try to find someone with a scanner, who will let you experiment on a couple of negatives.

 

Here is a link to an M3 - 50mm lens, using Ilford Delta 100.

 

Stephen Harris Archive

 

The negative was not "scanned" but digitized using a slr and a macro lens.