C41 film - getting professional level photographs from a lab

[rayonline_nz]

Hi all,

I am curious to know. I don't shoot much C41 but it is something I hope to get more into this year. Just in very recent history say from the 1990s and the 2000s professional portrait / wedding / graduation / engagement photographers shot with C41 film. How did they get the colors on the print to look that good?

I have shot film such as Fuji ProH 400 and I have used an expensive lab but they don't come out nearly as nice.

Edit to add. My graduation photos were printed on some type of Fuji Professional paper.


Thanks in advance

 

[koraks]

Preferably shoot medium format or larger, expose properly, be precise in color matching while printing. It can still be done just like in 1995.

 

[Lachlan Young]

A lot of that sort of work was done with minilab type equipment latterly, but as with all things, it is dependent on the skill of the operator & the imaging being done under relatively tightly controlled conditions to allow efficient mass production.

Understanding how to correct colour to something that looks correct is vital.

 

[EdSawyer]

I think the major issue, that I have noticed at least, is that back then minilab workflows were C41->Optical RA4 prints. Now, most are C41 (and maybe a cheaper version of it at that, or pushing the chemistry too far) -> shitty scan -> inkjet print. If you can find a lab with a decent optical printer, it will be worth the effort.

Even 4x6s from the local Ritz camera (a dumpster fire of a company, but still...) back in the 2005 timeframe were top-shelf optical prints, really damn good.

As mentioned, it's still possible.

 

[koraks]

Most consumer high-volume color printing is done from digital scans (automatically corrected) and then digitally exposed onto RA4 paper. If you're lucky onto Endura or Crustal Archive Supreme, if you're less lucky onto Kodak Royal or even worse regular Crystal Archive. The automatic color correction is often quite alright, but cannot usually live up to a proficient human/optical RA4 printer.

 

[1kgcoffee]

Print them in your own darkroom. It's cheaper than B&W, Prints are stunning. As others have said make sure that you're exposed correctly. You may need to use colour correction filters IE warming to get desired results as color balance in shadows alone is hard to adjust. Overexposed can be hard to print.

You can do it with a condenser enlarger with an RGB bulb. Or purchase a dichro head.

The future is uncertain so enjoy while it is still here.

 

[MattKing]

The film + scan + colour print on to RA-4 paper workflow is eminently capable of producing professional quality results.
Just as film + optical colour print on to RA-4 paper workflow is capable of producing really crummy results.
And vice versa of course.
It all depends on the knowledge, attitude and experience of the operators and the resources operated and approach taken by the lab.
And those factors are influenced by market conditions, and what people are willing to pay for quality work.
In this world where price seems to be so important, it is much harder than it used to be to find quality work.

 

[cmacd123]

Pro photographers also used specialist labs that were JUST interested in the wedding business. so they had all the settings already to make great prints. The film was fresh, the Photographers were bang on on exposure - (You have to be to pick out details in a white on white dress) the lab print directly onto paper so no brightness compression from Digital scans. high volume meant always fresh chemistry.

 

[rayonline_nz]

I live in little NZ, so optical prints are not available ..... One time I paid $25US for a roll of C41 D+P off their minilab machine.

 

[1kgcoffee]

Don't be discouraged. You can do it at home, including development. It's easy

 

[jtk]

"fresh chemistry" indicates amateur or very low volume...which I turn indicates lack of controls. Real pro labs replenish.

 

[Chan Tran]

If I don't do it myself I use 1 hr lab and I tell them how to print it. If you are a professional and use one lab they get to know you can can print just the way you want. You are also likely to use only one type of film and even the same batch refrigerated so it would make it a lot easier for them to do it right.

 

[RPC]

"Fresh chemistry" can mean replenished, since replenishment, as you would find in a high volume lab, keeps the chemistry in a constant state of "freshness". Both freshly mixed and properly replenished chemistry will pass a control strip in-spec so are essentially the same.

 

[foc]

C41 is C41 and RA4 is RA4. (no I'm not gone mad)

So whether it is a minilab or a pro-lab, it all comes down doing the job correctly. The C41 processor is just a machine that automates the film processing.
BUT as with all things the devil is in the detail. Control strips, rep pump output, filter change, etc, it all comes down to good housekeeping.

And likewise with RA4 printing. I have printed optically and with scanned negs (Frontier & Pakon) and again it's the detail.

A pro-lab can charge more and be more attentive to their customer demands, but if they have sloppy practices then it is no good.
Likewise a minilab can be at the lower price range but be scrupulous in their processing and printing.

Colour balance can be a subjective thing. I have set an optical minilab printer to the correct print bullseye (technically correct colour balance) but the prints didn't look just right to me, and making a slight colour correction and I was happy.

Lab scanners I find are easier to use and keep calibrated. BUT just like going into a television shop and viewing all the screens on display, showing the same program (image) and seeing the difference in colour between each one, colour balance can be a personal thing.

Back in the 1990's some professionals (including myself) used my minilab for film work. We used to keep a referance chart for each of the pros with a colour balance correction, because we knew that's the way they wanted their prints.