Something wron with processing and printing???

nomade · 08-09-2006

Here's an attahced photograph from a tmax 100 roll, this photo was shot in strong day light at 1/125 f 16, is this result normal?? I don't think so, on the negative, many correctly exposed pictures were lost, this photo looks like it was shot at 1/500!!!

It might look a bit glowy, because of the printing paper, and then the color in it, it's so brownish, i expected more black, some photos are quite normal but they were over exposed, kodak forgot the roll in the solution for a while or what???

Kin Lau · 08-09-2006

I think it's a high contrast mostly dark shot that the print processing machine was automatically trying to average out to 18% gray.

Same reason why our sunset/sunrise shots end up looking like midday unless the operator knows enough not to try to "fix" the exposure.

Gabriel M.A. · 08-09-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by nomade

this photo looks like it was shot at 1/500!!!

It actually looks like it was shot at 1/4

Wow. I don't know what to tell you except that it almost looks like a bad case of solarization, but it isn't. The contrast is out of whack, that's evident. Did you print this or somebody else printed it for you? Whoever printed this pressed the "auto" button and had a few doughnuts while your roll was printing.

If you can scan the negative you can salvage it. From a print, though...ouch.

nomade · 08-09-2006

It's only a sample, the whole roll is the same way, i was trying some different exposures during day light, ranged between 1/125 f16 to f8 and i know how these exposures would look like, the problem is is that the negative actually looks like that, i know how to expose a 100 film, in most conditions, the easiest thing is day light time...

i've never tried a 1/4 exposure during the day, overexposed photos look normal, and the correctly exposed ones look that way...

RayPA · 08-09-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by nomade

It's only a sample, the whole roll is the same way, i was trying some different exposures during day light, ranged between 1/125 f16 to f8 and i know how these exposures would look like, the problem is is that the negative actually looks like that, i know how to expose a 100 film, in most conditions, the easiest thing is day light time...

i've never tried a 1/4 exposure during the day, overexposed photos look normal, and the correctly exposed ones look that way...

Are you saying the negatives look proper, good densities, good range, etc.?

nomade · 08-09-2006

No, it's not, the enagtive looks the same way as the enlarged prints...Which is a problem, there's no way to get my photos back, some photos with lower light has vanished...

Bryce · 08-09-2006

Nomade-
I think the problem lies in printing a traditional B+W negative on color paper. C-41 film has an orange mask that the paper's uneven color response normally makes up for. So a negative with a clear base would print with a VERY warm cast, maybe like we see here? I think for a small lab to print B+W neg.s on color paper would require either very strong orange filtration or maybe a more modern lab whose machine scans the negative, then prints the paper digitally.
Can you take the roll back to the lab and ask them what they know about it?

Bryce · 08-09-2006

Oh, the negatives... How were they developed?

nomade · 08-09-2006

Kodak are the only B&W labs in town, i donno i've tried color printing paper for B&W before, and it looks quite different, i'm not sure, maybe that is true because the photos weren't printed in the same lab...Though the photos that are printed with the looks of a correctly exposed photo don't have that orange tone...

Bryce · 08-09-2006

Nomade-
Can't speak for your other negatives or prints, but the sample you gave looks like this if you neutralize the color and increase the contrast.
I think this could be explained by my first response. Blank negatives, well that's different... When you find out what happened I'd like to know!

nomade · 08-09-2006

Yesterday i gave the kodak lab workers hell, but they really have nothing to loose, because i've no options really...They sell the chemicals, in big packs, high prices, they do the processing, and printing sometimes, no one is competing, they sell most of the B&W films in town, i don't have enough experience to know what happened exactly...But i know how pictures shoudl look like at least...

Some more samples...

Gabriel M.A. · 08-09-2006

OK, I think I know what's going on: what film is this. C-41 or "traditional" B&W film?

nomade · 08-09-2006

Tmax, traditional B&W...

peterc · 08-09-2006

Did they possibly run your roll of T-Max through the C-41 machine?

Peter

nomade · 08-09-2006

I wouldn't be surprised, they did it before with a c-41 film, they developped it as a traditional B&W film...

Gabriel M.A. · 08-09-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by nomade

some photos with lower light has vanished...

OK, I'm confused again; that doesn't make sense with what I was thinking happened. It looks to me as if the film was pushed. If this is C-41, then they don't have their machine calibrated, or there was some serious operator error.

But for low-light frames to have disappeared, while the properly exposed ones to have overblown highlights, that doesn't make sense at all. Are you sure you're not confusing overexposed (i.e. dark frames) with underexposed (i.e. light frames) and their printed counterparts?

Gabriel M.A. · 08-09-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by nomade

I wouldn't be surprised, they did it before with a c-41 film, they developped it as a traditional B&W film...

I once developed C-41 with traditional B&W chemicals, and the results were...well, not as extreme as this, but certainly could have been better.

Yes, C-41 film processed this way could have some very very muted shadows, and the highlights overblown when you print them, if you're not a careful printer.

You're going to have to ask them to process it in C-41 chemicals again, which would be absurdly difficult (not to say impossible) in their automatic machines if your negatives are already cut.

Sorry.

Bryce · 08-09-2006

Wouldn't the bleach in C-41 processing remove all the silver from T-Max and leave completely blank negatives?

Kin Lau · 08-09-2006

Compared with your other negs, does this one look a little "cloudy"?

If so, then the fix was probably exhausted and the negs only need to be re-fixed.

BTW, this would be a good time to start looking into dev'ing your own B&W.

rogue_designer · 08-09-2006

Looks to me like they processed you T-max in C-41, which would create both a dye and silver image in the negative. Which explains the wierdness in the shadows vs. the heavier silver highlights whre the bleach/fix didn't dissolve the silver halide out.

Not good overall... time to either start processing your own, shoot a c41 BW film, or shart shipping out to another lab.

nomade · 08-10-2006

I wanted to start processing myself, at leats if i screwed up, i've no one to blame, but they are dominating the market...it's pretty expensive, cannot afford that...

But i'm looking for alternatives

nomade · 08-10-2006

And yeah, i'm goin to kick their asses...

Gabriel M.A. · 08-10-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryce

Wouldn't the bleach in C-41 processing remove all the silver from T-Max and leave completely blank negatives?

Yes, it would. I also found this out the hard way. I shot a few rolls that I spun myself, but that was years ago; found them later, and used them for tests (the film was beyond expired). I thought it was C-41 B&W. Turns out it was my TJ-Max 400. Not a single mark. Nothing, I mean, *nothing*. Absolutely clear.

All dead, all dead...