 Doreen |
Film developing Hi As a newbie--I noticed throughout this website that the developing process of film from negatives to prints is important and can make or break a picture depending on the 'developer'. I was wondering if the developing of the negatives are the same everywhere and it depends on where the prints are developed, or is the development of the negative the crucial part of the processing. Thanks, D
|
|
|
|
||
|
Jeff S. Kennedy |
Both. The developing of the film (and I'm going to assume you are talking about color film) is as important as the printing. But in todays automated labs the developing of C41 film is pretty much protected from incompetent lab techs. The machine does most of the work. And since developing standard C41 is not an interpretive process the machines do fine. Quality printing, on the other hand, requires some decisions regarding exposure and density. Here is where a good lab tech can shine. A lazy one will not. So, whereas both steps are important, it's the printing that more often than not makes the difference.
|
|
|
|
||
|
BetterPhoto Member |
I have had ample experience with C-41 and it has all been bad. There are no shades of grey so the photo looks washed out with no shadow detail. I have much better success processing my own black and white film and use a film such as T-Max by Kodak with T-Max developer. The difference in quality is amazing. Joan
|
|
|
|
||
|
Doug Vann |
I took a roll of film in to Zehrs (large grocery chain in Ontario). Some of the prints I got back were not up to the clarity I was expecting so I had them do them over again. The results were the same - crap. I then took one of the negatives that I was most interested in to the competant photo lab/camera store where I bought my camera and had them make a print. The difference was like day and night. Therefore since both places were making prints from the same negatives .... I would assume there is either a difference in the equipment or the training of the people. Note that the print I got from the camera store was also an enlargement and it was even clearer than the 4 x 6 from Zehrs. The photo developing at Zehrs is definitely cheaper cost - so I guess you get what you pay for.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Davian |
the problem with general retailers that do large volumes is they do not change there chemicals very often. Also the people who operate them are generally not photographers themselves and they do not take the care that you and I would. you said it best, you get what you pay for. You should try shooting slides, it is very cheap to send out and get processed, (5.50 at adorama.com they do a great job)and E6 film is pretty hard to screw up, also thats 36 pictures. don't be afraid of the exposer lat. just braket +- one stop and you'll be fine. --Davian
|
|
|
|
||
|
Melissa Williams |
The Walgreens across the street from me was running contaminated chemicals and they KNEW it but didn't fix the problem so they could save money on chemicals! Ask the lab if they run test strips every day. Many places don't run the tests until there's already a problem because the test strips are expensive. But the chemicals can change so much in just a day that it really is important to test every day to ensure good quality in developing. What camera store did you get the enlargement from?
|
|
|
|
||
|
This old forum is now archived. Use improved Forum here
Report this Thread |
||