First time developing 35mm, please help me diagnose color issues

[fdonadio]

Excuse my ignorance but it is normal to post process every negative before printing? Should I always edit the saturation, sharpness, contrast. etc before making any prints or with a scanner that is properly set up this is not necessary?

Yes, it is necessary, even when your scanning software “inverts” the image automatically — the algorithm isn’t perfect and small color casts always remain.

This is true even when wet printing. I mean, you have to set filtration to remove the orange mask — otherwise, your prints will be greenish-blue all over. It may also be necessary to warm or cool the image as needed.

 

[Mainecoonmaniac]

I think you negs look fine. One way to tell is to shoot the first frame of your roll with a Macbeth color checker. Try to balance the color checker in your scan. In Photoshop, you can use the levels and choose the middle gray color eyedropper on the middle gray patch.

 

[RPC]

I second the use of a color chart or at least a gray scale. This will show any problems with your processing or scans. If you color balance for the middle gray patch, and all other patches are gray as well, crossover is not a problem and indicates your processing and scans are fine in that respect.. This is recommended for anyone processing their own film, especially with non-standard processes. You should not simply look at the negatives and go by that.

 

[BradS]

These negs look good to me. This was your first time developing color? I'd be ecstatic....this has inspired me to try C-41.

 

[Evilash1996]

These negs look good to me. This was your first time developing color? I'd be ecstatic....this has inspired me to try C-41.

I am glad I inspired somebody because I was starting to get discouraged myself!

I think you negs look fine. One way to tell is to shoot the first frame of your roll with a Macbeth color checker. Try to balance the color checker in your scan. In Photoshop, you can use the levels and choose the middle gray color eyedropper on the middle gray patch.

Can I use an online version of a color checker? Or does it have to be a physical print out that I will have to purchase. Also is it necessary to do it for the first frame of the roll? Only asking because I am halfway through a roll right now of 36 exposures.

 

[Mainecoonmaniac]

I am glad I inspired somebody because I was starting to get discouraged myself!



Can I use an online version of a color checker? Or does it have to be a physical print out that I will have to purchase. Also is it necessary to do it for the first frame of the roll? Only asking because I am halfway through a roll right now of 36 exposures.

You have to have to buy a physical version. I think they use special inks to print them. In the old days, it was the Macbeth color checker. It's now Xrite Macbeth. Here's a version that's been around for decades. https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/465286-REG/X_Rite_MSCCC_Original_ColorChecker_Card.html

I used it to check the color balance of batches of film. It's an industry standard.

Here's one that's used by the offset printing industry. I like the Xrite version better.
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/prod...ezKIiC_CT38Yr6IaYw4-SggF1IaAvx2EALw_wcB&smp=y

 

[RPC]

I am glad I inspired somebody because I was starting to get discouraged myself!

Doing your own C-41 is especially rewarding when you learn some quality control as has been described here. It feels good to know if your negatives are right, not just guessing. Using the chart or gray scale method is superior to just going by looking at the negatives. Even looking at the positive images can reveal something is wrong, but one can't always tell where the problem is, as you have seen.

 

[foc]

I agree with all the advice given. And while in an ideal world, a control strip processed and read with a densitometer would reveal how your home C41 processing is behaving, I think the photos you posted of your negs say enough.

I have seen enough negs in my 39 years of commercial C41 processing to be able so spot a problem visually. (yes you should then confirm it with a control stip and yes the clear mask area around the edge markings is not the definitive example of good processing ) But your negs in the samples you posted are very good so in my opinion your problem lies else where.

The scan of the Eiffel Tower has that magenta cast that can sometime happen when a neg is slightly dense (overexposed) and can be a common occurrence with Fuji negs. I had a Frontier 330 scanner printer that showed the same symptoms with Fuji Xtra 400. A simple -1 manual colour correction (with sometimes a +1 density) solved it.

If these negs were mine I would be very happy with the results.

 

[btaylor]

Without a doubt a color checker is best. But without going to the expense of a genuine MacBeth color checker (I have an old Fotokem grayscale/color checker) a simple 18% photo gray card will pretty much get you there in terms of color and density: when I print a photo of the gray card and get a match between the physical card and my print, the prints thereafter on the same roll are usually within 5cc of color correction and a third of a stop in density provided the lighting conditions are similar (always be aware of color temperature of the light illuminating your subject). That's why I always keep a gray card in my camera bag. If I am using an unfamiliar film or in unusual lighting conditions I click off a frame of the card, correctly exposed. Simple, easy, cheap.

 

[MattKing]

Without a doubt a color checker is best. But without going to the expense of a genuine MacBeth color checker (I have an old Fotokem grayscale/color checker) a simple 18% photo gray card will pretty much get you there in terms of color and density: when I print a photo of the gray card and get a match between the physical card and my print, the prints thereafter on the same roll are usually within 5cc of color correction and a third of a stop in density provided the lighting conditions are similar (always be aware of color temperature of the light illuminating your subject). That's why I always keep a gray card in my camera bag. If I am using an unfamiliar film or in unusual lighting conditions I click off a frame of the card, correctly exposed. Simple, easy, cheap.

In case it isn't clear, btaylor's references are based in the world of optical printing (5 cc of colour correction) but they are applicable to the world of digital.
Scanning is an art as well as a craft, and there is no such thing as an "automatically correct" scan.
But if you do it regularly, you will arrive at some standard adjustments that are fast and easy and will help with the majority of negatives. Essentially customized profiles.

 

[Evilash1996]

When I adjust the parameters on my scanner to compensate for any color issues is that actually changing the way the negatives are being scanned or is it just applying these changes in "post"? I hope I articulated my question correctly. What I am trying to ask is if I should re-scan the pictures with modified settings or should I edit the already scanned pictures in Lightroom.

 

[MattKing]

When I adjust the parameters on my scanner to compensate for any color issues is that actually changing the way the negatives are being scanned or is it just applying these changes in "post"? I hope I articulated my question correctly. What I am trying to ask is if I should re-scan the pictures with modified settings or should I edit the already scanned pictures in Lightroom.

It depends.
Some software/setting choices at the scanning stage can leave you with a file that is difficult to correct back to normal with post-processing choices available in something like Lightroom.
Think, for example, of a file that reveals an image that is way too dark or way too light.
It would be a good idea to experiment with some re-scanning. Try some scanning adjustments, and note the ones that seem to give more pleasing results. The settings used for those may be ones that you will want to use as your new "normal". Depending on your software, you may be able to incorporate those adjustments into a custom profile for that combination - that film developed with that kit.
The thing to be careful of is using an unusual scene to base your "standard" profile on.
I picked the shot I did because, if it is exposed normally, that negative might be a reasonable one to work with - fairly normal lighting and reasonably typical colours and tones. Some of your other shots may be more unusual, and as such may be more likely to confuse any "automatic" functions in your scanner and software.